Getting Versed On The Fediverse
In the ever-evolving digital landscape, an alternative way to connect on the internet has emerged: The Fediverse, and it is generating a lot of questions for users, policymakers, and technology scholars alike. While the idea of decentralized social media has circulated for quite some time, today there is more evidence that users are gravitating towards this new way to connect. But with any novel technology, lingering questions remain.
Understanding the Fediverse
The “Fediverse” or “federated social network” is an interconnected social platform ecosystem. The term is derived from “federation” and “universe” and refers collectively to the protocols, servers, applications, and communities that enable decentralized social media. The Fediverse ecosystem refers to the network of decentralized social media platforms that are interconnected and built on open protocols. One example of a protocol is the Hypertext Transfer Protocol (“HTTP”). It is the foundation for the World Wide Web and it is what allows users to load web pages using hypertext links.
The goal behind the Fediverse is to provide users with more control over their digital presence. This control means users have more autonomy, ownership, and transparency over their data. The Fediverse’s decentralized approach aims to address concerns related to privacy, content moderation, and algorithmic bias that can occur with centralized platforms by shifting control and power to the users. This approach is becoming a more popular means of interacting online, with younger firms – Mastodon, Pixelfed, Bookwyrm, PeerTube, and more – and successful businesses like Meta, owner of Threads, all participating in the Fediverse.
While there are multiple protocols for the Fediverse, one key pillar is a protocol called ActivityPub as it currently powers some of the most popular Fediverse apps. Because ActivityPub is open source and decentralized, anyone can use it to build a social networking platform, so long as they follow the ActivityPub protocol. A key feature of ActivityPub and the other Fediverse protocols is that they allow platforms that build on them the ability to communicate with other platforms in the Fediverse. Platforms can operate independently, each with their own unique purpose, but can also communicate with each other. This allows users to interact across many different platforms while only having to be present on the platforms they choose. This interoperability is vastly different from the more centralized ecosystem of mainstream social media, where users are limited within the boundaries of a single platform and if an X user wants to see a friend’s post on Facebook they need a Facebook account.
Mastodon and Threads can serve an example as to how the Fediverse operates. Mastodon is a free and open-source microblogging platform whose functions may remind users of X, but it is far different from it. Mastodon is best described as thousands of independent social networks called Mastodon Instances or Servers which often have their own preferred focus, similar to Reddit’s subreddits. Mastodon users subscribe to the instance they want to interact with, and are free to switch instances whenever they choose. Now, if you are on Threads, you may opt-in to Fediverse sharing. If you were to select this option, your Threads posts could be visible and interacted with by users on Mastodon. In fact, your Threads posts could be shared on any platforms compliant with ActivityPub and users of those alternate platforms could follow you and interact with your posts.
Challenges and Opportunities
Despite the surge of new applications and use cases, the Fediverse faces several challenges. The decentralized nature can lead to fragmentation and varying moderation policies across servers, raising concerns about content moderation and community standards. Moreover, while growing in popularity the Fediverse is still relatively niche compared to mainstream platforms, posing hurdles in terms of user adoption and awareness.
Additionally, like Mastodon, many of these platforms are young and as they continue to grow, more vulnerabilities could arise around content moderation and data privacy and security. Let’s use Mastodon as a case study here.
Content moderation in the Fediverse is handled at the server level, allowing for more localized and community-driven moderation policies. Users have the option to choose servers that align with their own moderation preferences, and if they disagree with a server’s policies, they can switch to a different server without losing access to the wider network. Users can choose which types of content they want to see or avoid. This in turn gives users more control over the content that they are exposed to and reduces the reliance on centralized algorithms that may have inherent biases.
For example, one aspect of the Fediverse that is unlike X is that there is no way to perform a text search of all posts. Mastodon users also have other tools at their disposal such as the ability to mute, block, or report other users. These tactics are said to lessen harassment online as abusive accounts have a much harder time discovering accounts and spreading posts to the population they want to target.
Servers on Mastodon also have the ability to “defederate” from other servers if they find the content coming from the server abusive, or in violation of their own policies on content. Defederation here means that the server, as a whole, blocks another server, such that all the users on that server would not be able to see or follow any friends coming from that blocked server. Since users are encouraged to join a server that aligns with their interests when they join Mastodon, defederating gives users a powerful option, creating an overall more convivial experience.
There is a concern, however, that given Mastodon’s setup, it may actually promote insular communities and echo chambers, since users are encouraged to join a server that aligns with their interests. Alan Z. Rozenshtein, a law professor at the University of Minnesota, has a more positive outlook. Professor Rozenshtein states that perhaps we should not “overstate the effect of filter bubbles”’ after all “even the most partisan users frequently [consume content that goes against their beliefs.]” Rozenshtein adds that the smaller communities in the Fediverse are a “useful corrective” to the “megascale” of current social media.
Another user concern is privacy and security on decentralized social media. Contrary to centralized platforms that often collect user data for personalization and targeted advertising, many Fediverse platforms prioritize user privacy and control. On Mastodon, users have the option to choose a server that aligns with their privacy preferences or even host their own server, giving them full ownership of their data and interactions. The aim here is to mitigate concerns involving content moderation and data misuse, empowering users to reclaim control over their online presence.
But there are still concerns about how users’ personal data is collected, stored, and used by different servers on the Fediverse. As with any online platform, there is always a risk of data breaches where sensitive user information could be exposed to unauthorized parties and your data could only be as secure as the server host makes it.With the lack of a centralized authority, it is challenging to verify the identity of users, potentially leading to impersonation or fake accounts. Users may also need to grant permission to third-party apps to access their data on the Fediverse, which naturally raises further privacy and security concerns.
While interoperability is a key feature of the Fediverse, there can be technical challenges in ensuring seamless communication and data sharing between different servers. For instance, Mastodon offers two-factor authentication with an app or security key on the server as well as other privacy settings like automatic deletion of old posts and personalized keyword filters. That said, there is nothing that enables users to make their account “private.” A user can edit their settings so that a post is viewable only by their followers at the time of the posting, but they are not able to change the visibility of their previous posts. Mastodon for one, also does not provide end-to-end encryption on direct messaging.
Conclusion
The Fediverse offers a decentralized alternative to traditional social media, emphasizing user control, privacy, and interoperability across platforms like Mastodon. While it addresses concerns about centralized platforms, challenges such as fragmentation and adoption hurdles remain. Nonetheless, its innovative approach has sparked important discussions about the future of online connectivity and community governance. As it continues to evolve, the Fediverse will likely play a significant role in shaping the landscape of digital interaction.
