51–60 of 90 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
There's a bunch of these things, regrettably.
For example, could you please provide at least 3 (a bunch) examples which are in production?
just this week I saw https://adamant.im
There was a thing called "my echo" (which appears to have failed/been cancelled).
Earlier quoted context omitted.
For example, could you please provide at least 3 (a bunch) examples which are in production?
I don't really keep track of those things, but I can give you two attempts without much searching: just this week I saw https://adamant.im There was a thing called "my echo" (which appears to have failed/been cancelled).
Earlier quoted context omitted.
If you actually put the content of the messages on the blockchain itself it'll become ridiculously expensive really fast. Furthermore if you actually wait until a message gets mined to be accepted it's not going to be exactly "instant" messaging. What would be the point anyway? A dedicated peer-to-peer messaging network that doesn't need to keep track of the entire history of everything seems much more appropriate. I…
My original comment was a little bit sarcastic, but seriously - why not? I understand that a single blockchain will not handle global scale messaging. But a set of federated installations, could that work?
Because in engineering, the question is not "why not", but "why". Blockchains are not the default answer. What positive virtue is blockchain going to bring to your IM system that is not better attained by a non-blockchain-based solution?
If you can answer that, great. I'm not saying this has no answer. I'm just saying it's the real question.
If you are going to say the word "federated", then from what I can see, trying to do "blockchain" at that point isn't all that helpful and likely to be worse and harder than just trying to develop a federated system, a sufficient challenge on its own that doesn't strike me as greatly helped by "blockchains". XMPP already does federated IM, since long before the current fad.
I match any vague handwaves about identity or security with vague handwaves at existing SSL certificate authorities, and an observation that if you're going to complain about the security of such things I get to apply an equal amount of effort towards breaking your blockchain solution, e.g., if you're going to complain about nationstates getting root certificates they shouldn't, I get to point out your tiny little blockchain for IMs is equally vulnerable, if not more so.
And we already had DHT before serverless became a thing... sigh
As a browser author, are there any alternate implementations of WebRTC besides the one all of the browsers use? From my research I was kind of shocked that the answer might be no.
Surprisingly large amount of dependencies in a conforming implementation. (e.g. SCTP for datachannels!)
> That means the "servers" hosting it are distributed across a wide network. This is a strange way of saying "you're looking at this site through one centralised server hosted at ipfs.io". Don't get me wrong, IPFS is great. I have released an application that works over IPFS. But I don't think obscuring the difference between a gateway and a node is beneficial. I think the difference needs to be highlighted front and…
Interesting, why there is still no chat-on-blockchain thing. Sounds like an obvious idea for an ICO.
Can we stop calling everything "serverless"? It's a stupid name. I assume it means peer-to-peer here right?
No it doesn't mean peer-to-peer here. It means that there is no one server but a lot and in fact the 'server' is abstracted away from the developer so he sees no server (serverless). I think Wikipedia has a nice explanation of the term: Serverless computing is a cloud-computing execution model in which the cloud provider dynamically manages the allocation of machine resources. Pricing is based on the actual amount of…
I wanted to write that there is another similar project based on Beaker Browser (P2P) browser, that uses dat protocol and direct streaming to another browser... but I can't find it. https://beakerbrowser.com/
I never understood how Beaker browser can act as a server listening on a port. It sounds like you always need relays on the internet because your router and ISP is gonna block all ports unless requested not to. Read this: https://www.scuttlebutt.nz/stories/design-challenge-avoid-ce...
I wanted to write that there is another similar project based on Beaker Browser (P2P) browser, that uses dat protocol and direct streaming to another browser... but I can't find it. https://beakerbrowser.com/
I never understood how Beaker browser can act as a server listening on a port. It sounds like you always need relays on the internet because your router and ISP is gonna block all ports unless requested not to. Read this: https://www.scuttlebutt.nz/stories/design-challenge-avoid-ce...
Responding to GP, you probably mean https://github.com/cabal-club/, which is a WIP and relies on some new protocol features not in Beaker yet, but usable in the CLI as I understand it