Disclaimer: I wrote this article and made this website.
There was some talk of this issue in the recent fediverse inefficiencies thread. I’m hopeful that in the future we’ll have a decentralized solution for file hosting but for now I deeply believe that users should pay for their own file hosting.
Personally I’m in the camp that I want history to be lost. That’s part of the appeal to me. In fact my favorite feature in the fedi is Mastodon’s option to enable auto-deleting posts of a certain age.
Only content that is explicitly pinned or reaches a certain amount of interactions should be saved imo. Since that’s the stuff you’d actually want to preserve rather than the 99% of forgettable content, and it would also drastically cut down on file hosting.
Another thing is that a federation should only act as the exchange between users on ActivityPub. It should only cache relevant information and not be expected to store everything, like I wrote before. The user should be a portable account that is stored on a device. The federation server would sync your account between your devices, but not store it. You send your content to the federation, and then the federation sends it out into the world where they choose to do what they want with it. The federation shouldn’t hoard it indefinitely.
Also this makes sense from a privacy perspective. If you care about privacy, why would you also want all your data indefinitely stored? Unless certain things are relevant and explicitly kept, it should be expected to expire and be lost by default. Where did we get this expectation that data should be stored forever? Also you expect it to be stored forever and not be trained on by AI?
This comment for example, after about a week or two most of the visibility and interaction of it will drop to zero. At that point, this comment should expire and no longer exist. I wrote this comment, it reached some people, and served it’s purpose and should expire. I’m not going to pretend like this comment is some kind of historic document that should be indefinitely preserved, nor do I expect or want it to be.
Can you judge a work of art by it’s virality? Should you judge by virality?
A lot of times in history artists got recognition they deserved only after their death. When they ware alive they lived in poverty struggling to make ends meet.
There is a lot of internet 1.0 preserved by internet archive that I didn’t get to experience. There are flash games that I would love to preserve and show the next generation.
We wouldn’t have known how Scotts Cawthon games have looked like before he made FNAF if not for the preservation efforts.
Usually those artist did get some recognition during their life, but never got into the main stream. That changed due to the main stream changing and the people who did like the art showing it again. That is actually rather easy to do with something like the Fediverse. It just requires a download option. Especially when everybody is aware, that the content will be deleted, that would be a decent option.
Also a lot of content on social media in general is very short term. Stuff like politcal discussions are fairly useless after a few months in most cases. So that can be deleted without much care and again, if somebody wants to preserve it, they easily can just download it.
That’s an incredible naive and egoistic take. Think about all the knowledge that is getting lost by applying this approach. How many times have you searched for some obscure thing and found the answer only on some five years old reddit post? That information would be lost for ever if you had your way.
I think the massive privacy benefits outweigh things like that, which should be documented properly anyways