> The fact that they even take up visual space is an annoyance

Yes, we all have things other HN users are interested in that we aren’t. That’s a consequence of participating in a community, as distinct from a hivemind.

Most links on HN don't interest me, and they don't bother me either, but the shilling for Bluesky has been quite apparent lately. If anything, their presence is more indicative of a hivemind than my eagerness for them to go away.

Your proposal that I must want every link on HN to be something I am interested in is obviously a bad faith argument. Later.

I think the uptick of blue sky posts is directly tied to a bunch of techies/journos getting their invites and are excited for a possible Twitter alternative. But I’ve also seen articles talk about the issues with bluesky as well (hell threads, bunch of butts, public block lists, s3 domain thing). Exciting times.

> That’s a consequence of participating in a community, as distinct from a hivemind.

Then surely you upvoted 'brvsft' for being a good member and asking the community to not to share more Bluesky content?

> no one would give a single shit if it were created by some unknown person

Sure, general-purpose social networks need a large reach to be of value. This is not insight.

Here's the reply to your dogpile comment. I hope you feel validated.

This didn't happen, but more importantly Twitter was far more proactive about resisting law enforcement requests for private info than other social media companies, which is the actual thing to be worried about.

Current Twitter ownership is allowing India's government to censor things worldwide and is obviously compromised in China as well.

You can hide posts you don't want to see. Problem solved.

You cannot hide posts before you see them.