Now this is interesting. Bluesky's ATProto is *explicitly designed* around people being able to replicate and index it. But here's a great example where peoples' data is being replicated and indexed and users are *furious* about it:
https://bsky.app/profile/jasonkoebler.bsky.social/post/3lbvb5lk2qk25
I'm not saying people are wrong for being upset, or that it's wrong to build a protocol that is built around replicated indexing
I'm saying that if both of those seem to be butting heads, *some* sort of disconnect is happening
Similar things have happened on the fediverse of course. Personally I am not as opposed to having global search for *public* posts; I think that's semi-inescapable. Whether it should be opt-in or opt-out is a different thing.
But I think what's true both on the fediverse and bluesky is that people are communicating in ways that easily *can be* indexed and which are public and I think people want more community-oriented private communication than feels "easy to do" on these systems.
@folkerschamel I think your standards are far too low. What of consent? What about reasonable expectations for how we use the commons? What about not being exploitative? Just because we *can* scrape posts, and just because someone probably will, means we should give up?
@annika I am in favor of protecting copyrights, as well as technical mechanisms similar to robots.txt, including not using it for AI training.
But publishing, replicating and indexing data is exactly the purpose of #bluesky and #mastodon, and when you publish something there, you give permission for it.
Analogous: I wouldn't understand if someone published a website and then complained that the data was being loaded into the visitor's browser.