• federico3
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    3
    ·
    2 years ago

    It’s not that simple. ActivityPub is at risk of centralization, just like email. There are no built-in protections against centralization or EEE (Embrace, Extend, Extinguish). Furthermore, Mastodon makes it difficult to migrate accounts, especially from an instance that is unreachable or just disabled the export function.

    Unfortunately locking users into a platform is extremely valuable because they can be shown ads, used for data mining, manipulation (like Cambridge Analytica). ActivityPub is not automatically immune to all of this.

    The comparison with IRC is not very meaningful: moving from one server to another is much easier because IRC users don’t lose followers, bookmarks, posts, etc.

    • dreiwert@szmer.info
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      2 years ago

      How would a “built-in protection against centralization” even work?

      IMHO, you can only provide tools. You can’t prevent people from being stupid and not using them. That’s also why by now, e.g. the EU tries to solve such problems through regulation.

      • federico3
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        2 years ago

        The protocol could require “dual-homing” user accounts, where each account is automatically replicated on 2 different instances without need for hacks and workarounds. That would prevent users from losing their account if an instance is shut down, and also make it easy to migrate to a new instance without losing followers etc. The clients following your account always check for updates on both instances and if you move one of your accounts they update automatically.

        (This would not create significant additional load on the network: your toots are already being replicated on all instances where you have followers.)

        IMHO, you can only provide tools

        No, tools are rarely “neutral”. They encourage or discourage workflows and behaviors.

        • Grouchy@hub.grouchysysadmin.com
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          2 years ago

          @federico3

          The protocol could require “dual-homing” user accounts, where each account is automatically replicated on 2 different instances without need for hacks and workarounds. That would prevent users from losing their account if an instance is shut down, and also make it easy to migrate to a new instance without losing followers etc. The clients following your account always check for updates on both instances and if you move one of your accounts they update automatically.

          Sounds like Nomadic identity from the Hubzilla and Streams projects.

    • dreiwert@szmer.info
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      2 years ago

      The comparison with IRC is not very meaningful: moving from one server to another is much easier because IRC users don’t lose followers, bookmarks, posts, etc.

      The point is that IRC is normally used in a way that leaves more to the client. ActivityPub services usually expect that users put much more trust in the instances. It might be worth thinking about that.