Federation & Decentralization

Status: 🔮 Planned for V2.0+ (not in V1.0 scope)
FactHarbor is designed to eventually support federation, but this feature is deferred until core product is proven and user demand exists.

V1.0 Scope (Current)

Single-node deployment:

• Full-featured standalone instance
• Read replicas for scaling if needed
• All features available without federation
• Focus on core product quality
  Why defer federation:
• Adds massive complexity (sync, conflicts, identity, governance)
• Not needed for first 10,000 users
• Core product must be proven first
• Build when users explicitly request it

V2.0+ Federation (Future Vision)

Implement federation when:

• ✅ 10,000+ users on single node
• ✅ Users explicitly request decentralization
• ✅ Core product is stable and mature
• ✅ Geographic distribution becomes necessary

Federation Features (Future)

Independent FactHarbor Instances:

• Each node operates autonomously
• Local governance and moderation
• Regional data sovereignty
• Domain specialization possible
  Claim Synchronization:
• Claims propagate between trusted nodes
• Conflict resolution protocols
• Distributed consensus on verdicts
• Maintain source attribution
  Federated Identity:
• Users recognized across nodes
• Reputation portable (with consent)
• Single sign-on capabilities
• Privacy-preserving authentication
  Decentralized Governance:
• Each node sets own policies
• Collaborative standards development
• Inter-node arbitration for disputes
• Federation-level oversight (optional)

Technical Architecture (Future)

Sync Protocol:

• ActivityPub-inspired messaging
• Claim deltas and updates
• Source verification across nodes
• Bandwidth-efficient synchronization
  Identity Management:
• Decentralized identifiers (DIDs)
• Verifiable credentials
• Public key infrastructure
• Privacy-preserving authentication
  Data Sovereignty:
• Each node controls own data
• Cross-node queries (opt-in)
• GDPR compliance per jurisdiction
• Right to be forgotten respected

Benefits of Federation (Future)

Resilience:

• No single point of failure
• Censorship resistance
• Geographic redundancy
• Community ownership
  Autonomy:
• Local governance
• Regional moderation policies
• Cultural sensitivity
• Domain specialization
  Scalability:
• Horizontal growth through new nodes
• Regional distribution reduces latency
• Load distribution across federation
• Independent scaling per node
  Trust:
• Decentralized verification
• Multiple independent sources
• Transparent provenance
• Community validation

Challenges to Address (Future)

Technical Complexity:

• Synchronization protocols
• Conflict resolution
• Network reliability
• Performance at scale
  Governance Complexity:
• Inter-node standards
• Dispute resolution
• Quality consistency
• Abuse handling
  User Experience:
• Node discovery
• Identity management
• Seamless cross-node interaction
• Performance transparency

Why Not V1.0?

Reality check:

• Most successful platforms start centralized (Wikipedia, Reddit, GitHub)
• Federation can be added later (see: Mastodon, Matrix)
• Core product quality matters more than architecture philosophy
• Users don't care about federation until they need it
  Build federation when:
• Users say "I want to run my own instance"
• Censorship becomes a real problem
• Geographic distribution is required
• Community governance demands it
  Until then: Focus on making the core product excellent 🎯

Related Pages

• Architecture - Current V1.0 architecture
• Design Decisions - Why we defer complexity
• When to Add Complexity - Federation triggers

Historical Note

Previous versions (V0.9.50-0.9.58) included detailed federation specifications. These have been moved to future vision documents. The federation architecture is well-designed and ready to implement when the time comes—we're just not building it in V1.0.
See: `/future-vision/federation-architecture.md` for complete technical specifications (when implemented).