This seems like a much better way, in many ways it would be more robust. There would be problems though… This would be even more vulnerable to EEE. Disputes/hostile action between servers could damage the whole website (I’m talking about maliciously hosting CSAM for example).
Comment on Feddit.UK has finally kicked the bucket- and what happens next.
Kecessa@sh.itjust.works 10 months ago
As I mentioned in another discussion, the fediverse needs to work like crypto mining pools, you join the pool of servers that share the data load, but you’re just there for data redundancy, users don’t “sign up to your server”, they “sign up to the website” that all servers are hosting together, if you go offline another server has your data so the website never goes down in the end.
BluesF@lemmy.world 10 months ago
Kecessa@sh.itjust.works 10 months ago
It’s an issue with the current method too and hosts could decide if they host NSFW content or not with the risk and curation responsibilities that entails if they do (as we can see with Pornhub you can get in trouble for hosting porn stuff that isn’t CSAM).
BluesF@lemmy.world 10 months ago
I doubt that if one server was hosting CSAM that law enforcement is going to be charitable with the rest of the site just because technically it was just one server. I’m admittedly not at all sure of the legal precedent here… But I suspect the site would be judged as a whole, if not by the law then certainly by the public.
Kecessa@sh.itjust.works 10 months ago
It’s already a thing on Lemmy at the moment and it’s not as if people were talking about the various instances as separate websites when they talk about Lemmy.
It would be fairly easy to have a post info page that mentions what servers (including redundancies) the content is hosted on.
Anyway, the ideal solution would be that NSFW content has its own website separate from the rest so as not to potentially create legal issues.
Blackmist@lemmy.world 10 months ago
Yeah, unless I own all my own data, the Fediverse doesn’t really solve anything. Sure, I could host a server just for me, but if everyone did that would it even work? Or would it collapse under the load of all the data whizzing about behind the scenes?
kpw@kbin.social 10 months ago
Or just have a bus factor greater than one.
kilgore_trout@feddit.it 10 months ago
I believe the idea behind different servers not meshing but federating, so they can have different focuses and different moderation stances.
Kecessa@sh.itjust.works 10 months ago
But then you’re still stuck with some kind of central authority, just let people decide what they want to block from their free instead or what they want to subscribe to even…
psud@lemmy.world 10 months ago
Not stuck. You can set up your own instance and be beholden to no-one other than your country’s law
Kecessa@sh.itjust.works 10 months ago
And you still lost all your previous data.
It’s also a question of wanting to make the website popular, if you don’t care about getting more people to leave centralized websites then sure the current solution works, if you want more and more users to join then the experience needs to be used friendly and right now it isn’t, even as a tech savvy person I had a hard time figuring out how to add communities from other instances to my subscribed list and I couldn’t figure out why some would never confirm I was subscribed.
Social Media needs to be decentralized behind the scene, users must not feel it.