the only thing they need is to read the cert and confirm the auth of the issuer.

You just glossed over why this is a hard technical problem in the first place - They also need to check the cert isn’t revoked.

Otherwise, you can just hold onto a compromised cert, and reuse it.

Superconducting magnets don’t heat up naturally, not without breaking. All we’d need to do, is engineer an isolated environment for the magnet, and there’ll be no chance of it heating up, except maybe for an intense solar storm overwhelming it’s magnetic shield.

Unlike earth, where there are multiple potential sources of heat, in space the only one of note is the sun. So yes, you can’t remove heat via conduction or convection, but that also means that you can’t gain heat from it. If anything, that simplifies the design.

The energy requirements for keeping a magnet out of the sun at all times, is probably considerably less than powering a conventional electromagnet for the equivalent duration.

We’ve already achieved this on the extreme end via the new horizons probe, I’m not sure what all the fuss is about.

We could maybe make superconducting magnets strong enough to create a field to reduce the charged particles, but then you have to keep them powered

The superconducting magnets you describe, do not require ongoing power, only ongoing cooling. Which in space, is more manageable.

Interesting concept, but not very scalable. It’s basically a reversed dam - when it’s full, there’s 0m head of water. Then with excess energy, you lower the level inside, storing the energy in the water outside. E.g -2m head. Water then flows in to equalise head, and doing so, regenerates electricity. Adding depth to supercharge pressure differentials is a good idea, although I wonder how they limit the flow rate, or otherwise prevent cavitation shocks each cycle.

Could be useful as a private industrial battery, but a dam would still be better on an infrastructural level.

Before an instance does something malicious, how do you know it will be malicious?

Even if everyone there running it, & participating is pure of heart, how can you be assured that haXXors won’t simply break in to take advantage of that trust you’ve given them?

Banning bad instances is a reactive stance that only applies after damage has been done. Can you convince the corporate overlords to take that risk? And it only increases as the fediverse gets more popular, and more instances get trusted.

Yes and no.

Decentralized IDs exist, but will almost never be accepted by any large reputable institution.

Why trust every indie site to be 100% truthful, and definitely not full of malicious haXXors?

Why not post that link instead of AI slop then?

This is AI slop.