Please consider adding screenshots of the UI that provide an idea of what the experience will be like without having to log in using Bluesky or other credentials.
But that’s not where you want your chats now is it? E2EE? And how does it keep it all private since apparently the Bluesky bros haven't figured that part out?
Thanks for building this, UX is nice and should encourage people to switch from Discord. Bsky only is a bit disappointing as it is still heavily centralized. I would love to see a system like this that can also set up channels over Nostr and the Fediverse. Fragmentation is starting to become an issue with decentralized and federated social.
This looks neat, but should I be concerned about the permissions this is requesting for my account? Bluesky: Manage your profile, posts, likes and follows
Hi! We're doing that to allow you to update your profile from within the app. Not doing anything else besides that. If you have concerns, take a look at the source code:
https://github.com/colibri-social/colibri.social
From a product uptake perspective, I could suggest that since a user is still building trust when they begin use - to only require as few permissions as needed. I'd punt that profile update requirement out personally for another method later.
An example might be when a user has used your app for N sessions, or after N months.
They should prompt the user for permission when they use a feature that requires it, explain why, and allow them to cancel if desired. Have seen this pattern used many times elsewhere.
> Running a private group chat? As soon as the AT protocol supports private data, we'll work on implementing it and giving you the option to create private communities.
Not exactly "private when needed" then, is it? It's disingenuous to even mention this in the marketing copy.
Please consider adding screenshots of the UI that provide an idea of what the experience will be like without having to log in using Bluesky or other credentials.
I assume it looks the same as literally every other chat app
Done! Thanks for the suggestion, that's a good idea.
“Your data isn’t trapped on our servers” - where is it then? Who can access it?
“Open social” is so much bs compressed in a couple of buzzwords.
> where is it then?
it might be on https://bsky.social, https://npmx.dev/pds or sitting next to your router in your living room in the form of a raspberry pi (https://atproto.com/guides/self-hosting)
But that’s not where you want your chats now is it? E2EE? And how does it keep it all private since apparently the Bluesky bros haven't figured that part out?
Thanks for building this, UX is nice and should encourage people to switch from Discord. Bsky only is a bit disappointing as it is still heavily centralized. I would love to see a system like this that can also set up channels over Nostr and the Fediverse. Fragmentation is starting to become an issue with decentralized and federated social.
This looks neat, but should I be concerned about the permissions this is requesting for my account? Bluesky: Manage your profile, posts, likes and follows
Hi! We're doing that to allow you to update your profile from within the app. Not doing anything else besides that. If you have concerns, take a look at the source code: https://github.com/colibri-social/colibri.social
Very interesting project.
From a product uptake perspective, I could suggest that since a user is still building trust when they begin use - to only require as few permissions as needed. I'd punt that profile update requirement out personally for another method later.
An example might be when a user has used your app for N sessions, or after N months.
They should prompt the user for permission when they use a feature that requires it, explain why, and allow them to cancel if desired. Have seen this pattern used many times elsewhere.
Hi, person behind the project here, thanks for the cross-post!
You're welcome! Cool project!
Ty!
Interesting project, but...
> BUILT ON OPEN STANDARDS. PRIVATE WHEN NEEDED.
> Running a private group chat? As soon as the AT protocol supports private data, we'll work on implementing it and giving you the option to create private communities.
Not exactly "private when needed" then, is it? It's disingenuous to even mention this in the marketing copy.
Valid point! I'll get that section removed for now and either reword it later, or re-add when the protocol supports it.