Post

I have a whole folder of ATProto apps on iOS (plus a select few directly on my Home Screen). Today we call them “ATproto” apps. In the future … they’re just a better way to build a wide range of apps, where users own their data, login in anywhere, and choose different interfaces.

Genuinely, I wish it was called something else, something a bit more... consumer-friendly? I always found "Nostr" quite friendly, despite the protocol being a minefield. It's (annoyingly) still nicer to say "Login with Bluesky" instead of "Login with ATProto".

"sign in with your ATmosphere account" seems a little better.

I am deferring comment on off-the-cuff naming and branding. This needs real research of a wider group of people who aren't early adopters, and @christian.bsky.social is taking some of this on discourse.atprotocol.community/t/research-p...

Yeah, I’m getting regular feedback from normies who do have Bluesky accounts and were confused by what an “ATProto handle” or “ATProto account” mean. Maybe an example on the entry box that says “yourhandle.bsky.social” will help, but it confused even people who were willing to search online.

Also thinking that letting people enter “joebob” or “@joebob” and have the app try that as “joebob.bsky.social” is a sane default for the foreseeable future. #ATDev

I don't like that idea because while it's CONVENIENT, I think it pushes users towards ways of thinking about things that will come back to bite them and us in the long run.

".bsky.social" is a PART of the username, and if users get used to letting their eyes glaze over and glance past it, they'll be more vulnerable to impersonation attacks.

It also further cements bluesky's central position in the ecosystem in users' minds, and if we're trying to push forward the idea of atproto as an ecosystem and not just "bluesky" that's not something we want to do.

(Bluesky IS undeniably central to the ecosystem and will likely remain so for a long time, but I don't think that's something we want to enshrine, and it's going to create the misconception that you MUST have an account with bluesky to be on the ATmosphere, which is false)

Adoption over gospel. As long as there is nothing on the labeling hindering future changes, or stopping people who are self-sovereign, UX-friendly branding has value. And people with a custom handle would understand what an “ATProto handle means” so it’s not like you are excluding them.

I definitely care about adoption but I don't think it's the only value worth caring about. Avoid $ Success At All Costs and all that. In this case it's specifically that I think doing this will make unsophisticated users more vulnerable to predatory behavior.

I agree! I wouldn't trade adoption for (say) something that requires Bluesky PBC to be the only identity provider, even in the short term. Having said that...