Notices by bhaugen (bhaugen@social.coop)

Let's leave the ocap stuff to the side for now, then. Let's focus on what Bluesky and the fediverse have to learn from each other.

- The fediverse should adopt content-addressed storage and decentralized identity
- Bluesky should adopt real, actual federation and decentralization

Spec-wise in ActivityPub, I think it's possible. The ecosystem, as deployed? I think the ecosystem can and will only do part of it, if we really get everyone excited, maybe the content addressed storage and decentralized identity parts, in which case the fediverse will also survive nodes going down

Here is your recipe for making the "Correct Fediverse IMO (TM)":

- Integrate ocaps, which is possible because actor model + ocaps compose
- Content addressed storage!
- Decentralized identity (notice the *y*, I did not say DIDs) on top of ~mutable CAS storage
- Petname system UX

(cotd...)

The reason I bring up the proposal here is that I think it has all the right analysis of *what the fediverse should do*, if it was going to rise to the challenge of fulfilling its true potential

So let me lay out what the things in that proposal were:

Anyway, if you know *anything* about me, you know I am a big fan of capability security (ocaps) and that's the foundation of our work over at @spritely

But we will come back to ocaps in a second because it turns out OCapPub is not the only time I proposed AP + ocaps!

ActivityPub left giant holes in the spec around two things which sound the same but which are not the same: Authentication and Authorization

Trying to mix these two, you accidentally get ACLs, and then you get confused deputies and ambient authority, plagues of the security world

This isn't the only time I left a critique of ActivityPub-as-Deployed as opposed to ActivityPub-as-it-could-be: see also OCapPub, which critiques the anti-abuse tools of AP as inadequate and leading to "the nation-state'ification of the fediverse" https://gitlab.com/spritely/ocappub/blob/master/README.org

Oh, and ocaps!!!

@cwebber good thread! Thanks.
Bookmarked.

The thing that is telling to me about DMs is that we *have* federated direct message protocols like XMPP which have been around for ages; if Bluesky wanted to they could have tacked that on pretty quickly, E2EE or not. It still would have been decentralized at least

We're getting to the point where we get to why I'm so damn frustrated about this and have been biting my tongue until it nearly comes detached from my mouth: users THINK Bluesky is decentralized because they're TOLD Bluesky is decentralized

AUGH! *That's* what drives me nuts.

Now yes, they are using decentralized techniques. Remember when I said content-addressed storage is a good idea and the fediverse should do it too? IT IS! (And as I also said, it's actually fully possible for the fediverse to do, more on that later.)

But the reality is, it's still *centralized*

Actually all these critiques of the fediverse are TRUE, these are known challenges, and actually it's not really so bad, but it could be better, and at any rate, Bluesky made a major decision to simplify a lot for new users, and they have. Things seem to just work for people! Incredible!

Remember the directive that Bluesky was given: develop a decentralized protocol which Twitter can adopt. That informs a lot of things, and has meant that Bluesky was really very ready for this moment!

If you're an ex-X-Twitter user then by god, you're going to be amazed! It's just like Twitter!

Now you may be saying, "Christine, this is really unfair, because you're looking at ActivityPub servers which are only dealing with a small amount of the network, what if it were an ActivityPub mega-node? What are the costs THEN huh?" and "What if we hosted just PART of ATProto?"

What then INDEED

Remember that the idea of "fully self-hosting" on Bluesky/ATProto at this point is primarily abstract; nobody is really doing it. But of course there's a place where tens of thousands of people are running their own servers for millions of users, and that's the fediverse/ActivityPub.

Let's take a break, the analysis of server costs is boring and I don't like doing it, and I'm sure people will throw numbers at me of the absolute race-to-the-bottom hosting numbers they can find to store and run all this stuff, but really that's not interesting to me.

Let's do a comparison.

But worse, we have reached the limits of what is possible to do with a dedicated server. We *have to* move to abstracted storage from this point forward because we're starting to hit the limits of what's offered for cheap dedicated storage on one machine. And this number will only grow, and as said previously, is growing at an enormous rate.

Even if we look at the dedicated hosting provider that @bnewbold provided in June and scale the cost to the pre-election storage requirements, we are adding on a massive amount of cost every month, over $400/month more.

In fact @bnewbold and alice had gotten the server down to just close to $200/month in their estimate, much much cheaper than I had, by choosing a dedicated server plan. Much cheaper!

But there's a problem though; that's cheap because you've got a server that has a dedicated disk...

Just focusing on storage, in July @bnewbold.net estimated the amount of storage expected to run a Bluesky relay is approx 1 terabyte. In just 4 months at start of this month (November), alice estimates nearly 5 terabytes.

This is a fast growth rate and this is *before* the big post-election influx.