@atomicpoet
You were told that by a Bluesky engineer, we have no idea what the reality will be or what BS's ultimate plans are.

This is the problem, once you put VC money into it, it messes up the relationship between provider and end user. It sooner or later makes the provider see the end user as cattle to be exploited.

It makes absolutely no sense to go down that road when we already have a VC-free alternative in the Fediverse.

You don’t have a VC-free alternative in the Fediverse. Multiple Mastodon servers are owned by entities financed by VC entities. Some of the biggest servers even.

To me, that doesn’t matter, though, because my server isn’t owned by a VC. It’s owned by me.

But I also don’t look at VCs as a metaphysical evil. I just look at them as banks. Maybe banks are evil, but I still use them. You probably do too.

Some people try to bypass the evil banks. And what does that get them? They’re either storing cash under their mattress or buying Bitcoin. And we know what kind of kookery that leads towards.

You can’t avoid VCs any more than you can avoid banks. Almost everything you use has been touched by them. That includes the development of ActivityPub itself—but I’m sure you know that.

"But I also don’t look at VCs as a metaphysical evil. I just look at them as banks. Maybe banks are evil, but I still use them. You probably do too. "

No, VCs aren't banks. Banks loan money but they don't buy control of the company. VCs take control of your company and force you to do growth-oriented things that enshittify you.

Every single online project backed by VCs has enshittified.

"You can’t avoid VCs any more than you can avoid banks. "

That just isn't true. Most companies and organisations aren't backed by VCs.

VCs are looking for rapid unsustainable growth so they can cash out a large profit.

Chris, it is pretty nasty to imply that those who criticise VCs are "kooks". There are serious long term problems with the structure of VC projects due to their unsustainable growth-chasing. It will kill the planet amongst other things.

It is reasonable to criticise and condemn VCs, it's not "kookery".

"You don’t have a VC-free alternative in the Fediverse. Multiple Mastodon servers are owned by entities financed by VC entities."

Vast majority of servers aren't involved with VCs. The standards aren't created by VCs.

And it's possible to defederate the tiny number of VCs on here.

Here's a textbook example of how Venture Capital gradually enshittified and destroyed a social network that claimed to be an ad-free privacy-friendly alternative:

https://waxy.org/2024/01/the-quiet-death-of-ellos-big-dreams/

"The Ello founders (say they) won’t sell your data or show you ads."

"If they were independently-funded and run as some sort of co-op, bootstrapped until profitable, maybe that’s plausible. Hard, but possible."

"But VCs don’t give money out of goodwill, and taking VC funding — even seed funding — creates outside pressures that shape the inevitable direction of a company."

VC backing means enshittification.

The Quiet Death of Ello's Big Dreams - Waxy.org

Ello launched in 2014 with big dreams, but the artsy social network suddenly shut down last year, deleting nine years of posts without warning. What happened?

^{Andy Baio (Waxy.org)}