Well that didn’t take long. Looks like they’re going the discord route and locking uploads + basic customization behind a subscription. You know, because we don’t already have enough of those.

Bluesky is working on a premium subscription that will add features like higher-quality video uploads and some profile customization options.

  • .Donuts@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    84
    arrow-down
    4
    ·
    18 days ago

    If they want to keep existing they are going to need to make money somehow. Cosmetics and power user features without any ads would be the most favorable, right?

    It’s that or donations, I guess. But with the people running it, I don’t think they’d crowdfund a lot of money.

  • hono4kami@pawb.social
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    54
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    18 days ago

    I would not even call it enshittification, this actually seems like a good trade off. How else they would make money? Ads? If they run ads that would be instant no from me

    • timbuck2themoon@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      16
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      18 days ago

      People somehow think this stuff costs nothing I guess. The era of everything free on the internet has really made people blind to the fact this all costs money, one way or another.

    • orcrist@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      5
      arrow-down
      11
      ·
      18 days ago

      It’s degradation of service, no new benefits, and it will only get worse over time. This is textbook lock in and enshittify.

  • LordKitsuna@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    45
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    18 days ago

    Because it’s the only way the service can continue to exist. I don’t understand where people think the money to run these things come from. It’s either advertising or subscriptions. Bandwidth is not free, storage is not free the idea that you can host a service that lets literally anyone just constantly upload a continuous stream of whatever fucking dumb garbage is in their head for the day without ever asking for any kind of monetary value is the thoughts of the mentally incompetent.

    It sounds like most of the features are still going to be free they’re just going to offer higher quality and some other perks if you pay so that they can actually keep running the damn service

    • bitwolf@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      17 days ago

      I would gladly host myself.

      But at that point a single user mastodon instance would be better.

    • orcrist@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      8
      arrow-down
      29
      ·
      18 days ago

      Lol except that’s not true at all. There are many other ways to pay the bills. Like here, for example.

      But then you’ll bring up how “it’s different” and I agree, but that is a new and different discussion.

        • PM_Your_Nudes_Please@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          11
          arrow-down
          6
          ·
          edit-2
          18 days ago

          The most straightforward answer is that anyone can spin up their own “here” for family and friends in about 20 minutes, and they don’t need to worry about anyone else footing the bill.

          Or the larger instances take donations, which go towards server costs.

          • LordKitsuna@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            3
            ·
            18 days ago

            Pretty much this, I’d be willing to bet that even the most popular Lemmy instance likely has half or less of the active users and daily added content compared to where blue sky is right now.

            Sure Blue Sky could Federate as far as I’m aware it is possible I think they technically have a back end for that somewhere but it wouldn’t have gained popularity like that because normally users absolutely hate the ux of multiple instances. To be honest I kind of do as well I’m here because I’m not going to use Reddit anymore. But the ux of finding content on Lemmy is atrocious. So many spread out instances tons of duplicated content between them but you kind of need to follow a lot of them for the non-duplicated content and just kind of find a way to deal with the duplicate cross-posted threads between instances… even then finding stuff can be annoying it’s just not a good experience

          • Randomgal@lemmy.ca
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            3
            ·
            17 days ago

            So you’re saying pass on the cost to the individual? You know it’s not a one-and-done kind of deal, right? Someone has to maintain the service.

            How is essentially exploiting someone’s passion as free labor any better? Is it okay because it’s your family member working for free? Is his knowledge and time not worth anything to you?

            • LordKitsuna@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              3
              ·
              17 days ago

              It also has the cost of how fragmented the service has become. And is a large part of why Lemmy failed to take over for Reddit despite the amazing chance it was given. It’s not that people didn’t care enough, it’s that the experience on Lemmy is garbage from a ux perspective. People don’t care about self hosting or Federation they want One login one URL one place to find everything

        • orcrist@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          15
          ·
          18 days ago

          That is the point. It depends what instance, and there are various answers.

  • geekwithsoul@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    40
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    18 days ago

    So either you misunderstood or you’re just purposely being misleading. They aren’t saying “locking uploads” would be part of this, they’re saying you’d just be able to do higher quality uploads.

        • 8uurg@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          18
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          18 days ago

          Hosting images is not free though, and the cost of it scales with the quality of the images. People that host Mastodon also have to manage excessive disk space usage, and if you want to use more of it, compensating the entity that provides this storage, whether a company or a person, is not unreasonable.

        • Seasoned_Greetings@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          7
          ·
          17 days ago

          From what I understand, the quality of uploads is already limited presumably because they can’t afford better servers with no income.

          Adding better quality uploads at a price is adding a feature, not degrading an existing one.

  • SapphironZA@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    32
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    18 days ago

    Subscriptions are much better than it is being ad-supported.

    Otherwise the clients are the advertiser’s, not the users.

    • bitjunkie@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      17 days ago

      Literally the same logic as with streaming services not having commercials. Why would you ever think they won’t just say fuck you and do both?

      • SapphironZA@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        17 days ago

        I was arguing what the case should be for sustainability.

        I agree with you, as long as the goal of investment is short term gain and pump and dump the flavour of the month, enshitification will continue.

  • Rentlar@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    30
    ·
    18 days ago

    I think this was known to be the gameplan beforehand for Bluesky so this isn’t a trick, bait and switch or anything like that. I think it can be reasonable to support the network and infrastructure with subscriptions. However, there are no guarantees as to what the subscription would provide or that the rates will not increase randomly without warning. So long as BlueSky users know that.

    A Donation-based model might net less, but it will be centered around what people can pay.

  • drdiddlybadger@pawb.social
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    20
    ·
    18 days ago

    I expected that and vastly prefer that over ads. I also support my home server in the fediverse, and I encourage people to provide monetary support to their homeservers and most used servers.

        • Corgana@startrek.website
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          edit-2
          16 days ago

          Oh, absolutely! I pay for startrek.website too. My point what that the Fediverse works just fine when people volunteer their time and money to keep it running. The only reason you would need a subscription is to generate a profit to pay the executives.

      • cheesepotatoes@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        4
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        edit-2
        17 days ago

        I’m not the one complaining about having to pay for goods and services. If lemmy required a sub I would evaluate it against competing products and make a decision.

        I would not, however, make a post complaining about a company trying to fund its operations.

        • Corgana@startrek.website
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          16 days ago

          My point was that the Fediverse works just fine without a subscription, the people upset about a subscription are not upset about the cost, but about what it represents (or more specifically, what it doesn’t).

    • DeadWorldWalking@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      10
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      17 days ago

      Maybe it’s time we start restructuring our economy and society to not require everything to have a profit motive?

      • cheesepotatoes@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        17 days ago

        I mean ya, sure. I have no particular love for capitalism. That is the economic system we currently exist in though, for better or worse.

        • DeadWorldWalking@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          16 days ago

          I just don’t see how a social media site can be healthy/safe AND profitable.

          If it has to make money it’s going to sell user data and force narratives, and the entire argument that it has to make money allows human beings to shrug responsibility for exploiting their userbase.

        • orcrist@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          17 days ago

          Except it is not. Bluesky can decide for itself how much profit to aim for.

          • cheesepotatoes@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            arrow-down
            2
            ·
            17 days ago

            Except it is not.

            Lol. It is. We live in a capitalist economy. That’s not up for debate, it’s a fact.

        • DeadWorldWalking@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          16 days ago

          Obviously in a non capitalist system our taxes would actually pay for public goods and services.

          We wouldn’t make a social media entity pay their own operating costs if we were intentionally funding it as a public service.

          Just like PBS and NPR.

  • Let's Go 2 the Mall!@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    21
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    17 days ago

    No ads, don’t sell my data, cancel and delete data anytime, and I’d pay a fee. Running servers ain’t free. Plus the added benefit of keeping the trolls at bay.

  • Mandy@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    21
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    18 days ago

    I mean, could have been hell of a lot worse.
    What are they supposed to do without ads? Locking things behind a paywall that nobody really needs (hello discord) sounds pretty reasonable.

    • grue@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      11
      arrow-down
      5
      ·
      18 days ago

      What are they supposed to do without ads?

      Decentralize/federate like they claimed they were planning to do?

      • Mandy@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        13
        arrow-down
        6
        ·
        18 days ago

        And hows that gonna help them again?

        we see how Decentralization made lemmy and mastodon so much more popular than bluesky.
        the only thing that did was make actually start using it so much more annoying and confusing to do than it should be.

        • grue@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          6
          arrow-down
          9
          ·
          18 days ago

          And hows that gonna help them again?

          By vastly reducing infrastructure costs, so that they don’t have to resort to advertising/enshittification for funding. I thought it was pretty clear from context.

          • egrets@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            10
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            18 days ago

            Those costs don’t go away by being spread out. Decentralized or not, hosting costs money. Many fediverse hosts are scraping by or out of pocket, and they’re spending their free time on maintenance and administration. We’d be hugely ungrateful to them by pretending that’s not the case.

            I’m not making an argument for big centralized social media, or I wouldn’t be here – but I’m a “premium subscriber” to my Lemmy instance.

          • Sparrowette@lemmy.zipOP
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            4
            arrow-down
            9
            ·
            18 days ago

            You’re just going to get angry “disagreement” downvotes. They’re all in the honeymoon phase. We’ll have the “I told you so” phase soon enough.

            • hono4kami@pawb.social
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              7
              arrow-down
              3
              ·
              edit-2
              18 days ago

              What’s with the “My opinion is better than yours” attitude? Can’t we just have nuanced discussion?

              • davidagain@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                3
                arrow-down
                3
                ·
                18 days ago

                I don’t know why you think your post is better or fundamentally different to the one you were replying to.

  • surewhynotlem@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    15
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    17 days ago

    You’re either the product or the consumer, or the company goes under.

    Or in fediverse parlance: you’re either a contributor or a leach. If you don’t get enough contributors, then the leaches kill the platform.

    • seaQueue@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      9
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      18 days ago

      This situation should surprise no one. Bluesky has exactly the same business model problems old Twatter had. Expecting any other outcome than enshitification or acquisition for propaganda purposes is insanity.

  • Shardikprime@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    8
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    18 days ago

    And then people complain about paying subscriptions and not having enough to live on. My god people, no one needs to pay for this. This shit didn’t even exist 2 months ago.