Bluesky managed to go offline practically entirely. I count on you folks to spork the hell out of this.

See also here.

        • GoodEye8@lemm.eeEnglish
          2·
          50 minutes ago

          Because most of the communities are on those 2 instances. In terms of userbase world does have the most users, but they’re the exception as other “big” instances are more evenly split.

          So instead of a single instance going down we have 2 main instances that need to go down, and even if they go down we’d have lemmee, shitjustworks, lemmyca and blahaj (and I guess also lemmynsfw) communities feeding the feed.

          • Voltage@lemmy.dbzer0.comEnglish
            1·
            13 minutes ago

            I agree, having multiple main instance is better than what we had. Also thank you for reminding me lemmynsfw, time for donating.

    • VerPoilu@sopuli.xyzEnglish
      36·
      11 hours ago

      Well, this user has posted on feddit.uk with a sh.itjust.works account. I would have been able to see it, but you wouldn’t have.

      To be honest, lemmy.world AND lemmy.ml could go offline I would barely notice it.

  • MimicJar@lemmy.worldEnglish
    26·
    13 hours ago

    Based on https://www.theverge.com/2024/11/14/24296537/bluesky-acting-up-outage-down it was down for 15-30 minutes and for some it was just read-only.

    Lemmy instances regularly go down for maintenance longer than this.

    Twitter used to regularly “fail whale” and in the long run no one cares.

    Yes, decentralizing is a good thing. Yes, it’s fun to poke at BlueSky. But in the long run if you have a product that people want to use then they’ll put up with a lot of crap/downtime.

  • RandomVideos@programming.devEnglish
    3·
    11 hours ago

    Assuming people dont make multiple accounts and each server goes offline for maintenance for the same time, wouldnt both one server and multiple servers act the same for the user?