Arguing against that, of course, is nostr being out there at the opposite extreme where it appears to have more different kinds of client software than it has users.
Eh, bluesky is another federated solution, that turned out to be quite similar to activitypub. Perhaps not in implementation, but in user experience. And after having used activitypub for quite a while, I don’t think it is the solution to decentralised social media.
I’ve been really enjoying nostr, even though it doesn’t have the content or user base of the fediverse just yet.
Curious what you think the issues with AP are. Other than the nature of the fediverse being confusing to new users (not sure which instance to sign up for, etc), I haven’t had any issues with it. I would like to see community syncing between instances for more seamless discovery, though.
Complexity to new users is definitely not better on nostr, just as confusing if not worse, currently. The reason I think nostr is on a better track than AP, is because I came to AP running from problems that I had on reddit, only to find the same problems on a smaller scale. Here’s what I can think of off the top of my head:
Variety of clientes
Both AP and nostr fix this.
Centralised power
Nostr fixes this, by making it so that your identity is usable anywhere.
AP kinda fixes this, but doesn’t go far enough. If the admin of your instance decides to not federate with another instance, you have no say in that. Your only option is to migrate to another instance, and since AP doesn’t have nomadic identities, you have to start from scratch. Mastodon’s export feature doesn’t go far enough.
Disagreement with mods
Nostr fixes this by offloading modding to individual users. You chose to mute what you dont want to see. A highly requested feature here on Lemmy.
AP kinda fixes this, where if you don’t agree with mods, you can start a different community, or a similar community on a different instance, but then you have the same problem as with centralised power, and are at the mercy of admins.
To be truly sovereign on AP, you gotta run your own instance, which is very impractical, and lacks nomadic identities. With nostr, you own your identity, because your identity is just a cryptographic key, which can be used anywhere, on any node.
To be clear, I think AP is a clear improvement over centralised services, thus why I still use it. I won’t let the perfect be the enemy of the good. I just think nostr is the better protocol to build decentralised services on top of.
I don’t get the first point. Do you think having variety in clients is a bad thing or do you think the variety in clients is not big enough and actually what does this have to do with the protocol?
The other points do appear that strong to me if we talk about developing a service and more about people who don’t want to host or do anything themselves but still want to have full control… Actually I think the better moderation structure that comes with AP is a plus point. I want a free web and not total anarchy in which the loudest wins.
Biggest strength of AP in my eyes is that it’s a W3C standard. AT was developed by a company to fulfill that company’s goal.
I think having many clients is a good thing. The reddit API debacle was the straw that broke the camel’s back for me, and got me to move away from centralised services.
Actually I think the better moderation structure that comes with AP is a plus point.
I can see how some people would prefer that, but Nostr also has a solution to this need. Not as good an experience as AP, if that’s specifically what you’re looking for, but nonetheless. If you want a curated, modded and filtered experience, you can just connect on to nostr nodes that filter heavily.
Biggest strength of AP in my eyes is that it’s a W3C standard.
I thought this when I came to AP at first too, but it’s been a W3C standard for a long time, and is still very niche.
Add comment