It's worth noting that in the recent #BlueSky vs #Fediverse drama, the fundamental complaint was that BlueSky wasn't centralized enough, so some people are coming to Fediverse seeking that centralization.
For the years of talk about how BlueSky isn't decentralized like Fediverse, those folks were always wrong, and this is another case illustrating their getting that backwards.
Fediverse is centralized around instances. BlueSky is decentralized down to users. Of the two, BlueSky is the decentralized option.
Whether that's good or bad is a separate matter.
@light you say "can always choose another instance" as if that's trivial. But it amounts to a much more serious banning than being removed from PLC when there are other options to replace that.
This is exactly an example of how BlueSky is more decentralized than Fediverse.
Fediverse requires that connection to an instance which can ban you while ATProto doesn't. It provides alternatives to prevent that centralization.
@light Yeah, the options might not be easy, but at least there are options, unlike on fediverse where you're just screwed by the instance centralization.
That's the point.
It might be inconvenient, and maybe with time there can be systems to improve the user experience, but on fediverse there's just no way at all.
@volkris I suppose you can set up a did:web identity. but those are less secure than did:plc (no key rotation) and it requires technical know-how just like setting up your own fedi instance.
The main problem is the relay/indexer, which requires a large amount of resources to set up, so there are likely to be very few of them.
https://dustycloud.org/blog/how-decentralized-is-bluesky/