From abc4a03d838f745fa0dbf9ab880536ac96bcfa96 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: JoYo Date: Fri, 21 Jun 2019 19:41:13 -0400 Subject: [PATCH] init from post https://thejoyo.com/notice/9k5PNW4ajLUxNsmGfI --- README.md | 18 ++++++++++++++++++ 1 file changed, 18 insertions(+) diff --git a/README.md b/README.md index 581ce17..8446079 100644 --- a/README.md +++ b/README.md @@ -1,2 +1,20 @@ # federation +A big problem is a lack of clarity on what instances are blocked and why by various instances. +This is a documentation and accessibility issue as I doubt most instances make neither. + +The other big problem is having central authorities. +You can see this on the internet now with certificate authorities. +If a CA is compromised, which they have and they will, then the trust is broken at the root and anything that inherited that trust needs to have it reestablished. +I’m not eager to apply blockchain to something that is a governance issue. +An alternative is notaries. + +Sharing inspiration for a design. + +- [SSL And The Future Of Authenticity](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8N4sb-SEpcg) +- [Convergence Notaries](https://github.com/moxie0/Convergence/wiki/Notaries) + + +The general idea is trusting more than one authority, polling them for a consensus on which instances are filtered/restricted. Many nodes would simply proxy their inherited filters but can change what node they would inherit trust from. + +Much like users pick an instance to join because of a theme or the moderation policies, instances could join a federation because of a grand moderation policy.