We need to separate identity from servers in the ActivityPub world. It's time. I should be able to have a single identity and use it with lots of servers from Mastodon to Lemmy and beyond.
Then, various instances could reflect different communities with different people in them, different features and policies.
This also would elegantly solve the "instance selection paralysis" in @tchambers 's Deadly Fediverse UX sin #1.
Fortunately @benpate is starting to assemble people to solve this.
@ Johannes Ernst The first step is already done:
Forte, @ Mike Macgirvin ?️ most recent project from the same family that started with Friendica 15 years ago, is the first and only stable Fediverse server application that uses ActivityPub for nomadic identity. Nomadic identity itself is a concept created by Mike in 2011 and first implemented by himself in 2012 in a very early version of Hubzilla which he called Red back then.
This means that you can have the exact same channel/identity (think Mastodon account, but without its own login) on multiple server instances with one account each. If one server goes down, you still have at least one clone (depending on how many clones you make).
@silverpill is working on implementing this on Mitra. It's still only available in development versions, though. The difference is that Mike had already created a whole bunch of Fediverse server applications with nomadic identity since 2012; he "only" had to port nomadic identity from the Zot or Nomad protocol to ActivityPub. Silverpill, on the other hand, has to implement nomadic identity in something that was built upon ActivityPub with no nomadic identity.
Both recognise each other's nomadic identities. (For comparison: Mastodon doesn't recognise any nomadic identities. It takes the two instances of this Hubzilla channel of mine for two fully separate identities.) But that's all for now.
The next step, and that's way into the future, would be to be able to clone from Forte to Mitra or from Mitra to Forte. This would give you one identity on at least two server instances of two separate Fediverse server applications.
The obvious downside is that you won't be able to take everything with you everywhere when you clone to other server types. For example, if you clone a Forte channel to Mitra, you won't be able to take your permissions settings, your permission roles, your friend zoom settings, the contents of your cloud storage, your CalDAV calendars and your CardDAV addressbook with you over to Mitra. That's simply because Mitra doesn't have any of these features.
What you envision is another step further. And that's the adoption of nomadic identity via ActivityPub and ideally also OpenWebAuth magic single sign-on, another one of Mike's creations, by all Fediverse server applications. And I mean all of them. Including extremely minimalist stuff like snac2 or GoToSocial. Including stuff that isn't actively being worked on like Plume. Including stuff that's dead, but that still has running servers, like Calckey, Firefish or /kbin. And including Mastodon which stubbornly refuses to make itself more compatible with the "competition" in the Fediverse and adopt technologies created by anyone else in the Fediverse, even more so if that someone is Mike Macgirvin.
In other words, this won't happen. Mastodon would rather turn itself into its own federated walled garden by becoming incompatible with all other ActivityPub implementations.
What many Mastodon users who know nothing about decentralisation wish for is another step further. And that's to create one account on one server instance of one Fediverse server software, no matter which, and then to have full-blown user permissions on any instance of any Fediverse server software.
Like, create one account on mastodon.social, go to a Pixelfed instance, post pictures Instagram-style, go to a PeerTube instance, upload videos, go to a WriteFreely instance, blog away, go to a Hubzilla hub, build a webpage, all with only your mastodon.social login.
Of course, this is impossible to do. This would mean that if you create an account on one Fediverse server instance, it would have to be cloned to all 30,000+ servers in the whole Fediverse instantaneously. And if you start your own instance, it would have to trigger 30,000+ servers to clone their tens of millions of accounts and channels over to your instance.
Usually, when I explain this to people who want to use everything with one login, they tell me that they don't want to use every server in the Fediverse. No, but they want to use any server in the Fediverse. Any one of the 30,000+.
And they want to use it immediately. Like, go there, use it with full-blown local user permissions right away, no delay.
Now you may argue that their account or channel could be cloned to that server when they visit it for the first time. Drive-by cloning, so-to-speak. Still, won't happen. Cloning takes time. I myself have cloned enough Hubzilla and (streams) channels over the years to be able to estimate just how long it takes. And none of my channels has ever contained tens of thousands of posts and thousands of pictures.
Besides, drive-by cloning would inflate Fediverse instances senselessly, not to mention bog them down with extra network traffic. Whenever you visit a Fediverse server instance for whichever reason (like, you want to look at a post on Friendica or Hubzilla to see what it looks like without being botched by Mastodon), your account or channel would automagically be cloned to that server instance. Another account (and channel, if necessary) on that server instance, another deluge of posts and files flooding into the database, and that clone would have to be synced with your 600 other previous drive-by clones on the 600 Fediverse server instances you've visited before.
Extra nefarious: Some "websites" that have to do with Hubzilla or a certain aspect of Hubzilla are parts of Hubzilla channels themselves. This includes the official Hubzilla website. If you visited them, you'd create a drive-by clone on the Hubzilla hub which hosts that website.
So if someone set up a single-user Hubzilla hub with their personal channel and a website channel on it, and the website is interesting enough, and 10,000 Fediverse users visit it, it'll end up bigger than the biggest current Hubzilla hub within days. It'll have 10,001 accounts, namely the owner's account with two channels and 10,000 accounts with drive-by clones, automatically created by the 10,000 external visitors.
But this will remain utopic not only because it's technologically pretty much impossible and very much not feasible at all. It also requires a mechanism for one Fediverse server to recognise logins on other Fediverse servers. You know, like OpenWebAuth. You want your Mastodon account to drive-by clone itself, Mastodon will have to implement OpenWebAuth, and I mean fully implement it.
There actually is a pull request in Mastodon's GitHub code repository that would have implemented client-side OpenWebAuth support (= Hubzilla, (streams) and Forte would recognise Mastodon logins). This isn't even about full-support that'd include login recognition on Mastodon's own side. This pull request has been there for two years. It was never merged. And it probably will never be merged.
This means that the Mastodon devs have practically rejected OpenWebAuth as a feature to implement. Won't come. Ever. Not even half of it.
And this should say everything about the chances that Mastodon will ever implement nomadic identity.
CC: @ william.maggos @ Richard MacManus @Tim Chambers @ Ben Pate 🤘🏻
# Long # LongPost # CWLong # CWLongPost # FediMeta # FediverseMeta # CWFediMeta # CWFediverseMeta # Fediverse # Mitra # Hubzilla # Streams # (streams) # Forte # OpenWebAuth # SingleSignOn # NomadicIdentity