Project Bluesky: Good or Bad for Twitter?
On December 11, 2019, Jack Dorsey, CEO of Twitter announced that he'd hired a team of five engineers to look into a method that could be used to decentralize Twitter. The announcement piqued the interest of many in the Fediverse, especially considering that Jack claimed that joining an existing protocol would be his preference, saying "we’d like this team to either find an existing decentralized standard they can help move forward, or failing that, create one from scratch".
While many have been calling for a decentralized internet, the online community now seems hesitant over the prospect. The question remains as to whether or not this move will benefit Twitter, the decentralized community, the public at large, all of the above, or no one at all. Of course, as with most technologies, it matters not that it's used, but rather how, and how others respond to its use.
The answer heavily depends on whether or not the Bluesky team decides to go with ActivityPub and/or Mastodon, or build out their own protocol. Since Gab moved from their own, centralized system to a Mastodon-based infrastructure, one can reasonably expect that Bluesky could successfully port Twitter into the Fediverse in a similar manner, especially considering that they have a far larger budget as well as a much larger dev team.
In fact, Twitter doesn't even have to adopt existing open source software to build their platform. They could write their own code to connect to the ActivityPub protocol, like Gab did. Other developers in the community have done the same, as evidenced by creation of other ActivityPub clients such as Pleroma and Misskey.
If they decide to use ActivityPub, the rest of the Fediverse will be able to interact with Twitter users. What software they end up using, in the grand scheme of things, is pretty much irrelevant. What does matter is how they plan to position Twitter within the Fediverse.
Dorsey seems to want Twitter to become the standard of whatever ecosytem it leaps into, which begs the question, what role would Twitter hold in such an environment, and what would they do with their newfound power? Some have cause for concern. After all, no one uses the Fediverse because of their love of Twitter; many have myriads of problems with the company and/or site, valid or not. Some feel that the Twitter community is to confrontational and toxic. Others argue that it has far too much censorship. Then others have huge problems with how they make money, by collecting user data and selling it.
If Twitter grabs a foothold in the Mastodon community, this could spell trouble for the Fediverse culture as it stands today. No one can outright force an instance to follow certain rules, but there are indications that admins of mainstream instances may be ready to fall in line with collective guidelines. The de facto homepage of Mastodon, Join Mastodon, already has a set of guidelines and rules observed by multiple instances, the Mastodon Server Covenant. This could indicate that most Mastodon admins wouldn't mind following in the footsteps and advice of a leader like Twitter. Some users and admins of smaller instances have already expressed concern that the site features server guidelines (which, by the way, all recommended instances on the website must abide by to remain recommended), but they seem to have very little influence, which in itself might indicate something worrying about Twitter's potential power.
However, Twitter joining the Fediverse might have some positives. Twitter joining the Fediverse opens popular figures, including politicians and the mass media, to a wider audience, allowing even more people to confront them and hold them accountable. This could also mean that, should Bluesky choose to take a similar route as Gab, its software would be open source and available to use on other instances, increasing the diversity of experience across the Fediverse. Additionally, it gives Twitter users a viable way to leave Twitter for the Fediverse without losing all of their data and having to manually follow back users one used to follow while on Twitter.
Of course, there's the possibility that Bluesky creates a new protocol, which could cause more fragmentation, and give Twitter even more power over the new community.
At the end of the day, it is up to you to decide whether or not Project Bluesky is even something you want to happen. The project has its share of pros and cons, and the lack of publicly disclosed information about it gives us little to go on when forming opinions on the topic. That said, it is important to be vocal about the project, especially considering that Bluesky is in its infancy. Contact your Fediverse admin, or the higher-ups at Twitter and Bluesky. Ask them questions and let them know your feelings about this new plan. After all, Project Bluesky just might shape the future of social media.
Written by Casey Rollins.