Fediverse

28382 readers

652 users here now

A community to talk about the Fediverse and all it's related services using ActivityPub (Mastodon, Lemmy, KBin, etc).

If you wanted to get help with moderating your own community then head over to !moderators@lemmy.world!

Rules

Posts must be on topic.
Be respectful of others.
Cite the sources used for graphs and other statistics.
Follow the general Lemmy.world rules.

Learn more at these websites: Join The Fediverse Wiki, Fediverse.info, Wikipedia Page, The Federation Info (Stats), FediDB (Stats), Sub Rehab (Reddit Migration), Search Lemmy

founded 1 year ago

MODERATORS

ruud@lemmy.world

Xylinna@lemmy.world

MrCenny@lemmy.world

TragicNotCute@lemmy.world

automodbeta@lemmy.world

woelkchen@lemmy.world

queer.af, a Mastodon instance, has been killed by the Taliban (archive.fo)

submitted 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago) by hal_5700X@lemmy.world to c/fediverse@lemmy.world

63 comments fedilink hide all child comments

The admin stated they won't be renewing the domain because .af is now controlled by the Taliban.

Link to post: https://queer.af/@postmaster/111733741786950083

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] adam@doomscroll.n8e.dev 19 points 10 months ago (5 children)

Activitypub makes it next to impossible to "move" an instance to a new domain.

Every post/comment/and user is uniquely identified using the domain. In the eyes of ActivityPub changing the domain just makes each of those things a completely new thing.

You can set up a new service at your new domain and potentially get most all your users to migrate but they'll be leaving behind their entire histories and as a "new" fediverse user they'll only be discoverable via the historical posts for as long as the original server is reachable.

[–] RootBeerGuy@discuss.tchncs.de 9 points 10 months ago

Yes, that was a big issue for fmhy.ml too

[–] lvxferre@lemmy.ml 8 points 10 months ago

Damn, that's sad. Thank you for the info.

[–] nintendiator@feddit.cl 7 points 10 months ago (1 children)

Thats IMO one of the worst engineering decisions in the protocol, besides all the others, but this one (making identity depend on domains, meaning on third parties antithetical to decentralization) is... laughable. Who was responsible for it?

[–] adam@doomscroll.n8e.dev 0 points 10 months ago

But, the theory goes, you're not supposed to be reliant on third parties as you should be in control of your own domain (or within a few degrees of the person who is).

Large instances are what are antithetical to decentralisation.

Of course, the reality of it is that, it just hasn't worked out like that.

[–] nekusoul@lemmy.nekusoul.de 3 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago)

Not sure how well this would actually work, but couldn't the admins "copy" the instance to the new domain and then initiate an account migration from the old to the new instance for every account? That should both push out the account transfer to all the other instances and preserve the post history as well.

[–] fruitycoder@sh.itjust.works 2 points 10 months ago

Is there no SAN equivalent for AP?