TL;DR: Betteridge.
Over on Bluesky, Bart-Jan Schuman asked:
Hmm, what kind of data/numbers would you be looking for to show that Bluesky no longer is a monopoly in/over the ATmosphere? Looking for deterministic feedback here, as I am actually trying to figure out what kind of data people would find useful to show that ATmosphere is more than Bluesky…
— Bart-Jan.Schuman.de (@schuman.de) November 28, 2025 at 11:20 AM
I replied directly with some metrics, but it got me thinking about all the noise there’s been lately around if Bluesky is decentralization theatrics, since there are always naysayers happy to jump in and claim they hold too much control - which is tricky, since too much is an issue of opinion.
The monopoly question, however, is easier to answer.
A monopoly requires exclusive control - you are the only one who gets to provide a service.
A monopolist always holds an implicit threat: stick with me, do what I say, or get cut off altogether.
For example, Microsoft’s monopolistic practices to exert desktop dominance was a threat because it excluded other OSes. Nobody could replace parts piecemeal. Running Windows meant running Windows apps.
If you were in an organization that had bought into Windows, even if they did it for practical reasons, chances are you were out of luck if you wanted to run absolutely anything else. Conform, or find a job elsewhere.
It was even more insidious than that. People running Windows apps meant you needed Windows SDKs and documentation, so as a devyou had to pay Microsoft for access.
None of these apply to the current situation. The code is open, there is patent non-aggression pledge, and there are multiple implementations of - as far as I can tell - every component on the stack other than the PLC directory.
Now, arguably, Bluesky PBC does have de facto control over 90%+ of data and accounts… but there’s no particular reason for that other than inertia and user choice.
Bluesky PBC does not force people to host with them and, in their position, I would be much happier if I could offload those costs and the attending data risk onto someone else.
Furthermore, users who do not host with Bluesky nor use their applications to access the network are in no way disadvantaged.
Someone hosting their data on an alternate PDS, like myself, is not a second-class citizen on the network. Neither is someone getting their information from a custom app view, or running any of Blacksky’s infrastructure components, or simply using Deer to read their feeds, posting photos through Flashes, or looking to move their blog onto Leaflet.
Nobody loses access to their social graph if they decide to walk away from Bluesky PBC.
So I can’t see any monopolistic practice taking place nor an effort to maintain their position. If you are writing an ATProto application, Bluesky PBC does not dictate how you should create the lexicons for it, what you get to store in them or even where do you users need to keep their data. They don’t even demand a token payment for access to the docs.
Does Bluesky PBC get to choose what people using their UI and feeding off their AppView get to see from the Bluesky network? Sure.
But so do every single other participant running their version of those components.
In practice, Bluesky PBC has a salient position on ATmosphere microblogging, but beyond that, anything goes.