If Bluesky was just another ActivityPub using site you could just defederate from it. This isn’t really possible when there are many bridges that relay messages.
But you also seem to have completely misunderstood what people objected to about the ATProto bridge. It wasn’t the optional possibility to reach people on Bluesky. It was the automatic opt-in that most people objected to.
The Fediverse is, by definition, anything that supports ActivityPub. If BlueSky supported ActivityPub – which is what the bridge was meant to accomplish – then it would be a part of the Fediverse.
A bridge by definition does not make Bluesky compatible with ActivityPub and also does not make it part of the Fediverse. There used to be bridges to Twitter as well, but that doesn’t mean Twitter supports activitypub or is part of the Fediverse.
If Bluesky was just another ActivityPub using site you could just defederate from it. This isn’t really possible when there are many bridges that relay messages.
But you also seem to have completely misunderstood what people objected to about the ATProto bridge. It wasn’t the optional possibility to reach people on Bluesky. It was the automatic opt-in that most people objected to.
By using the Fediverse, you implicitly opt in to having your content federated between different platforms. How is this any different?
Not between platforms but within the Fediverse. Bluesky is not part of the Fediverse.
The Fediverse is, by definition, anything that supports ActivityPub. If BlueSky supported ActivityPub – which is what the bridge was meant to accomplish – then it would be a part of the Fediverse.
A bridge by definition does not make Bluesky compatible with ActivityPub and also does not make it part of the Fediverse. There used to be bridges to Twitter as well, but that doesn’t mean Twitter supports activitypub or is part of the Fediverse.