Ugh that sucks. That really shouldn’t happen

Frustratingly, the two are good at different things.

Apple Maps is mostly better at announcing driving routes. Routing quality is similar - they provide different, but similar-quality routes. Public transport routes are superior because - shockingly - they seem to have more accurate data than Google Maps. Google Maps is still superior in the specific location of a business within a narrow area. Apple Maps has more errors where the marker is on the building, but Google Maps has it at the entrance.

At the same time, local search is terrible. Their partners’ and their proprietary data is inadequate and it seems businesses don’t know they could/should care and don’t maintain listings. I’ve submitted several changes in my local area and while they are usually accepted, some of them ended up reverted a while later. They seem to be working on this and hopefully they’ll eventually catch up - but I’m not sure how, if businesses don’t maintain their listings!

This isn’t happening in isolation. Bluesky has shown itself to not care about community safety in the past, their plans are (more or less) “allow everything and then try and hide the bad things from people that don’t want to see it”. Naturally, this hasn’t worked at all. (Who could have guessed?)

Not doing the obvious things on community safety is the plan. I guess it’s nice that they are responding in this case, but it takes a bit more than that to regain that trust.

You treat this as a bug, others treat it as another sign of a lack of forethought on the core of their offering.

If this happened in isolation, people would be forgiving (or wouldn’t care, given how small Bluesky is), but it’s not. Bluesky has a whole theory about moderation and community safety, and half-assing fits with that theory.

The idea that Amazon subsidises book prices or generally sells everything at a loss is based on a flawed understanding of the early years of Amazon.

That hasn’t been true for more than a decade. (Why be in a business you can’t make money on?) Amazon have, for a long time, invested more or less all their profits into new business lines on the promise that they could easily “flip a switch” and start making billions in profits. (They started doing that a few years ago after bad financial results.)

Companies show what they care about by what problems they choose to focus on, or not. If you build a Twitter competitor and you don’t invest in community safety from the start, you’re showing what you value 🤷🏼‍♂️

I’m confused by your argument. Here you say white people know full well bad words/racist language exist (suggesting the Bluesky team is incompetent/has massive blind spots), but in another comment you say people just want to complain.

Do you think this is a simple mistake most developers wouldn’t make, or is it not a mistake in the first place?

Threads isn’t a Lemmy competitor - it competes with Mastodon

That argument suggests open source products couldn’t possibly compete with a closed-source alternative.

I think few people would migrate away in that scenario. Some might create additional accounts (none of this is zero-sum). It’s not unlikely that Mastodon itself will become bigger because of it, and it’ll get hard for Meta to unilaterally pull the plug - a bit like email.

If the Threads product was so superior, and Mastodon so unable to respond that millions would leave Mastodon - sure. I doubt it though…

The outcome then would be that Meta’s instance would be defederated/defederate itself - how would that be different from now?