Bridges like Bridgy-Fed and others can connect Fediverse to interact with Bluesky from their Fediverse account. Bridges are an opt-in which I think its a great thing for privacy. But at the same time, I don't think the majority of Fediverse users who would be interested in using bridges know that they exist.

What I am suggesting is that large Fediverse instances (and Bluesky) encourage and make it easy to use brigdes by having an easy tool to turn on or turn off bridges.

An example situation could be when someone creates an account on mastadon.social, a small pop up shows ups explaining what bridges are in two-three sentences, and has a recommended bridge to use along with a drop down of other options to choose from, and ask it they would like to bridge or not like to bridge.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] Kierunkowy74@piefed.social 4 points 1 week ago (1 children)

The platforms should provide inter-protocol bridging natively. Now we have to follow an unrelated (to either) account and hope that it not fails silently*. This should be a switch in the UI.

*at least one can follow bridged accounts from elsewhere without bridging oneself.

[–] Twoafros@sh.itjust.works 1 points 1 week ago (1 children)

This is a good point. I wonder why this isn't the default

[–] thenexusofprivacy@lemmy.blahaj.zone 2 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago)

wafrn and Hubzilla both do this. But in general, developers of most ActivityPub-based platforms prefer to focus on AP, and already have a lot on their plate; Bluesky wants to focus on AT, and similarly has a lot on their plate; and most users don't actually care that much ... so nobody's likely to prioritize it.