as long as the admins give a heads-up, you can still move to another instance using the provided feature. If the instance spontaneously combusts, you're a bit out of luck, yes :(
(And ideally one that lets me maintain my own blocklist rather than doing that for me, but I'm already accepting that at mastodon.social, so that's not a deal-breaker.)
Most instances have a public page you can check out to see the instance's vibe. EG https://mastodon.xyz/public , https://fosstodon.org/public
Once you've found a new instance, you can transfer your followers to it. This Feditips page tells how to move your 'mutes, blocks etc'.
https://mstdn.social/@feditips/105317854827203241
Remove that number at the end and there are a lot more Feditips. One tip: you can easily subscribe to any Mastodon account through an RSS reader ... add '.rss' to the account's public page, there's your feed!
For example, a network of nodes that balance all traffic rather than a network of independent servers that federate.
Has the fediverse reached that level of maturity?
A single distributed network is more like twitter, instagram, or telegram. A federated network necessitates teaching about home servers, blacklists, server outages, etc.
I've heard from people that work on Activity Pub though that they are moving towards making things function in a more distributed way (portable accounts for example). So things seem to be converging in that direction regardless.
I hadn't considered this before, but might this be an instance where a blockchain is actually useful? If you want to mitigate the brittleness of a single personal server hosting your toots, distribute/duplicate them across many personal servers? Then I guess we'd need to change our concept of "host" from "physical server" to "private/public key pair that enables encrypting toot history (so writes/edits/deletions) from an author and decrypting them for author+host subscribers".
Admittedly I'm a bit out of my depth here so maybe there's some reason this wouldn't work/would be a bad idea I'm not seeing at the moment (aside from the additional technical overhead).
While I agree with the principle of this argument, I think it's far more likely that any of the publicly available Mastodon instances goes boom long before Twitter does. My different kinds of social media activities might be spread across the fediverse, but all of my toots are only on one point of failure, and technically in significantly more incompetent hands than on Twitter.
I'm not disagreeing with this article per se – I want decentralized social media to succeed as much as everyone else – but it's much too brittle and technically minded for the people I mostly like to hang out with, i.e. non-techies.