Orthographic
Thank you. ATProtocol is really cool, but I share some concerns about the centralized resolution of identities to custom servers. If I understand Bluesky correctly:
When you follow users on Bluesky (even those on a hosted custom server), atprotocol allows you to follow them by a "URL" (DID:web) but by default you're following them by their DID:PLC, a kind of Decentralized Id that is resolved via an equivalent to a "name server" (see: https://github.com/did-method-plc/did-method-plc).
You give that name server a DID json representing a user you want to follow or are following, it will tell you the IP of the (custom atproto) server where that user's posts and replies are. By default Bluesky apps only know about PLC nameservers that are in Bluesky's registry.
And so even if I'm using custom hosting if Bluesky PLC nameserver delists my DID (or my server?) most bluesky users will be unable to find me.
Bluesky is theoretically interested in moving this nameserver under a nonprofit consortium structure but no one is working on it, and BlueSky for years hasn't gotten around to it.
My questions are:
1. Is that right, or are there any promising nascent efforts to create a nameserver registry under a consortium structure?
2. Is it fair to ask users, potential users and developers to take it as an article of faith that BlueSky will fully support and partner with such a consortium (since it hasn't helped set one up already in the years of its development) and steer ATProto's development without self-interest? What about in light of Bluesky features that have not been "backported" to ATproto?
3. Once Bluesky has a large enough userbase (far beyond those that joined just for the decentralization) and is a private company, are its incentives aligned with increasing centralization to lock those users in or decentralization to allow them to leave?