Post

Samuel
@samuel.fm

coolest atproto project bar none. correctly identifies that github is a centralised social layer on an otherwise decentralised protocol, and atprotoifies the social layer

Evan Boehs
@boehs.org

Except the decentralized protocol already had a decentralized social layer… email. The original value-add of GitHub was not (directly) the social layer, it was the intuitiveness. That gave GitHub a critical mass. It became *the* place for development.

Evan Boehs
@boehs.org

Any developer, *today* can pickup any one of a plethora of alternatives that are just as intuitive. It’s not that hard to switch, as git is a decentralized protocol. But they don’t because switching still incurs friction, however small.

0 reposts0 likes

Evan Boehs
@boehs.org

And why would you switch? GitHub has remained remarkably unconventional. Perhaps Microsoft understands how remarkably little vendor lock-in it holds.

Evan Boehs
@boehs.org

In sum, tangled feels like a solution in need of a problem. GitHub offers a thin social layer on top of a decentralized protocol. If GitHub is threatened, decentralized alternatives already exist. Afaik tangled has no discernible value-add over these alternatives, other than “wow atproto”.

Evan Boehs
@boehs.org

Both gitlab and forgejo have federation in varying capacities. They aren’t perfect, but as a holistic platform they’re light years ahead of tangled which is still closer to concept art than a fully functioning platform. If energy was given to these features they’d be great much faster than tangled

Evan Boehs
@boehs.org

(“wow atproto” doesn’t count. That’s what the cryptobros said. No use in being loyal to the technology. Only ask what the technology enables that others do not)

caleb
@caleb.jasik.xyz

i agree that email is a similar social layer. github is also a similar social layer, since you have one identity that can be used for *all* repos on the platform. I like using Gitlab, but I don't enjoy needing a unique identity for each forge hosted on the internet.