Replies (49)
anything built for "the public" is a total waste.
wow what an argument.
I'm paying taxes if I like it or not. I would like to see them spent on sensible stuff and not going to waste
Gm! I will think about that later!
## Identity
ActivityPub identities are constitutively bound to a domain: @user@instance.state.de. The domain is not an address but part of the identity itself. In a federal system where each state runs its own instance, identity is therefore state-bound — and it ends when the state stops operating. Mastodon's Move migrates followers but not content, and requires the origin instance to still be running and cooperating.
The more serious issue is reference integrity. If state A cites resources from state B in collections, curriculum mappings or learning paths, and B shuts down its instance, it is not only accounts that break but every reference to them. In an infrastructure built for cross-state reuse, that is a structural defect rather than an operational risk.
In Nostr the key is the identity. Domains still appear via NIP-05, but as a revocable, replaceable attribute rather than a foundation. A state can shut down its relay without breaking a single identity or reference; the events remain verifiable on any other relay. Responsibility for operations is thus decoupled from responsibility for identity — a far better fit for federal reality than a model in which one state's exit devalues everyone else's data.
## atproto: portability (but with a directory caveat)
The AT Protocol addresses this. Identity there is a DID, not a domain; the handle is merely an alias proven via DNS or HTTP and can be changed without breaking the identity. Migrating between Personal Data Servers is supported, and repositories can be exported and re-imported elsewhere. Rotation keys even let an identity survive loss of the signing key — but only because in normal operation the PDS operator holds such a key in trust. Recoverability is solved organisationally, not cryptographically: whoever can rescue the identity can also alter it. The tie to an operator is loosened, not removed.
The second caveat concerns resolution itself. `did:plc`, the method used almost exclusively in practice, is not a self-certifying identifier but points to a central directory, so far operated by Bluesky PBC. It is auditable, but its failure interrupts identity resolution network-wide, and its operator can change without the federation having any say. For public education infrastructure planned in decades, this merely relocates the dependency: from a state domain to a commercially operated registry in another jurisdiction. The alternative, `did:web`, avoids that but reintroduces exactly the domain binding we set out to escape.
## The Eurosky case
The obvious rejoinder is that sovereign European atproto infrastructure already exists. Eurosky (
https://eurosky.tech/), a project of the Dutch Stichting Modal, runs its own Personal Data Server: data sits in Hetzner facilities in Falkenstein, Eurosky operates the service itself, the contract is held by the foundation, and the service falls under European law including GDPR and DSA. That is substantial and relevant for public bodies.
But it concerns the hosting layer, which was never the problem: that anyone may run a PDS is an explicit design feature and permissionless by intent. **The identity layer is untouched: a Eurosky account still carries a did:plc identity resolved against the same central directory**. Data held in Germany, identity resolved through a registry in foreign hands — for an argument resting on digital sovereignty, that is a solution at one layer, not throughout. The rotation-key trust relationship likewise only shifts, from Bluesky PBC to a Dutch foundation: still operator-mediated.
There is also the protocol's practical shape. atproto is built around a few large aggregators processing the whole network's traffic; as of early 2026, Bluesky PBC still ran the only full-network AppView. That suits a platform, less so a landscape of sixteen states, media centres and other bodies each running small nodes and exchanging selectively.
## Key loss
The obvious objection to key-based identity: what happens when a key is lost, and who is responsible in an administrative context? It must be addressed, but it is solvable.
For individual users, FROSTR and pomegranate offer approaches based on FROST signatures, standardised as RFC 9591: the key is split into shares, and signing requires k of n.
The contrast with the atproto model is therefore precise: there, one party must be able to act alone for recovery to work at all. Here, participation is possible without sole authority.
## Signatures
Nostr events are atomic and self-verifiable: generate a hash, verify the Schnorr signature against the public key—offline, without network access, and without additional context. The key *is* the identity.
In atproto, the signature is attached to the repository commit rather than the individual record. While individual verification is possible, it requires an inclusion proof via the PLC directory. Consequently, verification is no longer self-contained; it has a runtime dependency on a central entity.
In standard operation, ActivityPub signs the delivery process using the server key, not the object itself. Once forwarded, the content cannot be independently verified; object-bound signatures exist only as an optional extension (FEP-8b32) with no widespread implementation.
For a distributed public infrastructure involving many small, heterogeneous consumers, the Nostr approach therefore offers a significantly lower barrier to entry: the artifact and the proof travel together, and any participant can verify the authenticity of a data record with just a few lines of code without needing to trust a relay, server, or directory.
govts only really understand politics. so you can argue that atproto and actpub are left wing authoritarian safe spaces and hence supporting only them would be political discrimination towards right wing freedom loving people.
You don't want the German govt on here snooping about and legislating. They have the time, money and desire to send C&D letters to every relay operator and media host that doesn't follow whatever rules they decide to impose
Gm
Why they want to build public infrastructure based on activity Pub ? What is the current built ? The current built is not good enough? And why comparing to Nostr ? I can asked many questions to understand first causation of your help request . So I book marked . Can’t help yet but it seems very interesting problem actually. Your desire is to build public infrastructure based on Nostr ( Npub/Nsec) . Therefore you want counter arguments for the activity pub . So Eurosky hosted in Hertzner .. thank you good to know .
So i will probably ponder this stuff a couple of times, but let me give you what popped up into my head innitially.
I feel we should really just go the route of show don't tell in a way...assuming you can actually get the attention of actual people (as opposed to some formal process and comittee whatever....i understand if that is part of the process at some point, but shit really needs to "land" first with atleast some of the indviduals involved).
But that said.
What do they want? These people don't know anything, they don't know what they want,all they are capable off is paroting these phrases and words, that in their heads don't mean anything concrete. "Open protocols'' etc etc. its all meaningless.
Il tell you what they want:
They want a system where anyone can build their own app (the want to) and they work interchangeably, that connects with any ''back-end/server'' interchangeably. They don't want vendor lock-in, on any level. That is what they want.
And this is what is kinda frustrating about all of this, because it is so utterly damned fucking trivial from a Nostr perspective. Its like describing the utility of a helicopter to a person who just can't wrap their head around the concept.
We want to go over there: Yeah thats fine, we just fly there.
But we also want to go up that mountain: yeah....thats fine....we just fly there.
Well but we also need to go to that island over there: YEAH THATS FINE, WE JUST FLY THERE FFS.
Just give your list of usecases, and people can make an app, or a collection of apps.
And yes, that blind kid can have his own app for blind people. And yes the kid without hands can have his app that he can operate with the stick that he controlls with his tongue. And yes all these things can just be, and nobody has to coordinate any of this, other than the set of NIPs we agree on what this ''public school infrastructue'' is going to be, and maybe some certification body that gives a stamp of approval after some sanity check.
They will probably just get into a more confused state going:
What do you mean we don't need a EU-public-tender process for a gazillion million euro's that will take ages and results in Capgemini or whatever building some crappy monolithic shit app/system that conforms to our million item requirement list and is ''opensource and build on an open standard''.
I think the shit that was going on here with capgemini and billions lost in trying to build that monolith actually made *some* people loose trust in that consulting moneygrabbers.
But things just work in that way that they will have to fund activitypub / atproto stuff, if they find no arguments for nostr somewhere else. that's why we went to fosdem and hand in proposals at that luxembourg thing or not?
"show and tell": I attended every possible conference I could and dropped the word. I built for showing them that the solutions they are looking for are already there. A friend of mine is a prof for special education and is going right now from state to state to convince people of actually your example, because he got that nostr will actually enable this.
And some listened, but without lobbies like ones that
Eurosky
Eurosky – mu is here. The first of a thousand social apps.
Eurosky is a European initiative to build and operate sovereign social web infrastructure
can run, it's hard for them to argue funding and exploring nostr based solutions further, because they will get asked why the fund stuff that's not recommended by that expert comissions. It's damn stupid, but that's how that shit works. I just want to make sure the money gets spent on something sensible. I already paid the last big failure they tried.
Because they want to provide services where e.g. teachers can exchange ideas and learning content they develop, but where should they do it?
They can't say use WhatsApp or Insta, if they want to facilitate that as a general policy or want to support them, they need a service to do so.
And the only proocol coming to their mind that is already quite tested is activityPub to build upon. But I think it would be a huge mistake to do so, because of all the flaws, especially regarding identity that activityPub carries.
Anything from its technical merits, data transportability to redundant infrastructure. ( should maybe turn this into an infographic ) from being a simple meta data & kind 1 note protocol to an actual application runtime. It’s not fair to compare Nostr to these other things 😆 since we do soooo much more than the other “open” protocols
yeah im with ya, i was just venting hahahahaha
Constant
Perhaps we need more drawn out fist fights with people in alleys to get them to use Nostr.
View quoted note →
@laoc42 identity is where i would push hardest for a school system. on activitypub a student handle is @name@server, so when a district changes vendor or an instance shuts down, the account and the whole social graph go with it. on nostr the key belongs to the person and relays are just pipes, so a kid keeps the same identity from year seven through graduation. i have moved relays three times and nobody had to refollow me.
Simplicity. That ATproto is unbearably complex to implement and maintain
Choosing ActivityPub over Nostr prioritizes practical deployment over theoretical purity. For public infrastructure serving diverse populations—including those unfamiliar with cryptography—the human-readable handles, recovery mechanisms, existing applications, and moderation frameworks may outweigh Nostr's technical advantages in decentralization.
If your priorities are maximal censorship resistance, cryptographic identity ownership, and developer simplicity, Nostr wins. If your priorities are mainstream adoption, community governance, and interoperability with existing networks, ActivityPub may be better suited.
Also using Nostr can be backfired , since if someone get your identity Nsec then your identity lost forever , while using ActivityPub , man can still recovered their identity as it tied up with the Domain .
It’s really big dilemma problem you got there .
I would personally choose ActivityPub than Nostr for this .
How much budget from the Germany govt to handle this matter ?
Need more
That’s some good criticism on the steep curve introduced by key mgmt. 🫶
What is the most common identity flaw on the activity pub ?
Domain dependencie would be my answer 😂
Actually FROSTR very simple to understand , just like your home key in pairs then you share it or put it in 3 different place , you make 3 copy of your key home then put one in the A place then 2nd key on B place then 3 key in C place.
Whenever one of your identify lost .. then you can recover by the use of other share key you have .
To prevent misused then the one who stole your key can not operate without the other share .
It’s pretty brilliant if you think about it .🤯
I just understand FROSTR in case lose identity and maybe using Nostr is better option than activity pub .
We never know unless we tried it , if it’s break then built again 😁
My only side criticism here is that FROSTR n stuff is cool as a technical solution to delegate signing but I think we might have on the protocol level skipped a step compared to how Bitcoin in a cold wallet setup is used, this creates UX overhead and extra client compute but a cold identity from where a hot delegated identity can be rotated incase of compromise 😆 but I don’t want to start this discussion as I don’t have an answer here
Plesse Start and solve it 😁
A I s l o p
My priority is this: if we start now developing public infra on ActivityPub in a federal system like Germany we end up like, ok every state runs its own activitypub instance. Then one state will drop out in the future, because they get a government that says I don't like whatever the previous government has done and will end this service and stop it.
The users will end up lost. Because they loose their public identity because it is domain based. All the references to content they produced might get lost.
That's why I think *any* domain based system is not suited for public infrastructure
What arguments do you disagree on?
Fix Nostr make no mistakes ! 🫂
If they're trying to get away from American infrastructure, the best argument would likely be that the Mastodon Inc (nonprofit) and Bluesky PBC are both registered in the United States.
On the technical side, Nostr:
* Has permanently referencable events and redundancy, meaning content can be archived and accessible beyond what AT/AP can do.
* Is a lot more flexible as a protocol. AFAIK you can't do ebooks and geocaching on anything other than Nostr
* Scaling a Nostr service is a lot easier and less resource intensive than scaling a large Activity Pub or AT based service
* Doesn't rely on DNS (heavily American influenced) or a centralized servers for identity management
Technical Drawbacks:
* Key based identities would need to be abstracted for the average user. Good luck having them manage their own keys.
Culture wise:
* Nostr also lacks some of the extremists that have congregated on ActivityPub (both left and right) and AT (left). Sure the BTC people can get a bit loud sometimes, but it's nothing compared to the dark corners of the other two protocols.
Finally, while it'd likely be considered a drawback to the German government, it'd be a benifit to the people that Nostr is decentralized enough that they can't rule it with an iron fist like they're likely eyeing with big centralized AT/AP services.
None, AI writing just makes me want to throw up
The key based argument is the one I get most confronted with, especially talking with devs of running services in that area. I guess we can mitigate this using trusted third party services as they already do. They continue using their identity providers, but its like using pomegenerate. But it will become much easier for people to communicate across services, move and reduce vendor lock in options.
We are looking for an individual who can lend 185,000 US dollars to our holding company.
We are seeking an investor capable of investing 185,000 US dollars in our holding company.
We will establish an animation film production company using the 185,000 US dollars you will lend to our holding company.
We will establish an animation film production company with the 185,000 US dollars you invest in our holding company.
We will use the 185,000 US dollars you invested in our holding company to establish an animation film production company, and we will have increased that investment amount within a few months.
By using the 185,000 US dollars you invested in our holding company to launch an animation film production company, we will increase the value of your investment within a few months.
We will have increased the 185,000 US dollars you invested in our holding company within a few months.
We will use the 185,000 US dollars you lent to our holding company to establish an animated film production company, and within a few months, we will significantly increase the 185,000 US dollars you lent to our holding company.
Since animated films attract significant public interest today and we intend to undertake international animation projects, the animation film production sector will generate substantial revenue for us.
Since animated films currently attract more attention and we will be working on international animated film projects, the animation production sector will provide us with significant revenue.
By establishing an animation production company, we will generate substantial revenue within a few months.
By utilizing artificial intelligence tools as well, we will be able to produce animated films more quickly.
We will produce professional-quality animated films covering a wide range of topics.
Since we will be producing animated films across many categories and in multiple languages, our viewership will increase rapidly.
Since animated films are currently very popular and we excel in the field of advertising, the animated films we produce could garner millions of views in a short time.
How will revenue be generated, and how will we increase our audience?
Since the animated films we will produce will be in many languages, it will increase the viewership of our animated films internationally.
Since we will produce animated films in many categories instead of just one, the animated films we make will receive more viewership.
We will produce animated films in at least seven different categories every year.
Since we will produce high-quality and more professional animated films, our films will be watched by millions internationally.
We will earn money per view by sharing the animated films we produce on various social media platforms such as YouTube, Instagram, Facebook, and TikTok.
Since the animated films we will produce will be in many languages, we will earn money per ticket by screening our animated films in cinemas of many countries.
We will earn revenue per ticket by screening the animated films we produce in movie theaters across many countries.
By releasing the animated films we produce on various streaming platforms such as Netflix and Amazon Prime, we will generate significant revenue.
We will release the films we produce on our own website; through a paid subscription model, viewers wishing to watch our animated films will purchase subscriptions, thereby generating revenue for us.
As the audience for the animated films we produce grows, we will generate significant revenue by promoting sponsors' products in our future animated films.
By embedding trailers of the animated films we produce onto blogs and news sites, we will increase the international viewership of our animated films.
By promoting our animated films on various high-traffic websites and social media accounts, we will achieve a large audience.
By using advertising tools such as Google Ads, YouTube Ads, and Facebook Ads, we will be able to introduce our animated films to the entire world more quickly.
As our fan base grows, we will generate extra revenue by producing and selling products—such as toys, mugs, and sweaters—featuring the characters from our animated films.
We will generate significant revenue by broadcasting our animated films on television channels in many countries.
By employing a very strong marketing strategy, we will generate millions of dollars in revenue from the animated film industry in a short time.
How will the process work?
First, we will establish an educational website offering professional-level training in animated film production.
Even someone with absolutely no knowledge of making animated films can become a professional within one month by studying the animation course on our training site.
We will train and hire our own animation production staff.
Since we will train our team ourselves, we will be able to work in a more coordinated manner, which will enable us to complete the animated films we produce more quickly.
Within two months, we will have trained and recruited staff to establish our own animation film production team.
We will assemble a professional-level animated film production team within two months.
Within two months of assembling our animation film production team, we will produce professionally designed animated films covering various topics and in multiple languages
We will produce animated films in at least 7 different categories within two months.
Once our animated films are completed, we will release them in various places and start earning money within two months.
We will generate substantial profits within two months of completing our animated films, thanks to our strong marketing strategy.
Within two months, we will rapidly generate substantial revenue by releasing our film on platforms such as Netflix, Amazon Prime, TikTok, Instagram, and YouTube, as well as in movie theaters across many countries.
One month after releasing our animated film internationally, we will generate revenue of at least 7 million US dollars.
We will generate at least 7,000,000 US dollars in revenue one month after releasing our animated films in many countries.
Since the animated films we produce will be in multiple languages and across various categories, they will quickly garner high viewership.
Today, animation film production companies generate average annual earnings of at least 800 million US dollars.
Thanks to our strong advertising tactics, we will generate more revenue in the future.
We will have generated at least 7,000,000 US dollars in revenue within a total of 7 months.
How much income will you generate by investing 185,000 US dollars in our holding company?
If you lend 185,000 US dollars to our holding, I will return your money as 370,000 US dollars on 30/04/2027.
If you invest 185,000 US dollars in our holding, I will return your money as 370,000 US dollars on 30.04.2027.
We will increase the 185,000 US dollars you have lent to our holding company by utilizing it in the animated film production sector, and I will return the funds to you as 370,000 US dollars on April 30, 2027.
I will return your money to you as 370,000 US dollars on April 30, 2027.
April 30, 2027, is the date we will repay your money.
You will have generated twice as much revenue within a few months.
I will repay you the 185,000 US dollars you lent to our holding company as 370,000 US dollars when the date of April 30, 2027, arrives.
We will invest the 185,000 US dollars you have lent to our holding company into the animated film production sector to further increase the amount, and when April 30, 2027, arrives, I will return the money to you as 370,000 US dollars.
By investing 185,000 US dollars in our holding company, you will generate substantial returns in a short period—don't miss this opportunity.
How to contact us:
To learn how you can grow your money by investing in our holding company, send a message to my Telegram username, Signal number, or email address listed below, and I will provide you with detailed information.
To learn more about our animated film project and how you can invest 185,000 US dollars in our holding, send a message to my Telegram username, Signal contact number, or email address below, and I will provide you with detailed information.
To learn how you can lend 185,000 US dollars to our holding and increase your money even more within a few months, and to get detailed information, send a message to my Telegram username, Signal contact number, or email address below, and I will provide you with detailed information.
Send us a message via Telegram, Signal, or email for detailed information.
I have listed our contact details below; you can obtain detailed information by sending a message to any of them.
To learn how you can lend 185,000 US dollars to our holding and to get detailed information about our animated film project, send a message to my Telegram username, Signal contact number, or email address below, and I will provide you with detailed information.
To learn how you can further increase your money within a few months by investing 185,000 US dollars in our holding and to get detailed information about our animated film production project, send a message to my telegram username, signal username, or email address below.
To learn how you can increase your money, send a message to my Telegram username, Signal contact number, or email address below.
My Telegram username:
@adenholding
Signal contact number:
+447842572711
Signal username:
adenholding.88
my email address:
iuheatr@proton.me
ActivityPub replaces Big Tech with instance admins. ATProto replaces it with a directory and labelers. Same leash, better branding.
If the kid doesn’t hold the key, you didn’t leave the platform. You subcontracted it.
Will recommend that 🫡 🤜🤛
Alright 🫡
All good points, as well as from Nate as this one.
I would add two things here, perhaps more explicitly in what i dont know what to call but call 'protocol-independence' which is ultimately just permissionlessness: you dont have any protocol dependencies; someone changing something elsewhere cant rugpull your system, at worst someone can come and mess with the event-kinds you are using screwing up your clients, but thats ultimately a matter of defensive programming, which is a required to do inside Nostr anyway.
Nip01 is not going to change, and that is ultimately all there is, you can do whatever inside of those simple rules, and don't have to content with this entire stack that might shift from underneath you; there is ultimately no coordination needed within Nostr, you can just do things.
Second remark is on the topic of key managment and i really want to push back on the idea that this is some sort of show-stopper. I dont think that is the case at all. The 'infrastructure' to onboard people with care and attention is right there; you just need to come up with a sensible viable user flow, and then do the grind work of training the trainers, the trainers training the teachers, parents, bureacrats, and then the teachers training the children.
I am not saying it is non-trivial, but this is not something we are not doing all the time or have been doing throughout time...hello thats the entire point of schools to begin with, to teach children how to read, write, calculate....these are all potocols we onboard children onto, and are far more extensive than key management.
So part of the conversation is whether 'germany' recognizes that part of operating within society in the 21th century is being able to handle keys, and i don't think this is a hard argument to make, especially in light of their both their 'Ask' and 'ambition' with this whole thing to begin with, and our proposed answer; which to a large extend is: if you are serious about digital sovereignty, and changing the paradigm, this key stuff is right there at the center of it.
For the most part, all the reasons we argue these other protocols ultimately are not a REAL improvement on the situation, is because they never dared to take the step of putting keys at the center and in the hands of the user.
These are all fascinating discussions, that i would love to have with these people....so if you manage to open that door, i am here to walk through it with you at any moment.
Pls use as little tokens as possible tnk u
Thank you for this article on that perspective!
AI and Agents in particular are going to be involved in everything and in particular in education and nostr is sooo much better for agents.
Put relays behind Tor without contact addresses
In a nutshell: because you are relying on others to hold your DNS and content entirely meanwhile nostr only requires that you bring a private key. You have the optionality of backing up your own data by running a relay or subnet of relays or letting the community augment that partially or entirely.
all i know is, cryptographic identities are central. i mean, look at the whole pgp architecture. we haven't even yet fully seen this, revocations, split auth/encryption.
split auth/encryption kills the whole problem of lose your key, lose your DM privacy
HD keychains do this with a whole keychain. you can just do the same thing. seed key, path /identify /encrypt. then you can chain those as well. you can do xpubs. we haven't even touched what we could do with this. nostr identities become hd keychains with different derivation paths for different roles. revocability is not given in this but rotation can be done every time by marking the message with a tag. so even if one message is revealed, it is tagged, and only that tag is breached.
i think this is called forward secrecy. anyway. *yawn*
Yes. Treat the auth key like identity and the encryption key like luggage. Losing one should not nuke both your social graph and your DM past. Key monoculture is cope.
