• indigomirage
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    13
    ·
    11 months ago

    You are exactly correct.

    I posted this in response to the DDOS attacks a few weeks ago. Same idea.

    "… This is a shame. Hosting a high visibility server is no joke, and I don’t envy the admins and the very difficult work they do. It’s simultaneously an argument for and against decentralization. For - a single instance can get knocked out without talking out the whole fediverse. Against - it seems as though high visibility communities are potentially fairly easy to target and take down.

    I think that decentralization wins out here in the end, but it does feel like there may be a need for some sort of fallback mechanism to be in place at an instance/community level. I suspect this might evolve somehow over time. It would require some way to expand trust between instances and or portability of communities (which could be fraught with user trust/data integrity issues).

    If things don’t evolve it could grow into a whack-a-mole game for bad actors, or there might need to be more investment into server infrastructure (which could work against decentralization if only because of economies of scale).

    Or maybe there’s no issue after all? I’m just imagining potential implications of a scaling fediverse - it’s fascinating and exciting stuff! …"

    • 1984@lemmy.today
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      11 months ago

      Everyone is a lot safer, faster and less vulnerable by being on smaller servers.

      It’s not possible to ddos thousands of smaller instances in the same way. And if communities were spread out, taking a few instances down wouldn’t even be noticeable.

      • hellishharlot@programming.dev
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        11 months ago

        I expect as federation becomes more common we’ll see patterns like user servers, community servers, archive/redundancy servers, and eventually it’ll be less clustered. My instance that this version of me is on is much snappier than lemmy.world but it’s also federated differently and that’s very obvious when searching or browsing all

        • 1984@lemmy.today
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          11 months ago

          Yeah I’m not exactly clear over why federation differs either. Its designed not to differ I assume?

          • hellishharlot@programming.dev
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            11 months ago

            It is actually! The idea is you can join servers with certain levels of curation. For example if lemmy.world decided tomorrow it didn’t like blahaj.zone it could defederate them. That’s not the point of blahaj.zone but think of it like having multiple reddit accounts with different subscriptions each account is like a superpowered multireddit on it. You choose the subreddits that go in the multireddit but not that the account it’s on subscribes to

      • Muddybulldog@mylemmy.win
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        11 months ago

        Theoretically, yes. Practically, maybe not so much as a ton of these smaller instances are consolidated on a just a handful of hosting providers.

        • 1984@lemmy.today
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          11 months ago

          When Lemmy.world was ddos’ed, other instances didn’t feel any of the effects, despite being on the same hosting provider. So it really matters - spread out :)