Complexity to new users is definitely not better on nostr, just as confusing if not worse, currently. The reason I think nostr is on a better track than AP, is because I came to AP running from problems that I had on reddit, only to find the same problems on a smaller scale. Here’s what I can think of off the top of my head:
Variety of clientes
Both AP and nostr fix this.
Centralised power
Nostr fixes this, by making it so that your identity is usable anywhere.
AP kinda fixes this, but doesn’t go far enough. If the admin of your instance decides to not federate with another instance, you have no say in that. Your only option is to migrate to another instance, and since AP doesn’t have nomadic identities, you have to start from scratch. Mastodon’s export feature doesn’t go far enough.
Disagreement with mods
Nostr fixes this by offloading modding to individual users. You chose to mute what you dont want to see. A highly requested feature here on Lemmy.
AP kinda fixes this, where if you don’t agree with mods, you can start a different community, or a similar community on a different instance, but then you have the same problem as with centralised power, and are at the mercy of admins.
To be truly sovereign on AP, you gotta run your own instance, which is very impractical, and lacks nomadic identities. With nostr, you own your identity, because your identity is just a cryptographic key, which can be used anywhere, on any node.
To be clear, I think AP is a clear improvement over centralised services, thus why I still use it. I won’t let the perfect be the enemy of the good. I just think nostr is the better protocol to build decentralised services on top of.
I don’t get the first point. Do you think having variety in clients is a bad thing or do you think the variety in clients is not big enough and actually what does this have to do with the protocol?
The other points do appear that strong to me if we talk about developing a service and more about people who don’t want to host or do anything themselves but still want to have full control… Actually I think the better moderation structure that comes with AP is a plus point. I want a free web and not total anarchy in which the loudest wins.
Biggest strength of AP in my eyes is that it’s a W3C standard. AT was developed by a company to fulfill that company’s goal.
I think having many clients is a good thing. The reddit API debacle was the straw that broke the camel’s back for me, and got me to move away from centralised services.
Actually I think the better moderation structure that comes with AP is a plus point.
I can see how some people would prefer that, but Nostr also has a solution to this need. Not as good an experience as AP, if that’s specifically what you’re looking for, but nonetheless. If you want a curated, modded and filtered experience, you can just connect on to nostr nodes that filter heavily.
Biggest strength of AP in my eyes is that it’s a W3C standard.
I thought this when I came to AP at first too, but it’s been a W3C standard for a long time, and is still very niche.
But amount of users is actually more a product of marketing than any technical protocol so I don’t really see that point either. Also I don’t see that being true, especially if you count in all the threads users.
My point of it being a W3C standard is more that it is a protocol that is in somewhat responsible hands. When using a protocol that was developed by and only for one (commercial) application in minds other players are always one step behind.
Mastodon (or threads) as the main platforms that implement AP don’t have any more influence on the protocol than any other platform as well.
I wrote a long answer to this, but forgot to post and lost it :(. But here’s what I wanted to say:
I forgot about Threads, that’s indeed a big user base.
Just because the standard is managed by the W3C doesn’t mean they’ll do a good job of managing it, but it’s probably more positive than negative.
I don’t know enough about how the W3C is organised and accepts contributions, but wasn’t one of the concerns of many AP users when threads announced their AP integration, that threads would immediately become a big player and essentially EEE AP? Tbh, I still fear that.
I’m enjoying this conversation, it’s brought my hopes for AP a bit higher, I hope I’ve managed to convince you that nostr is something to keep an eye on.
Yes this EEE fear exists but I think it’s unreasonable in my eyes. AP being managed by W3C is one reason for it.
Sure Meta will probably extend AP for their own use but it’s not that they can simply decide that the new feature that they introduced and is at first only working on their platform is the standard from now.
I definitely agree that Nostr is something to keep an eye on but for me that’s more about to see if there is stuff that works and can be introduced in AP as well. Because of all the arguments above I don’t think we should all switch to Nostr now.
Sure Meta will probably extend AP for their own use but it’s not that they can simply decide that the new feature that they introduced and is at first only working on their platform is the standard from now.
Maybe not formally, but it might not matter. Looking at how google implemented XMPP, then slightly changed their implemetentaion until it was incompatible, and clients tried to keep up with changes, makes me fear meta will do something similar.
Complexity to new users is definitely not better on nostr, just as confusing if not worse, currently. The reason I think nostr is on a better track than AP, is because I came to AP running from problems that I had on reddit, only to find the same problems on a smaller scale. Here’s what I can think of off the top of my head:
To be truly sovereign on AP, you gotta run your own instance, which is very impractical, and lacks nomadic identities. With nostr, you own your identity, because your identity is just a cryptographic key, which can be used anywhere, on any node.
To be clear, I think AP is a clear improvement over centralised services, thus why I still use it. I won’t let the perfect be the enemy of the good. I just think nostr is the better protocol to build decentralised services on top of.
I don’t get the first point. Do you think having variety in clients is a bad thing or do you think the variety in clients is not big enough and actually what does this have to do with the protocol?
The other points do appear that strong to me if we talk about developing a service and more about people who don’t want to host or do anything themselves but still want to have full control… Actually I think the better moderation structure that comes with AP is a plus point. I want a free web and not total anarchy in which the loudest wins.
Biggest strength of AP in my eyes is that it’s a W3C standard. AT was developed by a company to fulfill that company’s goal.
I think having many clients is a good thing. The reddit API debacle was the straw that broke the camel’s back for me, and got me to move away from centralised services.
I can see how some people would prefer that, but Nostr also has a solution to this need. Not as good an experience as AP, if that’s specifically what you’re looking for, but nonetheless. If you want a curated, modded and filtered experience, you can just connect on to nostr nodes that filter heavily.
I thought this when I came to AP at first too, but it’s been a W3C standard for a long time, and is still very niche.
Is it really? I mean there are already many completely independent platforms built on it (Lemmy, Mastodon, PeerTube, Pixelfed… To only name a few)
Plus recently existing platforms changing to use AP like Flipboard for example or threads (even if nobody is happy about the last 😅)
Additionally AP protocol can be adapted and extended over time if it’s really needed. That would also be an option in the long run.
I meant niche in terms of amount of users, not implementations.
But amount of users is actually more a product of marketing than any technical protocol so I don’t really see that point either. Also I don’t see that being true, especially if you count in all the threads users.
My point of it being a W3C standard is more that it is a protocol that is in somewhat responsible hands. When using a protocol that was developed by and only for one (commercial) application in minds other players are always one step behind.
Mastodon (or threads) as the main platforms that implement AP don’t have any more influence on the protocol than any other platform as well.
I wrote a long answer to this, but forgot to post and lost it :(. But here’s what I wanted to say:
I forgot about Threads, that’s indeed a big user base.
Just because the standard is managed by the W3C doesn’t mean they’ll do a good job of managing it, but it’s probably more positive than negative.
I don’t know enough about how the W3C is organised and accepts contributions, but wasn’t one of the concerns of many AP users when threads announced their AP integration, that threads would immediately become a big player and essentially EEE AP? Tbh, I still fear that.
I’m enjoying this conversation, it’s brought my hopes for AP a bit higher, I hope I’ve managed to convince you that nostr is something to keep an eye on.
Yes this EEE fear exists but I think it’s unreasonable in my eyes. AP being managed by W3C is one reason for it.
Sure Meta will probably extend AP for their own use but it’s not that they can simply decide that the new feature that they introduced and is at first only working on their platform is the standard from now.
I definitely agree that Nostr is something to keep an eye on but for me that’s more about to see if there is stuff that works and can be introduced in AP as well. Because of all the arguments above I don’t think we should all switch to Nostr now.
Maybe not formally, but it might not matter. Looking at how google implemented XMPP, then slightly changed their implemetentaion until it was incompatible, and clients tried to keep up with changes, makes me fear meta will do something similar.