• papaya@possumpat.io
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    5 months ago

    As someone who’s had a single-user Mastodon instance for two years now: I love it. It’s definitely not for everyone, for reasons mainly stated in the article. However, if you like a more personal, highly-curated federated timeline, a single-user instance is great.

    I 90% use Mastodon to keep up with my friends’ posts and see art and animal pictures (and I hate interacting with strangers LOL), so I curate my instance to only subscribe to them. For the remaining 10%, I have a secondary account on a larger instance for when I want to read the news etc. It’s worked well for me, but again, it’s surely not for everyone!

    • Marud@lemmy.marud.fr
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      5 months ago

      Honest question : Why Mastodon ? I had a single-user instance very soon after discovering the fediverse, but the needed stack to run a Mastodon instance is really insane compared to something like Akkoma / Iceshrimp. I would never use Mastodon for a low number of users, including all the limitations compared to other micro-blogging activitypub compatible services.

      • maegul (he/they)@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        5 months ago

        Yea, as far as I’ve gathered, Akkoma is the way to go for single-user instances. Cleaner and more efficient platform with flexibility in the front end (and, IIRC, reply retrievals?)

  • thepaperpilot@incremental.social
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    5 months ago

    I agree with this take, and recently I actually read this article that criticizes how server centric fedi is as a whole. If it’s hard and expensive for a layperson to self host, but you need to have an account associated with a specific server, then you’re going to end up with a system where you’re under the whims of a instance owner still. Not to mention the whole pick a server step severely hurts our adoption rates.

    I like the idea of having an account just being a public and private key pair. Theoretically you could make one client side, use it to sign your messages, and servers could verify the signature and distribute your post without needing to have an explicit account for you. You could send every message to a random instance and it’d still work. You wouldn’t have to worry about links to the “wrong instance” and you wouldn’t have to attach your identity to a instance that might shut down or be bought by a bad person. The server would be essentially irrelevant.

      • thepaperpilot@incremental.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        5 months ago

        Nostr does some interesting things! What I mentioned here is actually just the identity part of what I think could be a significantly improved version of the fediverse. I have ideas on how to support subreddit style communities and decentralized moderation and things like that that make the whole idea a bit different from nostr.

    • Jayjader@jlai.lu
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      edit-2
      5 months ago

      I align with that article 's conclusion; in fact such a “fediverse browser” is exactly what I think the fediverse needs to fully replace closed/proprietary/traditional social media.

      However, some of their arguments seem off. For example, for the client to be able to choose/implement it’s own sorting algorithm, it seems to me that it would need to have access to all posts. At that point, your client is just another server, with all the problems that we’re originally trying to avoid.

      I have the same problem with your proposal / nostr’s approach: you may obtain a portable identity but all the “content” tied to that identity still has to live somewhere - someone else’s server or your own.

      • thepaperpilot@incremental.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        5 months ago

        Yeah, I disagree with that part as well. I think it’s fine for servers to store the content and provide endpoints for specific queries/sorts, and expecting the clients to have all the posts is a tad extreme.

        In this case, yes the data needs to live somewhere, but that’s the nature of having data be retrievable.