https://bsky.app/profile/leocomerford.bsky.social/post/3l7v6... To help the hard of clicking, this time I have pasted it all for you:
Leo R. Comerford @leocomerford.bsky.social
Why was it decided not to build on any existing content-addressable networking system (IPFS or whatever)?
November 1, 2024 at 12:39 PM
Leo R. Comerford @leocomerford.bsky.social · 23d
(Not implying that this was the wrong decision, it’s a genuine question.)
dan @danabra.mov · 23d
actually not sure i can answer this well. paging @bnewbold.net or maybe @why.bsky.team (who worked on IPFS btw)
dan @danabra.mov · 23d
my guess is that we’d want data hosting to be under direct control of the user (same as web hosting) rather than peer-to-peer, want instant deletion/edits at the source, need ability to move to a different host or take content down, need grouping into collections. not sure how much IPFS could adapt
dan @danabra.mov · 23d
we do use some pieces from IPFS through (aside from the actual peer to peer mechanism) bryan newbold @bnewbold.net · 4mo
you can basically ignore it, we don't use "IPFS" proper anywhere.
there are strong social connections, and we borrow some tech components like CIDs (flexible hash/digest syntax) and DAG-CBOR (more-deterministic subset of CBOR, good for signing+hashing)
Bumblefudge @bumblefudge.com · 1d
yeah this is all accurate. bluesky remixed a lot of IPFS components and patterns in interesting ways, but the monolithic global IPFS network (with chatty DHT distribution) wouldn't make sense here, BS made an infinitely more efficient/performant distribution of bytes tailored to its use case.
Bumblefudge @bumblefudge.com · 1d
FWIW the IPFS foundation is working on making IPFS more modular and easily remixed for future BlueSkies, but it's a big task decomposing the monolith and reorienting the documentation and ergonomics...
[a second reply to the first skeet:]
Uai @why.bsky.team · 23d
As far as im concerned (and i led ipfs development for a number of years) we are using ipfs, just a specific streamlined implementation of it. All your repo data can be imported into an ipfs node and addressed via cid
Uai @why.bsky.team · 23d
We dont use libp2p because for a consumer mobile app we didnt want to futz with nat traversal and connectivity and the like, but its definitely possible to build a p2p version of bluesky
"skeet" is such a terrible term for this. It's like mastodon "toot"s.
Using bodily functions as core infra terminology is off-putting and feels like a bit like a juvenile boy's club. I get that some people find it funny, but it alienates people. We should just call these "posts".
Same thing with names like CockroachDB and GIMP.
The official Bluesky FAQ says this:
>What is a post on Bluesky called?
>The official term is “post.”
Hard agree -- this one is especially bad because it's gendered. We'll see what happens, but I'd put my money on "post" winning out. There's some people on Bluesky who feel absurdly strong about this because of the history (the CEO asked them not to use it so they used it more often as a joke), but they're simply outnumbered already. Such is exponential growth...
Sure, whatever: I had certainly given it approximately no thought in this case, and my personal investment in 'sk**t' is zero. I'd edit my post but I seem to have hit the timeout. I will also say that I don't think this is the most interesting or on-topic thread to pull on from my comment.
Huh, I thought it was a reference to shooting: fling your hot take into the sky in front of an audience ready to blow it to smithereens.