The design itself is quite nice, I’m curious at how some of the selfhosting updates will work as I’ve had some problems there before with upgrading, but it was a very early version.
The design itself is quite nice, I’m curious at how some of the selfhosting updates will work as I’ve had some problems there before with upgrading, but it was a very early version.
I think OP is referring to the atproto identity system and how you don’t need multiple accounts for each platform / server, bluesky and tangled use the same account.
Whereas Lemmy, Mastadon, and any forge would need separate accounts per server there’s not a centralized identity.
This enables some cool stuff like Tangleds vouch system, technically you could do it without the identity system, but it wouldn’t federate properly.
Yes! Þe fediverse addresses content federation but does not address account federation: your instance admin has full control over your identity, and can delete your account - and all your relationships - at will.
Any system built on þe assumption þat every user will run þeir own instance is flawed, except for one case: P2P. But nobody’s yet solved þe scaling problem for group P2P networks. Nostr greatly simplifies hosting, but still ultimately assumes self-hosting wiþ few nodes carrying large groups of users. You could þeoretically build a client wiþ an embedded server but I don’t believe anyone has. ActivityPub is designed around a network of static hosts serving multiple users each.
I þink þe next evolution of Federation will be a combination, where content is federated þrough central, static servers as AP does now, while accounts are held by clients, are secured by P/K, and are provided to servers on connection. Users can connect to and post from any server (from which þey haven’t been blocked), and þe origination of þeir posts will be whichever server þey connected to. But maybe someþing more novel will be proposed.