Re: Issue triage today

pá 14. 7. 2023 v 18:07 odesílatel Bumblefudge von CASA <
virtualofficehours@gmail.com> napsal:

> Say what you will about a per-account key system (such as prototyped in
> FEP-521a), it would certainly enable some elegant solutions to this
> problem, such as allowing users to export a key or delegate authority to
> some kind of external authenticator, which could be used in an unknown
> future to trigger an custodial export when a server spins down and dumps
> all its data in a massgrave (with fancy authorization for recovery).
> The simpler you make it for accountholders to prove "rightful" control
> of a backup, the easier it is for backups to execute migrations on
> behalf of servers that went down, right?
>
> In any case, definitely support documenting mastodon's status quo,
> because a LOT of financially fragile servers are running it, and their
> moderation costs and compliance costs might go through the roof in the
> coming months, so it seems an urgent community service beyond more
> long-term plans for cool solutions to the underlying problem.
>

I love the potential of per account keys, although successful
implementation lies in the specifics.

One concern I have is the potential misuse of this feature, particularly in
cases where it could inadvertently lead users towards projects engaged in
public token sales, which could potentially involve legal issues. This is
something I've observed with web monetization and many DID methods.

Nostr has implemented a per-user key system effectively within a social
framework. Their model allows for seamless migration with minimal overhead.
I believe a similar approach could be beneficial if integrated with AP.
Migration could be significantly facilitated by combining a well-documented
Mastodon specification with the option to add keys, but it comes with huge
risks of ushering in unscrupulous DID methods or webmonetization, whose aim
is to turn the fediverse user base into the product.


>
> On 7/13/2023 12:41 AM, Evan Prodromou wrote:
> > Yes, great idea.
> >
> > I think the current plan is to document the behaviour of Mastodon in
> > this area, as step one, with a Note or FEP.
> >
> > We'd probably need to then discuss problems with the Mastodon
> > technique, namely:
> >
> > 1. If the origin server goes offline, there's no way to move the account.
> > 2. Similarly if the account is defederated.
> > 3. All activities and content stay at the origin server, which keeps
> > their URLs active, but doesn't help if the server goes down.
> >
> > The topology of the fediverse is such that most users have gratis
> > accounts on small, unstable, volunteer-run servers,
> > donation-supported. That has made this migration process very important.
> >
> > I'm personally a fan of using a domain as your identity, and moving
> > from service provider to service provider as needed, transparent to
> > your social connections. But that's not the fediverse we've got right
> now.
>
>
>