Tbh I don't know how admins of large instances sleep at night. Besides whatever drama any given user can bring upon the server, an admin is responsible for people's entire graph. Well, more like the owner tbh. I run a small instance of about 30 poeple and it's ok, given I know everyone personally. We're a small collective helping each other being independent. But in many ways, activitypub is incompatible with that idea. When they leverage our infra for their outreach, they effectively become dependent on our infra to maintain the results of their efforts.
But not everything should be thrown away from it. Especially not the social dynamics. There's a lot to learn from fediverse in that it is the oldest decentralized (federated) network and it has gained a lot of experience in both best and worse case scenario that can arise from that setup. Take for example follow packs that are the current hot deal in here. It's a lovely idea, and it was tried a long time a go over there. What came out is that, without a consent mechanism, they quickly get leveraged maliciously: people being grouped in packs with highly unflattering titles.
Fedi was the right thing to use at a given point of time in the past. It won't scale any other way than a few multimillion user instances and a handful of brave selfhosters building their graph from scratch every couple of years. I don't think it is ready for what's coming in terms of the corporate adoption going on and the type of scamming and spamming that it brings. There simply is no property verifiable way to create a web of trust on the protocol.
SettolinⒶ 𓁣
npub18u…r20ex
2025-05-02 07:16:59
in reply to nevent1q…cu9q
Author Public Key
npub18ug6hvhzxhdz6nw6t4k7ktcjx9e5w6n5tg7226y458g0vv4y9aqq3r20exPublished at
2025-05-02 07:16:59Event JSON
{
"id": "127d5862b1bacc50a7e9dc0e8c846a9b0472adbaa2815ab08b0c285857c911fa",
"pubkey": "3f11abb2e235da2d4dda5d6deb2f123173476a745a3ca56895a1d0f632a42f40",
"created_at": 1746170219,
"kind": 1,
"tags": [
[
"e",
"dd285392b4ba6517e969f5e0ef6d0533548159bdef0fd8f6a6fcf52bf05ad19e",
"",
"root"
],
[
"p",
"06639a386c9c1014217622ccbcf40908c4f1a0c33e23f8d6d68f4abf655f8f71"
]
],
"content": "Tbh I don't know how admins of large instances sleep at night. Besides whatever drama any given user can bring upon the server, an admin is responsible for people's entire graph. Well, more like the owner tbh. I run a small instance of about 30 poeple and it's ok, given I know everyone personally. We're a small collective helping each other being independent. But in many ways, activitypub is incompatible with that idea. When they leverage our infra for their outreach, they effectively become dependent on our infra to maintain the results of their efforts. \n\nBut not everything should be thrown away from it. Especially not the social dynamics. There's a lot to learn from fediverse in that it is the oldest decentralized (federated) network and it has gained a lot of experience in both best and worse case scenario that can arise from that setup. Take for example follow packs that are the current hot deal in here. It's a lovely idea, and it was tried a long time a go over there. What came out is that, without a consent mechanism, they quickly get leveraged maliciously: people being grouped in packs with highly unflattering titles. \n\nFedi was the right thing to use at a given point of time in the past. It won't scale any other way than a few multimillion user instances and a handful of brave selfhosters building their graph from scratch every couple of years. I don't think it is ready for what's coming in terms of the corporate adoption going on and the type of scamming and spamming that it brings. There simply is no property verifiable way to create a web of trust on the protocol.",
"sig": "a81e5be5066714294c32e0912da93eb3a55500e8793c7cc62b963adfa90e36759f1342d149db57a83f1a1936d4f8b67526dc4d4da654020c6de69ecc1b8f2b3e"
}