[olah_1]

I'm beginning to think that ActivityPub will never add anti-censorship features into the core protocol (for example, independent IDs that don't live on a relay server). Because I spoke with a core developer on ActivityPub stuff a couple of years ago about the issue of servers going offline and losing your account and he said that he was working on it.

But I wouldn't be surprised if he was discouraged from continuing this work because ultimately people like ActivityPub because server admins can be little dictators that censor and ban at will.

[bawolff]

> because ultimately people like ActivityPub because server admins can be little dictators that censor and ban at will.

ActivityPub isnt the only distributed thingy to learn that lesson. There are a reason the various ultra-free-speech hosted on the dark web, things never take off.

[olah_1]

I think the architecture is the issue. Nobody wants their account owned by a random guy running a server as a hobby.

[fiatjaf]

Of course they won't add anything, and if they add no one is going to implement.

Mastodon, Pleroma et al. are not really ActivityPub implementations. Each of the fediverse clients implement some random 10% of AP and just try to get compatible with each other using dirty hacks.