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

[–] _NetNomad@fedia.io 7 points 1 week ago (1 children)

most people join the fedi to get away from shit like bluesky, so until they become actually decentralized i think most fedi instances should block/ban bridges if anything. the current status quo of bridges being around for those who want/need them but are easily ignorable for the rest of us is probably the best case scenario right now

[–] 42yeah@lemmy.kde.social 2 points 1 week ago

I don’t think bridges are bad. Sure bsky may not be the ideal decentralized social platform, but still a lot of interesting people have moved there and it wouldn’t be so bad to see what’s going on with them, and also maybe interact with them. In a way this feels like homemade bsky decentralization (until bsky maybe enshittifies and chooses burns them down some day, that is)