I enjoyed the read, and it leaves some interesting questions for further research as well as asks some interesting questions about the future. Ideally ActivityPub will grow to a point where big tech cant own it but we will see. For now I will enjoy my slice of the free good old web, with the rest of my fellow neckbeards and greybeards.

I did not read the link, but two of my biggest concerns do not appear in the summary you provided :

• the burden of hosting an ActivityPub enabled service is often duplicated for each instance instead of being split between them (for example, my Lemmy instance has a large picture folder and database because it is replicating all posts from communities I’m subscribed to)
• it’s a privacy nightmare. All instance admins now have as much spying power as the single centralized service it is replacing

(Edit: typo)

I still think the fact it works as well as it does at all is incredible

Limited discoverability, complicated and controversial moderation, constantly changing interoperability problems, large instance users off in their own silo — it’s all part of the fedi charm, really.

I did read the paper fully, but I’m going to comment mostly based on the challenged that the OP refers to.

My belief is that the article is accurate on highlighting that the Fediverse on its own is not enough to reclaim the internet. However, it’s still a step in the right direction and should be nurtured as such.

Discoverability as there is no central or unified index

Yes, discovery is harder within a federated platform than a centralised one. However the indices that we use don’t need to be “central” or “unified” - it’s completely fine if they’re decentralised and brought up by third parties, as long as people know about them.

Like Lemmy Explorer for example; it’s neither “central” nor “unified”, it’s simply a tool made by a third party, and yet it solves the issue nicely.

Complicated moderation efforts due to its decentralized nature

This implicit idea, that moderation efforts should be co-ordinated across a whole platform, quickly leads to unsatisfied people - either because they don’t feel safe or because they don’t feel like they can say what they think. Or both.

Let us not fool ourselves by falsely believing that moderation always boils down to “remove CSAM and Nazi” (i.e. “remove things that decent people universally consider as bad”). Different communities want to be moderated in different, sometimes mutually exclusive, ways. And that leads to decentralised moderation efforts.

In other words: “this is not a bug, this is a feature.”

[Note: the above is not an endorsement of Lemmy’s blatant lack of mod tools.]

Interoperability between instances of different types (e.g., Lemmy and Funkwhale)

Because yeah, the interoperability between Twitter, YouTube and Reddit is certainly better. /s

I’m being cheeky to highlight that, as problematic that the interoperability between instances of different types might be in the Fediverse, it’s still something that you don’t typically see in traditional media.

Concentration on a small number of large instances

Yes, user concentration into a few instances is a problem, as it gives the instance admins too much power. However, there’s considerably less room for those admins to act in a user-hostile way, before users pack their stuff up and migrate - because the cost of switching federated instances is smaller than the cost of switching non-federated platforms.

The risk of commercial capture by Big Tech

Besides what I said above, on the concentration of users, consider the fact that plenty Fediverse instances defederated Threads. What is this, if not the usage of the Fediverse features to resist commercial capture?