Nope! The main thing going for a distributed ledger would be global consistency, but there are some very negative downsides. It’s slow, scales poorly, puts a massive burden on admins operating instances, and the blocks would be effectively immutable…meaning that if the contents of each activity were fully nested inside of a block, edits or deletions would be impossible. We already see problems with CSAM showing up in various blockchains, and a Fediverse blockchain used for social purposes would be no different.

It’s just not the right tool for the job when it comes to social networks. There were a few early experiments in this area, such as Twister, which tried to build a Twitter clone on top of a blockchain using DHT. It has a huge list of limitations, though, and development stopped around 2020.

No.

To have a decentralised network, you need a lot of servers storing some data and a access algorithm thar searches for the pieces. There are a lot of hard problems:

• you need various copies because each node can go offline any moment. This works for pirated DVDs, but not for social media posts.
• you need to store a lot of the network in each node. The user needs to contribute to the network. Few people will donate GBs of storage and bandwidth to use a social network. You will get only a few enthusiasts.
• search is a nightmare nobody have really solved.

The architecture is good for storing and distributing many copies of a few very popular contents (and shines in torrent) but is bad for storing, searching for, and accessing many unpopular and mildly popular contents.

Better how?

Can I ask what you’re planning to use block chain for? To verify each account? Or to federate instances?

The blockchain is always a scam.

I’m totally in favor of a fully distributed solution! But you don’t need a ledger for it, neither centralized nor distributed. A simple pub-sub + DHT, torrent style, should be enough.

Blockchain is the wrong solution for that problem.

Check out Nostr, its’s pretty much what we need.