//
sign in
Profile
by @danabra.mov
Profile
by @dansshadow.bsky.social
Profile
by @jimpick.com
AviHandle
by @danabra.mov
AviHandle
by @dansshadow.bsky.social
AviHandle
by @katherine.computer
EventsList
by @katherine.computer
ProfileHeader
by @dansshadow.bsky.social
ProfileHeader
by @danabra.mov
ProfileMedia
by @danabra.mov
ProfilePlays
by @danabra.mov
ProfilePosts
by @danabra.mov
ProfilePosts
by @dansshadow.bsky.social
ProfileReplies
by @danabra.mov
Record
by @atsui.org
Skircle
by @danabra.mov
StreamPlacePlaylist
by @katherine.computer
+ new component
Profile
Loading...
oscilloscopes, cycling, snow, big cities, wiki. I like speculating about found objects. protocol engineer @bsky.app (on 2026 summer sabbatical). formerly archive.org elsewhere: bnewbold.net / @[email protected]
bryan newbold (⛱️ sabbatical mode)









Loading...
I'm the later case, the client could control whether PDS can see API bodies by doing oblivious HTTP or not (eg, for PDS-as-trusted-middleware) concept. would let adverserial/proprietary apps bypass trusted-PDS traffic inspection; but they already cood via service tokens or BFF
💭 Oblivious HTTP is interesting! the stated use cases are anonymous/stateless, and in atproto this could help with client privacy for identity lookups (eg, PLC resolution) but seems like it could also help with pseudonymity? eg PLC op submissions. and even PDS proxying (!)
see also...