There are no instances in ATProto
Points and comments are a snapshot, not live.
Atproto separates hosting from aggregation, unlike Mastodon's instance model.
The article argues that atproto (used by Bluesky) has no instances like Mastodon. It separates hosting (PDS) from aggregation (apps). Users can swap hosting and use different apps without changing their identity. Relays help scale data distribution but are optional. The model is compared to RSS and Google Reader, where hosting and apps are independent.
The author claims this fixes broken incentives in both closed and federated social media by decoupling hosting from apps. Decentralization is measured by hosting migration and app creation, not instance count.
What commenters are saying
Most commenters found the article's RSS/Reader analogy helpful for understanding atproto's architecture. Some pushed back, arguing that relays and app views are instances, just grouped differently. The author responded in comments, clarifying relays are optional optimizations and that separating hosting from apps enables different forms of decentralization.
Several comments addressed moderation: one noted that federated Mastodon instances struggle with 'warring fiefdoms' while atproto allows users to keep identity and content when switching hosts or apps. Others debated whether running a full Bluesky AppView is necessary or if building new apps is the intended path.