There Are No Instances in ATProto

Re:There Are No Instances in ATProto by hack1312 on Monday June 22, 2026 @12:46AM (#48625788)

Does Blacksky have its own DID system, are they using did:web, or do they rely on blue sky’s did:plc? iiuc did:plc is what allows people to change their handle/use custom domains with the same account, but only Bluesky offers or can run did:plc, everyone else who wants to run their own full stack themselves is relegated to did:web which essentially has the same restrictions as ActivityPub where your account is tied to the domain hosting the DID.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:There Are No Instances in ATProto by tancop on Monday June 22, 2026 @12:19PM (#48632259)

> only Bluesky offers or can run did:plc

PLC is set up in a way where the database is fully visible and exportable. any censorship would show up in logs. if bluesky ever pulls it off at least part the community will stop trusting them, start their own server and patch apps to use the new domain. i know its not that easy in practice but its possible because everything is open source.

> ...your account is tied to the domain hosting the DID

thats nothing like the activitypub model. the atproto equivalent of an instance is your PDS which is something most users dont self host. did:web is not bound to a PDS, it uses a domain you own and a static https server you probably already have to host one file in `.well-known`. the risk of losing your account is much lower because someone would have to steal your domain or vps. theres no admin who can take it away.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:There Are No Instances in ATProto by hack1312 on Tuesday June 23, 2026 @12:38AM (#48640367)

yeah yeah “PLC is mirrorable” but can I run my own federated did:plc service at this moment for my own community? As far as I understand, I cannot and am limited to did:web and all the associated drawbacks, or having users sign up with Bluesky’s PLC directory to actually allow for the username portability ATproto promises.

[ Parent | on HN ]