kubaurbanowicz@zotum.net 
jupiter_rowland@hub.netzgemeinde.eu@hub.netzgemeinde.eu@Jakub Urbanowicz Mastodon users would cheer if they got nomadic identity. Maybe unless it made things significantly more difficult for them because their identity was channelised.
Mastodon developers, however, would only implement nomadic identity under pressure, if at all. That pressure would be most of the rest of the Fediverse being nomadic and at least one nomadic microblogging/social networking application offering a fairly easy import of Mastodon accounts.
They would only implement nomadic identity if people started running away from Mastodon because it doesn't have nomadic identity. In all other cases, they'd refuse to implement it, at least pan-Fediverse nomadic identity, out of fear that Mastodon users would run away from Mastodon because it's so easy now. If anything, they'd implement nomadic identity in a way that still makes it impossible to move or clone from Mastodon to elsewhere.
But they probably wouldn't implement it if they didn't have to. After all, they refused to implement client-side OpenWebAuth support as well. There's literally a merge request on Mastodon's GitHub that'd implement client-side OpenWebAuth support, and that has been lingering since 2023, completely ignored by the devs. Back then, one merge would have been sufficient to give Mastodon client-side OpenWebAuth support.
So much about whether the Mastodon devs are willing to implement something that Mike Macgirvin has invented. Especially if they can't sell it to their faithful followers as their own original invention, and if they can't sell it to their faithful followers without admitting that there's something else than Mastodon out there in the Fediverse.
But even if Mastodon's devs wanted to implement full server-side nomadic identity, that doesn't mean it'll be easy. Basically, large parts of Mastodon's server backend would have to be rewritten. I guess this is why silverpill threw in the towel, gave up trying to implement nomadic identity on Mitra server-side and built a nomadic client instead.
There is no case of Hubzilla-level nomadic identity having been implemented in non-nomadic, ActivityPub-only, login-equals-identity Fediverse software after the fact. And there won't be any for quite a while.
Mastodon developers, however, would only implement nomadic identity under pressure, if at all. That pressure would be most of the rest of the Fediverse being nomadic and at least one nomadic microblogging/social networking application offering a fairly easy import of Mastodon accounts.
They would only implement nomadic identity if people started running away from Mastodon because it doesn't have nomadic identity. In all other cases, they'd refuse to implement it, at least pan-Fediverse nomadic identity, out of fear that Mastodon users would run away from Mastodon because it's so easy now. If anything, they'd implement nomadic identity in a way that still makes it impossible to move or clone from Mastodon to elsewhere.
But they probably wouldn't implement it if they didn't have to. After all, they refused to implement client-side OpenWebAuth support as well. There's literally a merge request on Mastodon's GitHub that'd implement client-side OpenWebAuth support, and that has been lingering since 2023, completely ignored by the devs. Back then, one merge would have been sufficient to give Mastodon client-side OpenWebAuth support.
So much about whether the Mastodon devs are willing to implement something that Mike Macgirvin has invented. Especially if they can't sell it to their faithful followers as their own original invention, and if they can't sell it to their faithful followers without admitting that there's something else than Mastodon out there in the Fediverse.
But even if Mastodon's devs wanted to implement full server-side nomadic identity, that doesn't mean it'll be easy. Basically, large parts of Mastodon's server backend would have to be rewritten. I guess this is why silverpill threw in the towel, gave up trying to implement nomadic identity on Mitra server-side and built a nomadic client instead.
There is no case of Hubzilla-level nomadic identity having been implemented in non-nomadic, ActivityPub-only, login-equals-identity Fediverse software after the fact. And there won't be any for quite a while.
I’ll throw in one more thought here about Forte’s nomadic identity: it’s theoretical!
Yes, it’s supposed to work. But I don’t know myself whether it actually does. Even though I run a Forte Hub myself.
Why?
Because there are probably very few Forte Hubs; you simply can’t find them (in any of the usual Fediverse databases). Because you can search for them (if you know where and how, you might even find a few, but virtually none where registration is open).
So, with my Forte channel on my own Forte Hub (which, incidentally, is open for registrations), I have a nomadic channel, but simply no account where I could clone it (even just to test it out).
For me, therefore, the nomadic identity is purely theoretical.
I've managed to clone a few (streams) channels, but all my (streams) accounts are pre-FEP-ef61. Most accounts registered post-FEP-ef61 were registered into a (streams) ecosystem that barely offered any servers to clone to.
I guess that (streams) and Forte have fewer than 50 users combined, most of whom run their own private servers for exactly one user and with probably exactly one or two channels, depending on whether or not they daily-drive the admin channel.
What's really standing in the way of both testing nomadic identity on (streams) and Forte and for either to succeed is the lack of people willing and able to run public servers with open registration, regardless of how big these servers will be. Not just set them up, keep them running and peek in every three to six months, but actually pay attention to them and keep them well-maintained.
But then again, we've only got a small handful of such people on Hubzilla. Not many beyond Mark and you, which is why Mark holds most of Hubzilla on his two hubs. And because Scott doesn't really get his planned hubs going, even Americans join Mark's two German hubs.
Vice versa, if a German wants to try out (streams), they may have to join Waitman's American server. Ping times from hell included.
Nomadic identity as a whole is a purely theoretical construct as long as you've got nowhere to clone to.
bluenomad@forte.hubzilla.net – is that you? I have found about a dozen streams/forte instances using Google search including https://forte.hubzilla.net
I remote-logged on them and read some posts. The post on installing Forte from Yunohost was quite interesting to me, because that's what I was planning to do.
On thing threw me: after remote login you are presented with a list of applications. Strange.
In this regard, you can contact the maintainer of the Forte repository on Yunohost here: @Papa Dragon (now on Forte)
On Fediverse Observer, you can actually find quite a few Forte hubs. But without the option to register, that doesn’t really help either.
I don’t use Google. But tell me, how (using which search term) did you search? Probably not just ‘Forte’, because you’re hardly likely to spot the hubs amongst all the medicines 😉😂.
My hub runs on YunoHost… and at the moment, the update frequency is going relatively well too.
I just searched for some words and phrases from the login page, like "remote authentication"+forte or you can look up URLs with site:forte.* .
The following instances have their registrations open:
https://forte.diablocanyon2.com/
https://forte.blurstoftimes.org/
https://forte.eenoog.org/
https://forteclone.raitisoja.cloud/
https://f.morphtown.de/
https://forte.spectraltheorem.be/
Would you mind if I registered at your instance and experimented a little before I set up mine?