> Bluesky recently acquired the rights to the trademark for “ATPROTOCOL” and its variants—including “AT Protocol” and “atproto”—from another company that was threatening to take legal action preventing the company and others from using the term. Now that Bluesky owns it, the atproto community’s continued use of the mark can be protected.
The policy around usage is shared in the rest of the post but the goal is to make this very simple for everyone
I don't remember ever hearing that called AT proto or AT protocol, just AT commands or AT commandset etc.
Even though I'm that old, even I don't care even if it was anyway.
...as long as the reason is what it looks like. Rather have Bluesky claim it for the purpose of having the officially recognized legal authority to grant usage to everyone else, than have a rando douche company think they can claim it to extort or simply inhibit everyone else.
The single point of failure is always the biggest instances or communities, which impose their rules on everyone else under threat of refusing to communicate with them.
This has happened with every single federated platform, and it can’t be solved with technology because it’s fundamentally not a technology problem. People want to be where other people are, so once the community reaches a critical mass it inevitably degrades into the same sump of mediocrities and their rules as everything else.
I think you will find that a lot of people find that to be a feature of the federated networks. It's how society works outside of social networks. You aren't likely to see football fans of different teams sharing pubs here in Europe. You wouldn't see judgemental people be allowed in accepting roleplaying communities and so on. Why would a network of community controlled servers be any different than this? IRC was like this, Discord is like this. When you give people control they are going to kick out the opinions and people they don't want around.
If you find yourself on the outside, it might just be that you're the village idiot. Before SoMe platforms like twitter, facebook and other places without local moderation the village idiot didn't have much of a voice either.
>We plan to transfer that ownership to an appropriate, independent protocol governance organization in the future.
I never realized there is no independent governance org that should have registered this. So AT is governed by a single for-profit entity, that also runs the only viable instance?
ATProto is closer to how RSS works than ActivityPub. In the same way talking about "RSS instances" makes little sense, the same goes for "ATProto instances".
It makes sense to talk about “RSS aggregators”. Especially it makes sense to talk about “RSS aggregators that speak a specific vocabulary on top of RSS, host 99% of content using that vocabulary, and if you host your own RSS feed with said vocabulary they’ll show it in their aggregator but can ban it any minute”.
Did I just describe Apple Podcasts? Huh. Regardless, yeah, there’s no “ATProto instances” technically, but there are ATProto apps and the single biggest one now owns the trademark to the protocol name.
"Only viable instance" is not really the correct framing - Bluesky doesn't have instances. Anyone using ATProto without Bluesky will still be "on Bluesky".
When you go to bsky.app, you're interacting with the Bluesky AppView; one key feature of ATProto is that any AppView can interact with any (consenting) Personal Data Server (PDS). So you can self-host your PDS but still use bsky.app if you so choose. But critically, anyone can write an AppView; there are reimplementations of Bluesky as well as other social apps that use the same ATProto infrastructure. That would be closest thing to a Mastodon instance, except you don't have to host your data on it in order to use it. Imagine being able to go to a Lemmy instance and just post things with your Mastodon identity, and have everything show up without Mastodon having to know anything about Lemmy magazines or its special upvote / comment formats.
The actual centralization in ATProto lies in a combination of unfortunate design decisions and genuine friction in the self-hosted path. Being totally reliant on Bluesky is the happy path, self-hosting your PDS data is difficult but doable, and being totally independent of Bluesky is only possible if you do everything correctly right at the start.
First off, Bluesky doesn't offer any GUI tools for PDS migration. If you want to get off their PDS, you'll need to bust out command-line tools and possibly do some steps in advance of when you need to migrate in order for everything to work properly.
Second, even if you're on a PDS, you're still reliant on the Public Ledger of Credentials (PLC) to host your Distributed ID (DID) document. The PLC is run by Bluesky, although they've taken steps to make it easy to notice if they were to do something fucky with the PLC. But let's say we don't like that. There is a solution: you can host your DID document on a normal web server. Problem solved?
Well, if you were setting up an account for the first time, then yes, the problem is actually solved, you're 100% independent of Bluesky. But if you made the mistake of registering an account normally, you have a did:plc identity. And one core principle of ATProto is that identity names never ever ever change. So if you go and make a did:web identity, it's like having a second account, there is no way to tie your old did:plc identity into it. In fact, I'm pretty sure you can't even redirect one did:web identity to another (say if you need to switch domain names)
Regarding Bluesky's "independent protocol governance organization", they made the same promise about the PLC; but it hasn't actually been transferred yet. I would be a lot more bullish on ATProto if there was a way to migrate DIDs and retain all your followers and shit. And if there was proper graphical tools for data migration.
Bluesky has a data store, handles account authorization, and runs a web app that provides a UI to access the backend services. That's an instance, whether they call it one or not. Refusal to admit this is obfuscation for reasons I cannot understand.
The nightmare of the Wsocial rollout is a testament of the massive control Bluesky has on the ATProto network.
If Wsocial was on ActivityPub or Nostr nothing similar would have happened.
ATProto has serious centralisation problems, baked into the design. And it makes sense, considering it came out of a Twitter R&D experiment to "decentralise" Twitter itself. Pure federation was never part of the initial design.
I think decentralization is just not something users care about generally.
- many people wish they could control what they see and who they talk to. (Eg control the algorithm, avoid censorship from big tech)
- some people care about owning their data so it doesn’t go away when a company fails
- technical people are interested in building more types of social apps that aren’t just twitter posts etc
- nearly everyone just wants a fairly seamless experience without a lot of gotchas or technical problems to solve like self hosting an instance for your friends that falls over if too many people use it and is tricky to network with others.
Bluesky is trying to solve all those kinds of problems, which I think is pretty interesting, and I don’t think the others are quite doing the same thing technically. At the end of the day they are all pretty niche.
> I would be a lot more bullish on ATProto if there was a way to migrate DIDs and retain all your followers and shit. And if there was proper graphical tools for data migration.
This is exactly where I’ve landed re: ATProto. If you actually want to self-host everything you lose one of the biggest draws of it, the migratable IDs.
I was looking into it to build an alternative to Threads/IG/TikTok for one of my hobby communities that’s become almost entirely reliant on Meta/Tencent. Being able to plug into the wider AT Proto world was a big draw, but not being able to self host a true alternative to did:plc has put a halt to that for now while I figure out what I want to do.
I didn’t fully understand the part of the stack you’re talking about, but it always seemed like one of ATProto’s design goals was to really keep everything on the same distributed system (so to speak) while allowing people to host the bits individually that all contribute to the same connected system. Eg not having fully separate networks that don’t talk to each other
Nothing Bluesky does is really independent. This is such a transparent playbook and yet folks keep falling for a couple of open source repos and whatever hot takes Dan Abramov posts to reframe “instances” to “open social” bs.
I can’t imagine being a first time bootstrapped founder running a business without a trademark and not knowing that someone with bad faith would just register a trademark and just sue or order you to change your name.
These are the things that most startups account for when raising capital.
The community probably would have complained if they registered the trademark preemptively. But if they let the bad guys register it and then save the day it's the least bad solution.
The timeline just seems like two different brands wanted the name. atSign was using atProtocol as their thing. And trademarks are defend-or-lose. That AT Proto would grow so much more than atSign is just a thing we know now. They were both contemporaneous and it doesn't seem to have been some kind of gazumping operation so much as two groups landing on a name.
The policy around usage is shared in the rest of the post but the goal is to make this very simple for everyone
[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hayes_AT_command_set [2] https://tmsearch.uspto.gov/search/search-results/73319703
Even though I'm that old, even I don't care even if it was anyway.
...as long as the reason is what it looks like. Rather have Bluesky claim it for the purpose of having the officially recognized legal authority to grant usage to everyone else, than have a rando douche company think they can claim it to extort or simply inhibit everyone else.
Single vendor owned & controlled standards always turn out badly, just a question when.
This has happened with every single federated platform, and it can’t be solved with technology because it’s fundamentally not a technology problem. People want to be where other people are, so once the community reaches a critical mass it inevitably degrades into the same sump of mediocrities and their rules as everything else.
If you find yourself on the outside, it might just be that you're the village idiot. Before SoMe platforms like twitter, facebook and other places without local moderation the village idiot didn't have much of a voice either.
It didn't happen with the internet itself. You still can avoid Facebook and co. and happily discuss things on HN.
And with the email, it is much less serious than people assume. I do not use gmail or MS and practically nobody I talk to does.
I never realized there is no independent governance org that should have registered this. So AT is governed by a single for-profit entity, that also runs the only viable instance?
Those can't register trademarks, of course.
> that also runs the only viable instance?
This is false, both in the framing ("instances") and in the viability of running alternative infrastructure.
Did I just describe Apple Podcasts? Huh. Regardless, yeah, there’s no “ATProto instances” technically, but there are ATProto apps and the single biggest one now owns the trademark to the protocol name.
A Public Benefit Corporation to be precise. So they are legally obligated to favor public benefit.
When you go to bsky.app, you're interacting with the Bluesky AppView; one key feature of ATProto is that any AppView can interact with any (consenting) Personal Data Server (PDS). So you can self-host your PDS but still use bsky.app if you so choose. But critically, anyone can write an AppView; there are reimplementations of Bluesky as well as other social apps that use the same ATProto infrastructure. That would be closest thing to a Mastodon instance, except you don't have to host your data on it in order to use it. Imagine being able to go to a Lemmy instance and just post things with your Mastodon identity, and have everything show up without Mastodon having to know anything about Lemmy magazines or its special upvote / comment formats.
The actual centralization in ATProto lies in a combination of unfortunate design decisions and genuine friction in the self-hosted path. Being totally reliant on Bluesky is the happy path, self-hosting your PDS data is difficult but doable, and being totally independent of Bluesky is only possible if you do everything correctly right at the start.
First off, Bluesky doesn't offer any GUI tools for PDS migration. If you want to get off their PDS, you'll need to bust out command-line tools and possibly do some steps in advance of when you need to migrate in order for everything to work properly.
Second, even if you're on a PDS, you're still reliant on the Public Ledger of Credentials (PLC) to host your Distributed ID (DID) document. The PLC is run by Bluesky, although they've taken steps to make it easy to notice if they were to do something fucky with the PLC. But let's say we don't like that. There is a solution: you can host your DID document on a normal web server. Problem solved?
Well, if you were setting up an account for the first time, then yes, the problem is actually solved, you're 100% independent of Bluesky. But if you made the mistake of registering an account normally, you have a did:plc identity. And one core principle of ATProto is that identity names never ever ever change. So if you go and make a did:web identity, it's like having a second account, there is no way to tie your old did:plc identity into it. In fact, I'm pretty sure you can't even redirect one did:web identity to another (say if you need to switch domain names)
Regarding Bluesky's "independent protocol governance organization", they made the same promise about the PLC; but it hasn't actually been transferred yet. I would be a lot more bullish on ATProto if there was a way to migrate DIDs and retain all your followers and shit. And if there was proper graphical tools for data migration.
If Wsocial was on ActivityPub or Nostr nothing similar would have happened.
ATProto has serious centralisation problems, baked into the design. And it makes sense, considering it came out of a Twitter R&D experiment to "decentralise" Twitter itself. Pure federation was never part of the initial design.
ActivityPub and Nostr solve the issue already.
I don't mind the quasi-central nature of bsky, it's more of a problem that it's so heavily dominated by US politics.
- many people wish they could control what they see and who they talk to. (Eg control the algorithm, avoid censorship from big tech)
- some people care about owning their data so it doesn’t go away when a company fails
- technical people are interested in building more types of social apps that aren’t just twitter posts etc
- nearly everyone just wants a fairly seamless experience without a lot of gotchas or technical problems to solve like self hosting an instance for your friends that falls over if too many people use it and is tricky to network with others.
Bluesky is trying to solve all those kinds of problems, which I think is pretty interesting, and I don’t think the others are quite doing the same thing technically. At the end of the day they are all pretty niche.
This is exactly where I’ve landed re: ATProto. If you actually want to self-host everything you lose one of the biggest draws of it, the migratable IDs.
I was looking into it to build an alternative to Threads/IG/TikTok for one of my hobby communities that’s become almost entirely reliant on Meta/Tencent. Being able to plug into the wider AT Proto world was a big draw, but not being able to self host a true alternative to did:plc has put a halt to that for now while I figure out what I want to do.
Atsign, Inc. for this thing probably https://atsign.com/resources/white-papers/the-atprotocol/
These are the things that most startups account for when raising capital.