• Chozo@kbin.social
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    @renwillis I’m not so sure this is a “win”, since the Fediverse wasn’t specifically targeted by any entity involved to begin with. If anything, it’s just a straight-up loss to the communities that have to reassemble themselves under a new domain again, many of whom were probably mostly new users to the Fediverse to begin with, and are likely to be turned off by this experience. If anything, this just exposes that the Fediverse is significantly sustained by flimsy, free/cheap platforms that are vulnerable to disappearing without any notice. That doesn’t exactly instill faith.

    It’s a really bad look, to be perfectly honest.

      • Chozo@kbin.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        @renwillis The Fediverse is more than just the collective network. It’s also the individual communities, some of which no longer exist right now. Those communities are now scrambling to figure out what to do.

        Yes, the whole of the Fediverse is just fine. But the overall health of the Fediverse relies heavily on the health of individual communities.

  • shrugal@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    A domain takedown was never able to shut a server down, not even with centralized servers. Most big services are accessible via multiple domains of different countries, and this would just disable one of them. But for the Fediverse that means that they also “disabled” an entire instance with all its users.

    This actually shows us that relying on domains can be a problem for the Fediverse! Imo we need to upgrade the federation protocol to be able to handle these things, like propagating a domain change or migrating accounts to other instances.