It feels like they’re two different roles. It might be better to have user-orientated servers that prioritise federation of content and only have a couple of meta-style communities, and other servers which prioritise being the go-to place for discussion on a particular topic and less a place that manages a large number of user accounts.

It just seems like two really distinct roles all servers are trying to do at the same time, and it’s leading to larger sites with a lot of users duplicating all the same subs, rather than there being any particular spot for certain types of discussion.

It also means the server hosting a particular type of discussion might defed certain instances to prevent trolling when it’s a sensitive topic, but it wouldn’t affect a large userbase who have that as their home server, it would only be moderating the discussion for the content areas they specialise in.

Thoughts?

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] manitcor@lemmy.intai.tech 20 points 1 year ago (3 children)

This is how email works. This is how the internet worked in general before the big sites

The problem you want to fix is a big issue in computing in general. Billions have been spent on last mile auth and universal digital identity is still just a bit out of reach

Soon.

[–] dbilitated@aussie.zone 13 points 1 year ago (1 children)

I mean, absolutely - I guess what I'm saying is, it feels like a good time to bake in good ideas, while the fediverse is still evolving. After a while it'll just be the way it's always been and it'll be harder to improve.

[–] manitcor@lemmy.intai.tech 6 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

Digital identity at scale is still in the research stages and requires a fair amount of capital. This is why Google and social logins are dominant.

Unless someone has a rabbit in thier pocket we are waiting for a decentralized form of auth. There are some but people don't really like them. Even here.

The w3c standard you want to look into is DiD

Source: day job

[–] dbilitated@aussie.zone 6 points 1 year ago (1 children)

In a limited sense that's kind of what we're getting with the fediverse though - your account working across a number of servers. People don't seem to be thinking about how to do more than set up a bunch of duplicate instances rather than how to leverage it. I'll have a look at the DiD though.. I'm a programmer so always interested.

[–] manitcor@lemmy.intai.tech 3 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

It's a deceptive problem. Right now you have either cert trees or pki signers. Neither allow a traditional login flow and making it like "the old way" using "the new way" requires enclaves, signers and a specific sku of Intel processor.

[–] LUHG_HANI@lemmy.world 2 points 1 year ago

Agreed, although before 366 hosting it was an exchange shitshow.

[–] Kolanaki@yiffit.net 2 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Why tho? If we can get standardized protocols and stuff, why not a standardized login system where 1 account works on every site?

[–] manitcor@lemmy.intai.tech 5 points 1 year ago

Reposting from below:

Digital identity at scale is still in the research stages and requires a fair amount of capital. This is why Google and social logins are dominant.

Unless someone has a rabbit in thier pocket we are waiting for a decentralized form of auth. There are some but people don’t really like them. Even here.

The w3c standard you want to look into is DiD

Source: day job