• Jayjader@jlai.lu
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    16
    ·
    edit-2
    1 month ago

    I align with that article 's conclusion; in fact such a “fediverse browser” is exactly what I think the fediverse needs to fully replace closed/proprietary/traditional social media.

    However, some of their arguments seem off. For example, for the client to be able to choose/implement it’s own sorting algorithm, it seems to me that it would need to have access to all posts. At that point, your client is just another server, with all the problems that we’re originally trying to avoid.

    I have the same problem with your proposal / nostr’s approach: you may obtain a portable identity but all the “content” tied to that identity still has to live somewhere - someone else’s server or your own.

    • thepaperpilot@incremental.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      1 month ago

      Yeah, I disagree with that part as well. I think it’s fine for servers to store the content and provide endpoints for specific queries/sorts, and expecting the clients to have all the posts is a tad extreme.

      In this case, yes the data needs to live somewhere, but that’s the nature of having data be retrievable.