03.11.24

Fake food challenge,there’s tech for that

BY Wesley Diphoko 2 MINUTE READ

It has become very difficult to distinguish an authentic product from a fake product. Fake goods manufacturers have become so advanced that consumers are fooled into buying a product assuming they are buying an original version. In South Africa, this has resulted in people dying from eating expired goods sourced from traders that presented them to the market as authentic products. Authorities have attempted to curb this challenge however their efforts have failed. Now, there’s a tech solution to the fake goods challenge.

As the world is celebrating the 50th anniversary of the barcode, the organisation, GS1, that brought us the barcode was in South Africa to launch what it’s called – Verified by GS1. Essentially, GS1 (non profit entity) has brought the barcode and QR code together to assist consumers with getting more verified information about products. This is one of the most important interventions in the fight against fake goods. In the South African context, it has been launched with an app that will assist local consumers and traders to share verified product information.

Speaking about the technology, Zinhle Tyikwe, CEO GS1 South Africa, said Verified by GS1 registries functions as an “ID card” for products. She said it authenticates the identity of a packaged product using seven key attributes, with the product information securely stored in the Verified by GS1 Registry, which the brand owner maintains. “As we face challenges like counterfeiting and illicit goods, this App linked to Verified by GS1 gives consumers the power to authenticate goods that they buy and is our contribution to national and industry efforts to ensure that we deal with the scourge of counterfeiting and, importantly ensure consumers are buying trusted products,” she said

In simple terms, this new development means that consumers will now have the ability to check more information about a product using a mobile and scanning a QR code. By simply using a mobile consumers will be able to verify the authenticity of a product.

Eldrid Jordaan who leads Suppple, the company that developed the Verified by GS1 App in collaboration with GS1, had this to say about this development “at Suppple we take immense pride in our collaboration on the verified by GS1 SA app that connects citizens with 500 billion products globally. But it’s more than the scale, it’s also about playing a role in the fight against illicit trade and safeguarding citizens. Giving them the power”.

This is a step in the right direction towards safeguarding consumers against corrupt traders.

It is a welcomed move towards assisting consumers with food safety. The next big challenge that GS1 will have to tackle is the challenge of fake medicine. There’s a greater need for communities to be better informed about the medicine they consume. Already there’s a litany of medical products that are faked by traders who are just after profit. The solution presented by GS1 will just require people to have some digital literacy and perhaps a better mobile device to use their mobile phones to get product information. In the future, it will probably form part of eyewear that will enable consumers to read QR codes and get information on just about any product.

It is my hope that we will see more tech products such as these with the power to save lives. This is just one of the great examples of how data can be used for advancement. It is also a basis upon which AI can be used for advancement instead of just trivial things. If this product succeeds, its AI version will probably add another layer of protection.

03.04.24

The Elon Musk legal challenge is good for Tech

BY Wesley Diphoko 3 MINUTE READ

Elon Musk has been receiving serious backlash lately for all the right reasons. He has been off the mark a couple of times. He has been vocal about issues that should have been left to people with time to waste. Recently however he has raised something that should receive everyone’s attention. Last week he matched his criticism of Sam Altman (co-founder of OpenAI) with legal action. Why is one of the richest man in the world suing an innovator with a mission to advance technology? Few years ago before ChatGPT was a reality, Elon Musk, Sam Altman and others set out a vision to develop an AI machinery that would be free of commercial interests and everything that comes with it. It was supposed to be a holy AI that shows others how to do good. In a sense, it was going to set a standard for others to follow.

As most people who follow tech would know, Open AI was turned around by Sam and became a for profit entity that received funding from funders who were keen to see economic benefits from OpenAI.

The company moved away from its core to doing something contrary to its founding values.

As a result of this move by Sam Altman, there’s a serious gap of an AI organisation that can exist for the real benefit of all.

For this reason, Elon Musk has legally challenged Sam Altman and OpenAI. According to the New York Times, Mr. Musk sued OpenAI and its chief executive, Sam Altman, accusing them of breaching a contract by putting profits and commercial interests in developing artificial intelligence ahead of the public good. A multibillion-dollar partnership that OpenAI developed with Microsoft, Mr. Musk said, represented an abandonment of a founding pledge to carefully develop A.I. and make the technology publicly available.

The outcome of this legal challenge could shape the future of technology institutions that were designed to benefit all.

If the challenge by Elon Musk succeeds, it will ensure that institutions that were created to benefit all are not turned around to benefit just a few.

An entity such as OpenAI was created to ensure that mistakes of the past are not repeated.

In the era before AI, many have missed out on early benefits of tech. OpenAI was designed to avoid such an outcome. Of all the sins that Elon Musk has committed, this time around he’s on the right track. Some may say, as Vinod Khosla has said, it’s just sour grapes from Musk. The reality however is that someone had to raise this issue and perhaps shape the future of tech on such matters. In the future we are likely to see more technologies that will require neutrality. The future will require an OpenAI type entity that is designed to serve society at large. Tech needs an entity that is not just driven by profit. A great example in this regard is Wikipedia. As much as Wikipedia was criticised for inaccuracies it has become one of the most important websites of our times. One of the unique factors about the website is that it was built as a non-profit to benefit all. This is one of the reasons why it remained impactful and still served society. Imagine if Wikipedia had been turned into a for profit organisation.

While Elon Musk is making a point legally about the need for a non-profit organisation in AI, there’s a need for a group of tech leaders to set up such an AI institution for the benefit of all. It should be an AI non profit organisation that is built to watch the activity of other AIs and ensure that society is made aware of its harms and contribute towards a solution

02.26.24

SOVEREIGN AI: An opportunity for uniquely South African powered Artificial Intelligence

BY Wesley Diphoko 2 MINUTE READ

ChatGPT got most people excited about Artificial Intelligence (AI). Although AI has been with us for some time, recent developments have increased its adoption. Before then and through this era of AI euphoria, I’ve been concerned about what it means for countries with limited AI capabilities. The concern has been mainly around the extent to which countries could retain data sovereignty. In simple terms, how can countries use AI without the need to handover their data to countries that are leading in the AI race. Recently, it was encouraging to learn from the man of the moment, Nvidia CEO – Jensen Huang, that his company has built capabilities to enable Sovereign AI. It encompasses a nation’s approach to harnessing AI for its socio-economic, cultural, and geopolitical context. Essentially, it stands in contrast with corporate-controlled AI, which is developed and deployed less in any nation-state’s interest and more to generate profits and gain market share. Several countries, including Japan, Canada, and France, are already establishing their sovereign AI systems.

The push for sovereign AI implies a shift towards more localised and customised AI development, where AI systems are specifically designed to meet the cultural, linguistic, and regulatory requirements of individual countries. In the same way that we see smartphone companies locating AI within a device instead of a cloud option, according to Huang, we are beginning to see countries also taking the same approach in the form of Sovereign AI.

This capability which is enabled by Nvidia, presents an opportunity for African countries to build their own AI systems without handing over their data to more powerful countries. This is a positive development in the tech world. Most technological advancements often necessitate a reliance on countries that build the infrastructure which then compromises the position of developing countries. This move by Nvidia addresses a concern that has always been there about data sovereignty. Lack of data sovereignty up to now has weakened African countries and rendered them tech slaves to those that develop software and hardware. Sovereignty AI by Nvidia presents a major opportunity for African countries. Now countries within the continent can develop unique technology solutions.

The uniqueness of their technology solutions will be driven mainly by their unique data. Each country from a data perspective has something that another country does not have. This will allow country specific AI solutions and level the playing field. If embraced, this is a moment that could propel South Africa in the AI race. Challenges faced by South Africa as well as innovation projects could enable AI solutions that could be useful elsewhere. Think of the AIDS challenge in South Africa. It has enabled the country to embark on advanced AIDS research to address the challenge. The data that comes out of such work could enable the country to buld Health AI solutions that could assist others in dealing with the AIDS challenge. The crime challenge, although not unique to South Africa, its data could be used to build AI tools to assist other countries to prevent a similar challenges. The more unique the countries circumstances the more it will be able to use sovereign AI to its advantage. Each country now can develop an AI roadmap into the future and ensure that it has a sit at the AI table.The time is now for countries to also be excited about AI.

02.23.24

Nvidia Stock Effect: The CEO (Jensen Huang) could join the World’s Richest People

BY Wesley Diphoko 2 MINUTE READ

In 1978, Jensen Huang was a dishwasher and busboy at a Denny’s restaurant in Portland, Oregon, hustling for tips and a minimal salary. When he goes to sleep Thursday night, he will do so as one of the richest people in the world.

Nvidia shares skyrocketed following the company’s breakaway earnings report Wednesday evening. Shares were 15% higher in mid-afternoon trading Thursday, climbing roughly $104 per share since yesterday afternoon, to around $778. And, as of last September, Huang owned 86.7 million shares of the company, making him the largest shareholder.

At close of business Wednesday, Huang was worth $59.6 billion. Today’s spike should put him in the range of $68–$68.5 billion.

As of 2:30 p.m. ET, that increase in Huang’s net worth has rocketed him to the No. 21 position on Bloomberg’s Billionaire Index, a leap of two places, putting him ahead of Charles Koch (No. 23) and Zhong Shanshan (No. 22), a Chinese entrepreneur who made his fortune in bottled water.

In the coming days, he’s likely to overtake Julia Flesher Koch (No. 20, with $69.1 billion, as of Wednesday evening). And if Nvidia’s stock continues to surge, in the near future, he could top Walmart heirs Jim Walton (No. 17, with $78.3 billion), Rob Walton (No. 18, with $76.9 billion), and Alice Walton (No. 19, with $75.9 billion). He still has a long way to go before he gets in the top five, though. (Bill Gates currently occupies that No. 5 spot, with a net worth of $146 billion—and Elon Musk tops the list with $210 billion.)

Huang’s climb is an impressive escalation of wealth no matter how you look at it, but it’s even more stunning when you consider that a year ago, his personal worth was $13.5 billion, which put him at No. 128 on the list.

Nvidia posted record Q4 revenue of $22 billion, boasting a 265% increase from the same quarter the prior year and earnings that far exceeded analyst expectations. Goldman Sachs has called Nvidia the “most important stock on planet Earth.” And Huang’s words move markets.

Now the third-largest company in the U.S., Nvidia has been responsible for one-third of the Nasdaq 100’s gains this year. And it’s showing no sign of slowing. CFO Colette Kress, on Wednesday, said that although the company had improved supply of its AI GPUs, it was still well short of overall demand.

It’s a position that Huang and his cofounders, Chris Malachowsky and Curtis Priem, couldn’t have imagined in 1993 when they met (ironically) at a different Denny’s than the one Huang had worked at—this one in San Jose—to map out what their new company would be. (The restaurant was convenient, as Malachowsky and Priem worked at Sun Microsystems nearby, and Huang was at LSA Logic at the time. They would later use Priem’s non-air-conditioned townhouse to lock down their business plan.)

The early days were rough. Between 1999 and mid-2015, Nvidia’s stock didn’t top $6.25 per share. Last year, Huang told the Wall Street Journal that when he told his mother the trio was starting a company to make graphics chips for video games, she replied, “Why don’t you go get a job?”

Thankfully for him, he didn’t listen.

FastCompany

02.20.24

The meaning of “Please Call Me” victory by Makate

BY Wesley Diphoko 3 MINUTE READ

The story of the “Please Call Me” inventor, Nkosana Makate, is not about one man. It’s a story of South African young people who are ignored within corporate SA. When Nkosana Makate came up with the “Please Call Me” idea no one expected it to come from a township young man. The Vodacom leadership at the time just expected him to focus on his internship and earn a stipend at the end of the month. Makate was however pregnant with township experience that informed and inspired the “Please Call Me” idea.

We find a similar attitude in corporate SA today. Ideas of young people from townships are suppressed, they are not expected to come up with technological solutions yet they have an experience of some of the toughest challenges in our society. In case this is difficult to understand, just look at the number of young people who are funded to make their business ideas a reality. The lack of funding or support has nothing to do with the validity and feasibility of their ideas but more to do with the view that someone from a township cannot think.

This is clear when one looks at the Makate case. Here is a young man who experiences a difficulty of communicating with his partner and thereafter designs a solution based on his lived experience. In articulating the solution he does not only outlines the challenge, which was also experienced by many South Africans at the time, but also identifies a technology – USSD (Unstructured Supplementary Service Data) which is a Global System for Mobile Communications (GSM) protocol.

At this point in time it’s important to note that the use case for USSD was completely different, at least in the South African context. What Makate did is what most technologists do when they come up with solutions for our society. They identify a major challenge and at the same time they pick an ideal technology to address the challenge. When they don’t have all the expertise to develop a solution, they partner with those with tools and skills. This is exactly what Makate did and there was consensus that he was the creator. What happened thereafter is what happens to most young people from townships. Their ideas are hijacked by people with access to funders and networks and they present their ideas as if they have conceived them.

There are many Makates in our society.

As this matter is now approaching its conclusion, some have come up with strange theories. Some have started to argue that if Makate were granted what is due to him he would be richer than some of the richest South Africans. Some have also come up with weird theories such as that paying Makate will lead to retrenchments at Vodacom. There’s a need to be less confused when it comes to dealing with the Makate matter. Here we are dealing with a technology Intellectual property (IP) matter. In this country in terms of the law, IP matters. People are expected to be paid for their IP. If their IP has contributed towards wealth creation then they are entitled to the piece of the pie. The “Please Call Me” matter with Makate offers South Africa an opportunity to do what is right. It’s a wake up call to start acknowledging young people from townships. They have the capability to think beyond imagination. They need the support to make their dreams a reality.

They experience the challenges and they are the best to come up with solutions. When they come up with solutions there’s a need to credit them and not to suppress them. This is what could lead to more relevant and impactful innovations in the country.

When Nkosana Makate came up with the idea he understood very well what he was doing. He still understands the value of that idea today. His experience has opened his eyes about the challenges facing township young people within corporates. When he is paid what is due to him I believe he will do something to acknowledge innovations by township based young innovators.

02.12.24

Tech Giants are getting serious about Fake Content generated by AI

BY Wesley Diphoko 2 MINUTE READ

Recently, disturbing and sexually explicit fake pictures of Taylor Swift appeared online and were circulated swiftly. According to the New York Times, one image shared by a user on X was viewed 47 million times before the account was suspended. Social media platform,X had to suspend several accounts that posted the faked images of Ms. Swift, but the images were shared on other social media platforms and continued to spread despite those companies’ efforts to remove them. What happened to Taylor Swift can happen to anyone online. It has now become very difficult to distinguish between authentic and fake content online. Online users have to contend with fake videos, calls and photos.

This has prompted leading technology giants to come up with solutions.

Google announced that they will collaborate with companies like Adobe, the BBC, Microsoft and Sony to fine-tune technical standards to address the fake content challenge. Meta (Facebook parent) also announced a similar commitment.

The social network company wants to promote standardized labels to help detect artificially created photo, video and audio material across its platforms.

If such efforts become a reality in the near future we will have clearly marked content. An image or video will an indicated that shows that it’s AI generated. It will probably look like what Samsung has done with their new device, the Samsung S24. Images are that AI generated are marked with tiny starts to indicate that they were touched by AI. These efforts will go a long way in protecting people from negative AI content.

This may however create A challenge for positive AI content. Not all AI generated content is fake. Some content creators use AI to assist them in the process of creating content. Such content may be authentic in nature but now may need to reflect the AI label.

As much as labelling of content will positive for readers and online content consumers it will not serve the interests of well meaning creators. At the same time efforts to label AI content will elevate the status of original content creators.

The so called AI threat to writers will be minimised by the process of labelling content. In future, original content will be highly valued compared to AI generated content. Unique original voices and creative works will occupy a unique position. As societies battle with the deluge of fake content, there’s an opportunity for original content publishers. At some level those who will rely on original methods will gain the trust of readers and content consumers.

Major publishers will be able to cut costs by relying on AI but at the same time they run a risk of losing trust of readers. On the other hand Independent publishers can grab this opportunity and dedicate themselves to authenticity and quality. This approach may yield positive dividends in future. At the end of the day content consumers will benefit from such developments. The process of labelling fake content will create better awareness about AI generated content. It will also save people from falling for deceitful content. Content consumers will be able to choose between artificial content and authentic content. Software companies have started to fights fake content, now there’s a need hardware companies such as Apple to also join efforts to reduce fake content online.

02.05.24

Tech on Human beings needs Authentic Intelligentia

BY Wesley Diphoko 2 MINUTE READ

In between the noise, Elon Musk has been leading a team that has managed to plant wires on a human brain. The wireless brain-computer interface (BCI) developed by one of Elon Musk companies, Neuralink, seeks to evaluate the safety of their implant and surgical robot and also assess the initial functionality of the BCI for enabling people with quadriplegia and difficulty of movement to control external devices with their thoughts. If they succeed, in the near future human beings will have the ability to issue commands to computers via thoughts.

In simple terms, this means one day our brains will carry out functions that were executed by keyboards and computer mouses. Our thoughts will enable us to make phone calls and we could even open doors by just thinking. Although this may occur in the distant future we need to reflect on these developments now. It raises a number of questions that ought to be answered before we discover negative consequences that often come with innovation. At the same time, the research at Neuralink offers us an opportunity to allow innovation to transform lives.

When Elon Musk was presenting the first Telepathy (as it’s known by Neuralink team) he also mentioned that it could also cure blindness at some point. Some are concerned about such technological advancements and there’s already an interest to throw a rule book. Should we therefore allow regulators to stand in the way of health innovations due to fear of unintended consequences? How should we handle innovations that have a direct impact on human lives? There are no easy answers to these questions. Our experience with innovation tells us that we need to strike a balance that can allow progress while enabling necessary guardrails. Are we not at a point where there’s a need for us to create innovation zones or safety spaces to carry our research that could have an impact on human lives? There’s a difference between deploying an Uber solution which challenges traffic and transport regulations and deploying a technology solution that is embedded on a human body. Consequences of implementing solutions on nonhuman physical infrastructure and humans may require a different approach to implement technology solutions. We know it’s possible for innovations to yield negative outcomes and the interruptions on human lives have been minimal. We are now getting to a point where such human interruptions may be greater. As a society there’s a need to be ready for the Neuralink type innovations. There’s a need for new interventions that will enable progress while safeguarding lives. We don’t have such interventions yet. Failure to create them may lead to disastrous consequences. Future innovations will require new rules of engagement. We need them before we are surprised by an unstoppable tsunami of human beings embedded with wires. To solve this one we will need Authentic Intelligence instead of Artificial Intelligence. Human beings with brains will need to sit down and think deeply about how human beings could be impacted by technological advancements in their bodies. At the same they will have to consider the benefits for those whose lives is limited by lack of solutions to their challenges. Such a group of human beings will need more than just health professionals, but ethicists, technologists, and socioligists to map out a charter that will guide as we move innovation beyond just physical objects to human beings. The sooner we act on this one the better our better and safer our lives will be in the age of tech is beginning to merge with human beings.

Wesley Diphoko is technology analyst

02.02.24

Editorial: Inside the latest issue of FastCompany (SA)

BY Wesley Diphoko 2 MINUTE READ

We are entering a very interesting period in the evolution of technology. Some of the innovations we’ve been dreaming about are become a reality; there has never been a better time to witness innovation in action. It’s a moment that will require tech companies to learn from some of the “Brands That Matter” covered in the latest issue of FastCompany (SA). We examine brands that care more about what they do and the impact they have, rather than a polished logo and well-crafted public relations campaigns. This is just one of the reasons why they matter.

One of the brands, MultiChoice, from which we can learn, has developed an impactful innovation fund. In this issue we share more about how the MultiChoice Innovation Fund is enabling impactful businesses to grow. One of those businesses is led by our cover star, Siyabonga “Slikour” Methane.

In this issue we also take a different look at various brands. As opposed to just focusing on whether they are liked, or not, we examine their resilience rather than their shiny sides. We look at the impact they are having on society. We hope other businesses can draw important lessons from this, and themselves build better brands of the future.

As we kick-start 2024, we will all need guidance in order to conduct our business in ways that make us better human beings. We will be experiencing some of the most innovative tech developments, ones that will require responsible implementation. Among these will be the first AI hardware product, AiPin (learn more about it in this issue), as well as ChatGPT, which appears set to go ahead with even more powerful AI platforms. To understand more about what is happening in the world of AI research, take time to read about the OpenAI battle that almost killed ChaptGPT towards the end of last year (2023). The reasons behind this should concern all who will use future AI tools. It is my hope that more brands like OpenAI can learn from the “Brands That Matter” to deliver products that will have a positive impact in the world.

As FastCompany South Africa, this year we will also be showcasing—at our inaugural FastCompany Festival—some of the brands that can serve as an inspiration. The event will showcase many of the companies that have been featured in this publication, and their leaders will share some of their secrets. As you implement your 2024 business plans, may you do so responsibly, considering the impact of your business moves on broader society. I commit to making an impact through my writing and the stories I document, and I hope you will benefit from what’s going to appear in FastCompany during the course of this year. We will be adding new features, which we hope will add value to your business and professional life. More of these will be available via our digital platform on, www.fastcompany.co.za. Head over there to be inspired daily.

01.29.24

Apple is getting ready to change the world again

BY Wesley Diphoko 2 MINUTE READ

By Wesley Diphoko

One of the most important technology products will be in stores (US and Europe) this week. Apple’s Vision Pro will finally be released to the public on February 2. The Apple Vision Pro headset is not a new idea however whenever Apple releases a new product we should pay attention. The device that will bring computer visuals closer to your eyes is new for Apple and will probably shake up the headsets industry.Microsoft had Hololens, Google had Goggles, Facebook is armed with Oculus (now known as Meta Quest) and Samsung brought Gear VR.

So far we have not seen much adoption however the entry of the Apple product may change how we perceive headsets.

The Apple Vision Pro will take away the need for a screen and wrap it around your face. Your hands and fingers will now become an important interface as gestures will form part of controlling the visuals presented by the headset. The device is packed with high-definition lenses, processors, and special cameras. All of this will deliver what we’ve never seen in the same product category.

In the same way that an iPhone, the Apple Watch created an opportunity for developers to create apps, the Vision Pro will also create a community of developers around the product. It’s unclear yet what will be the killer app with this device. I can foresee it becoming a tool that transforms education. It also has the potential to transform communication via video calls. It stands a chance of delivering on the metaverse promise. In a world that has questioned the feasibility of mixed reality and e-metaverse, the Apple Vision Pro offers the only hope.

The first generation of the product is likely to be a product of the elite with a cost that may translate to R80 000 for the South African market. The future version of the Vision Pro will probably be more affordable however that will take time. Its size also stands in the way of making it a lovable product.

All of these obstacles cannot overshadow the innovations that will come with this headset. It will be one of the products that will change how we interact with computers. We will slowly be immersed in the digital world. One day will probably credit Vision Pro for merging our physical world with the virtual world. As Tim Cook enjoys his last few years at Apple it will probably serve as a product that will signify his impact at the Cupertino tech giant.

For business leaders who have given up on developing solutions that will be rendered via headsets, now is the time to reconsider. The Meta/RayBan glasses are another indicator that we are entering a different space that will require different business models.

Disney has already started to design for this new world. Recently the entertainment company unveiled a new virtual reality project that solves one of the biggest problems with virtual reality, an omnidirectional modular treadmill that supports multiple users. HoloTile will enable multiple people to move around freely without the risk of colliding with each other. Disney is one of the few companies that is already aligning itself for the shift we are about to see.

As Apple delivers its new product, it’s time to develop product solutions and services that will align with this new technological development. In the past Apple products brought us companies such as Uber and built the app economy. We are about to see another economy developing around the Vision Pro. It will be an interesting technological development to watch.

12.27.23

BlueSky: The social platform in the race to replace X/Twitter

BY Wesley Diphoko 5 MINUTE READ

If 2023 was the year X, formerly known as Twitter, slid into disrepair, then perhaps 2024 will be the year that a new alternative rises to take its place.

Among those touted as potential X replacements is Bluesky, a social media network that was, in fact, spun out of Twitter in 2021. The Bluesky project actually dates back to 2019, when cofounder and once-Twitter CEO Jack Dorsey unveiled the idea for a decentralized social network on Twitter. The principle behind decentralization would allow social media to act more like email, where you can pick your provider but converse all the same. Bluesky launched as a public benefit LLP in 2021, and raised $8 million in a funding round in July 2023.

When it first emerged as a potential lifeboat for disaffected Twitter users in April 2023, I thought it had echoes of the early days of Twitter. At that point, the platform had 50,000 users.

Today, Bluesky’s user base sits at 2.6 million: a 5,100% increase—noteworthy, given that the service is invite-only, as of now—but still far short of Musk-era X (225 million monthly users), and Threads, Meta’s hastily launched proxy (to date, 141 million users). Still, Bluesky is among the last standing of the proposed “Twitter-killers” (remember T2?), and its CEO, Jay Graber, has bigger plans than simply gaining users. “Next year,” says Graber, “it’s basically anyone can spin up a service, and then talk to ours, and plug into it.”

“It’s been a wild year,” Graber tells Fast Company. “We started off this year with just going into beta app in spring. And now we’re at 2.6 million users. So it’s been a lot of growth.”

But to compete with X, the platform needs to grow a lot more. And the question is, will Bluesky’s growth be too little, too late?

“I think Bluesky moved too slow,” says social media consultant Matt Navarra. “It’s stayed in this mode of exclusivity, in limited rollout, and in beta.” That’s had an impact on its cut-through with the average user, he explains. “[Bluesky] potentially has missed a great opportunity that presented itself with the spiraling of X, as well as the competitive landscape for other, similar platforms.”

Navarra admits that replacing X wholesale may never have been Bluesky’s goal. “Is the goal for Bluesky to be a several-hundred-million-user platform, or even a billion-user platform? Or is that not the aspiration, in which case, then maybe it hasn’t been a failure in any regard.”

That uncertainty fed through to users, Navarra reckons, who shied away from adopting it in earnest as X began to falter. A lack of branding also meant Bluesky couldn’t capitalize on users’ desire to find an alternative home, Navarra believes. “I think that it didn’t have any distinct personality as a brand or as a platform,” he says. “[There’s nothing] that you can clearly identify as a set of traits or personality—or something that separates it from the rest when you look at the likes of an Instagram or a TikTok or BeReal or even Threads.”

It’s something that the Bluesky team acknowledges has been a weakness. “There’s a lot of communication to do, I think, and showing people,” Graber says.

Rose Wang works on strategy and operations for Bluesky. “The 2.6 million happened when we gave one interview,” she says. “We basically did no proactive outreach. And so I think part of it is comms: We just need to go out there and tell our story.”

Here, then, is the story Bluesky wants to tell: It wants to redraw social media’s future. Core to it is the Authenticated Transfer protocol, a bit of internet plumbing that will enable users to interact with each other across different platforms. The protocol, Graber told Fast Company last week, will be ready in early 2024. The protocol, and the interoperability it would offer, will be a world away from the past 20 years of social media. Rather than closed walls run by proprietary companies, social media could become an open space, free for all to move around. The concept has also been called “federation.”

The idea sounds great. But part of the challenge for Bluesky is that it’s been thrust into the limelight and asked to meet a need that wasn’t necessarily its original founding principle. Many are looking for a one-for-one lifeboat from the sinking ship that is X. Bluesky, meanwhile, is looking to redefine how social media works. And rebuilding from its first principles is tricky enough, never mind communicating that to users who don’t know about the intricacies of decentralization and the Authenticated Transfer protocol.

Bluesky is still struggling to pithily get across to the average person what separates its product from the number of other microblogging platforms. Graber gets closest, saying that she hopes Bluesky will ensure “users have choice, developers have freedom to build, and creators get to control the relationships with their audiences,” but then says that it’s something people will see when it’s in their hands.

Wang admits that “people need inspiration,” and Bluesky needs to better communicate what it does that’s different. “I think federation is very confusing for people,” she says. “So it’s about showing them what that universe can look like. And there’s much more that we will be doing next year.” Of course, some people have joined Bluesky precisely because of its ideology in redrawing social media.

And far from blowing its shot, those within the team think that the platform is in a good position to grow further in 2024—not least because it was thrust into a position it didn’t expect by the collapse of Twitter since Musk.

One thing that the Bluesky team hopes will help its standing in 2024 is the imminent release of open federations, which will allow anyone to spin up a service that can talk to Bluesky. Open federations follow the unveiling of a public web interface this week that will mean embedded links to Bluesky posts across the web can be seen by all.

That could help Bluesky grow more—something that was hamstrung by necessity at the peak of Twitter panic. Then, as now, the service was invite-only because the team had to carefully manage an influx of users so as to not overwhelm the team or collapse the experiment. “As soon as we put out a waitlist, that we were building a client, which we hadn’t even said before—we were just saying we were building a protocol—we got over a million signups within a few days,” says Graber. “And so, we started to take it a lot more seriously and started to put a lot more work into it.”

Whether it’ll work is yet to be seen. “While making the platform somewhat exclusive by using a referral system, the fact still remains that it’s an exclusive club with very few cool people inside that the rest of us want to hang out with,” says Steven Buckley, a lecturer in media and communication at City, University of London.

It is, Graber admits, a different route than she expected Bluesky to take when she first started looking at it in 2019 and 2020. But Graber and her colleagues wouldn’t change it—and think they can capitalize. “I think to some degree, people are ready for a change,” Graber says, “even if they don’t know exactly what that change looks like.”

There’ll be at least one more change coming to Bluesky—one that’s smaller, but still meaningful for the company. “We’re unveiling our new logo for the Bluesky app soon, which is a butterfly,” says Graber. “When a butterfly flaps its wings, it’s the chaos effect, and you can have a lot of changes that way.”

FastCompany