Its not too far off. No, its not like an ISP or a central server, but each instance IS a “provider” of a server and service. It’s not the worst moniker I have heard
For now. Commercial servers are possible, especially if communities become multi-instance in the future.
Every mature decentralized service calls them providers. Phone providers, ISPs, email providers, etc. I guess usenet just calls them “news servers”, though.
Instances also need better names.
Why not “servers”? That’s all they are. They serve content.
Because technically, one server can host multiple instances. Instances are containerized— literally an instance of lemmy.
Is there any practical reason to actually do that, though?
What would you call gmail vs hotmail?
Providers.
But that’s a provider/customer relationship, on the fediverse it isn’t.
Agree on a technical level, but in terms of the average netizen being able to visualize the relationship, “providers” makes it much easier
I don’t think we should try to visualize something that’s not there just because it’s (supposedly) easier for the average netizen.
Its not too far off. No, its not like an ISP or a central server, but each instance IS a “provider” of a server and service. It’s not the worst moniker I have heard
For now. Commercial servers are possible, especially if communities become multi-instance in the future.
Every mature decentralized service calls them providers. Phone providers, ISPs, email providers, etc. I guess usenet just calls them “news servers”, though.
It’s provider/consumer (not customer, something being a “provider” doesn’t necessarily mean they are selling stuff).
We are consumers, we consume the content that the instances provide, as content providers.