Fediverse hot takes:
-
The only true client is the browser.
-
Microblogging be damned.
-
it’s the instances/servers that are federated, not the users (ie us) … and damn that too.
Fediverse hot takes:
The only true client is the browser.
Microblogging be damned.
it’s the instances/servers that are federated, not the users (ie us) … and damn that too.
@witcraft I’m aware, thanks! Seems interesting!
But, to my point, one platform having a feature isn’t really the same as it being an aspect of the fediverse. If only Hubzilla has nomadic identity, one can’t really be that nomadic can they?
@maegul
That depends what you expect. Nomadic identity allows you to migrate (or switch) between multiple instances, which keeps your identity quite invulnerable. If you want to switch between social purposes: Hubzilla can do nearly all of them (It’s the swiss army knife of the fediverse). Hubzilla handles all that actually sticks to the AP specification. But AP is not (yet?) capable of doing so, so when you actually migrate an identity for good, you would have to rebuild you AP address book (which is unfortunate, but is caused by lacking features of AP, not by Hubzilla). But you get to keep all your content of all types, and all Zot-(Hubzilla)/Nomad-(streams)-connections. You can even migrate from Hubzilla to the streams platform, but that would be a one-way road because streams has a newer protocol that is “backward-compatible”, but not identical. So you cannot clone or migrate back to Hubzilla. The Nomad protocol is newer with more features (trying to bring Zot functionality implemented with AP means), but the streams server software is more streamlined. So Hubzilla will probably continue to have the far larger population for now.
But I agree: If AP had picked up the key features Hubzilla / Zot had been created for in the first place (more than a decade ago, actually), that would make the AP galaxies much more future-proof, and thus, the whole Fediverse more powerful.