[jakebsky]

In fact, it's mostly inaccurate.

> "the protocol has an official webpage with a waitlist and a private beta?"

Both the waitlist and the private beta are gone.

> "The “protocol” is just a description of whatever the Bluesky app and servers do, it can and does change anytime the Bluesky developers decide they want to change it"

1. atproto is well documented and the plan and desire is to make it a proper internet standard.

2. There are hundreds of independent projects relying on the protocol to create alternative clients and custom feeds (algorithms).

3. The protocol includes namespaced schemas so that different apps can evolve without breaking each other e.g. the "app.bsky" namespace is for the Bluesky microblogging app.

> "The “DID Placeholder” method..."

There is already support for did:web and plans to support other DID methods, including potentially (non-POW) blockchain methods.

> "All posts go through the Bluesky central server..."

All posts go through any Relay that anyone cares to operate. It's also possible to fetch posts directly form the origin PDS host, it's just slower and results in more load on the PDS.

> "And you, as a reader, doesn’t have any control of what you’re reading from either..."

Apps are in full control over where they get posts from. An app can enable users to select a Relay/AppView or fetch posts directly from the origin PDS.

> "But I fail to see why even more than one network provider will exist,..."

People may want to operate their own Relay/AppView services so they have more control for their specific application, for higher performance (latency/throughput) reasons, or for geographic/jurisdictional reasons, to name a few.

And the compute/network requirements are not beyond the capabilities of small startups, non-profits, coops, or public services and likely never will be.