Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Patchwork – Decentralized messaging and sharing app built on Secure Scuttlebutt

github.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

21–30 of 65 posts

Re: Patchwork – Decentralized messaging and sharing app built on Secure Scuttlebutt

#21

Post by whimful »

DividableMiddle wrote: post #15
Asturaz wrote: post #3

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It does not work like that, the gateway will not be able to show anything, and if you would like to go through a gateway you would have to share your secret key with that Gateway, which means full control of your log. The first time you use Secure Scuttlebutt will be boring because it will be an empty town, you will not have anything and you will not see anyone's feed either. The magic happens when you start followin…

Although I understand the purpose of a new user having no data on first use I do not agree with it. Using a platform for the first time can be foreign and it eases the mind of the user if they can see what it would look like day-to-day. Maybe just have some test material and a very obvious button to wipe it clean when they are ready?

good idea, #somebodyshould implement it!

If you're familiar with terminal, you can start the app, connect to a pub, have a play, and when you want to reset _everything_ including your identity, run :

``` rm -rf ~/.ssb ```

(this assumes mac / linux) Next time you start Patchwork a new identity will be made and you'll be starting from fresh

Re: Patchwork – Decentralized messaging and sharing app built on Secure Scuttlebutt

#24

Post by mr_spothawk »

such a wonderful community of folks there. i log on once every several days and sus leave pleased. also, it’s a nomadic group, and i’ve been pleased to meet a few other community members in person.

i recommend SSB to my friends as the place to find me if all hell breaks loose

Re: Patchwork – Decentralized messaging and sharing app built on Secure Scuttlebutt

#25

Post by Cyberdog »

whimful wrote: post #19
Cyberdog wrote: post #14

How does this compare to Mastodon/GNU social? From what I can tell, this is inviting me to run a P2P program on my own system rather than on a server; is that just an implementation detail?

it's like federation, but at the level of a user. Much easier to set up, much easier to curate / moderate what you want to see. There's still emergent community in the space, it's just not tied to the politics of hardware

> it's just not tied to the politics of hardware

What do you mean by this? Is there some sort of hardware politics battle in the GNU social community or something?

Re: Patchwork – Decentralized messaging and sharing app built on Secure Scuttlebutt

#27

Post by internalfx »

ideashower wrote: post #26

So I see that in order to communicate outside your local network you need to connect to a pub. Can you set up a private, invite only pub? Say for an organization or team?

Yes you can.

https://github.com/staltz/easy-ssb-pub

Re: Patchwork – Decentralized messaging and sharing app built on Secure Scuttlebutt

#28

Post by setra »

Cyberdog wrote: post #25
whimful wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

it's like federation, but at the level of a user. Much easier to set up, much easier to curate / moderate what you want to see. There's still emergent community in the space, it's just not tied to the politics of hardware

> it's just not tied to the politics of hardware What do you mean by this? Is there some sort of hardware politics battle in the GNU social community or something?

When someone else runs the server you use, and your account is tied to their server, you are at the whims of the server owner, and are not able to migrate your identity.

Re: Patchwork – Decentralized messaging and sharing app built on Secure Scuttlebutt

#29

Post by marknadal »

Congrats Dominic and co! I saw that even Julian Assange was recommending scuttlebutt on Twitter!!

A couple people have asked about browser based access and some people have replied that that wouldn't work?

Could somebody explain why? Me and Dominic have debated design a couple times, and on my own system we have P2P cryptographic identities working just fine in the browser (see https://hackernoon.com/so-you-want-to-build-a-p2p-twitter-wi... for an example), so this should be possible with scuttlebutt also. Could anyone explain further?

Post reply on HN