Live data from Hacker News

Re-decentralizing the Web, for good this time

ruben.verborgh.org

31–40 of 295 posts

Re: Re-decentralizing the Web, for good this time

#31
post #29
post #8

I think the part ignored by so many is the need to decentralize the computers into the home. I'm not talking meshes or shared resources. For the majority of use cases, we don't need distributed storage, compute, etc. Just start making these self-hosted "servers", "data pods", etc as easy to install as desktop software and make it clear that they are inaccessible when the computer is off. People that aren't already wi…

First someone has to make a server that is perfectly secure and lasts for 50 years without any updates. It needs to be like a thermostat from the 1950s - maybe it lacks the latest features but it still works just the same as new. I'll accept maybe it only needs to last 10 years, but that is the minimum time. I have family to think about: I don't have time to update my servers every time some new zero-day is fixed. I'…

> First someone has to make a server that is perfectly secure and lasts for 50 years without any updates.

Nah, your auto-updating desktop is fine. The software itself might evolve to an hands-off, evergreen-type of approach, but for now just a desktop daemon is fine. The reason keeping servers updated seems so non-trivial is that we visualize it in an ops sense like we're at work.

Re: Re-decentralizing the Web, for good this time

#32
post #8

I think the part ignored by so many is the need to decentralize the computers into the home. I'm not talking meshes or shared resources. For the majority of use cases, we don't need distributed storage, compute, etc. Just start making these self-hosted "servers", "data pods", etc as easy to install as desktop software and make it clear that they are inaccessible when the computer is off. People that aren't already wi…

Setting aside the fact that most people would look unfavorably on yet another box in their homes, how does any of this help you avoid the blocking and tracking of the ISP?

Your ISP will still know what you are doing, and will have the ability to block you from doing it should the need arise.

I also feel like people are proposing solutions based on technologies as they stand today. Chosen solutions to the decentralization issue need to consider realistic future cases. Just as a quick thought experiment, what happens in the near future, say, 3 to 5 years out, when a huge chunk of people are using 5g technologies as their primary connections? AT&T, or sprint, or verizon, or what have you will still get all of your traffic information in this, very plausible, future case. "It's encrypted." or "It's going through a relay." Is just not a sufficient response to privacy if you wish to have privacy from AT&T. I mean, think about it, chances are, the relay will be using AT&T too.

Which brings me to the big problem with solutions like these, ie - inevitable recentralization. Google, or Facebook, (and now because of how this new decentralization idea works, even AT&T), are in an almost unassailable position to act as the "switchboard" for all of this non-indexed data. Need to know where your aunt, who just moved, is on this new decentralized network? Are you going to ask google? or "WeAreDecentralizationIdealists.com"? Oh, you're going to ask your own node? Sorry, her new information has not propagated to your node yet. Check back tomorrow. Oh forget it, just call your aunt and ask her to give you the new information so you can input it manually.

No, she will need to be registered somewhere to seamlessly communicate changes to her node's connection information. And that "somewhere" will likely be a BigCo.

If we want to replace the behemoths, we need to come up with solutions that are just as easy to use, (easier actually), and avoid any possible blocking or tracking. That requires some very creative people to think radically. Easily blockable in home network nodes I think, are not only not really solving the problems, but are also doomed to failure usability-wise when compared with google or facebook.

Re: Re-decentralizing the Web, for good this time

#33
post #20
post #8

I think the part ignored by so many is the need to decentralize the computers into the home. I'm not talking meshes or shared resources. For the majority of use cases, we don't need distributed storage, compute, etc. Just start making these self-hosted "servers", "data pods", etc as easy to install as desktop software and make it clear that they are inaccessible when the computer is off. People that aren't already wi…

Back when mobile devices were rare, skype used p2p and was very popular and novel. But then an increasing percentage of nodes were mobile with limited power, limited bandwidth, and much less storage. Even being a member of a DHT (a nice way for distributed peers to keep track of each other) is a prohibitive from a battery life and bandwidth perspective for phones. So Microsoft moved skype to a centralized service and…

> Most importantly, why would users care about decentralized vs centralized?

Probably few, except those actively searching for it. And, especially with decentralisation, the inevitable outcome of being too popular is that it starts to become centralised again, to make things easier.

Besides that, I thought for a moment about Apple's tech. If you and a friend have an iPhone and you're both trying to connect to the same network (and have each other in your contacts, I think), iOS will allow you to automatically share the credentials and connect the other phone too.

I reckon that you'd see a lot of value in that kind of device integration, which is essentially peer-to-peer.

Re: Re-decentralizing the Web, for good this time

#34
post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Try Sandstorm. Home servers are a very difficult sell (see $500 Helm) compared to VMs running in a data center and IMO the privacy difference is mostly illusory.

/me goes to sandstorm.io, click install, skip past the paid version on to self-host, see it only works on Linux, close tab ^ That is your expected reaction by normal desktop users. I mean literally download an exe and up pops up your feed ready to add your friends, or favorite businesses, news sites, link aggregators, etc given their onion ID (yes, onion ID is annoyingly large, especially v3, but discovery/identity c…

Truth. This stuff needs to be EASY. If I'm capable of setting up but too lazy, my mom stands zero chance.

Re: Re-decentralizing the Web, for good this time

#35
post #8

I think the part ignored by so many is the need to decentralize the computers into the home. I'm not talking meshes or shared resources. For the majority of use cases, we don't need distributed storage, compute, etc. Just start making these self-hosted "servers", "data pods", etc as easy to install as desktop software and make it clear that they are inaccessible when the computer is off. People that aren't already wi…

There should be a marketplace for apps running on home routers. It would change the Internet as we know it. Developers should be able to create router apps and submit them to marketplaces and users should be able to install router apps of their choice with just a few taps.

Routers have a few key advantages over most other computing devices owned by the public: routers normally have a public (non-NAT) IP address, they're always on, and battery power is not a concern. If people could install a Tor implementation on their router with just a few taps, Tor usage could expand dramatically. Developers of decentralized social networks might finally get a foothold once the installation problems are gone.

IMHO the best way to re-decentralize the Internet is by creating routers that host arbitrary apps, along with a marketplace of router apps.

The way to bootstrap this idea seems simple: sell a new router with a thin margin, provide SDKs for free, let developers charge what they want for the apps, and take a 30% cut from app purchases. The plan seems so clear that I wonder why I haven't yet heard of anyone doing it. :-)

Re: Re-decentralizing the Web, for good this time

#36

"In order to regain freedom and control over the digital aspects of our lives" Nothing proves his point more than:

This feels like the same argument: "Al Gore claims he's an environmentalist, yet he flies using his personal gas guzzling plane." And yeah, it's an ad hominem. "Is a fallacious argumentative strategy whereby genuine discussion of the topic at hand is avoided by instead attacking the character, motive, or other attribute of the person making the argument" You can most definitely use centralized servers to disseminate…

More specifically a Tu quoque / appeal to hypocrisy https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tu_quoque :-)

Re: Re-decentralizing the Web, for good this time

#37
post #32
post #8

I think the part ignored by so many is the need to decentralize the computers into the home. I'm not talking meshes or shared resources. For the majority of use cases, we don't need distributed storage, compute, etc. Just start making these self-hosted "servers", "data pods", etc as easy to install as desktop software and make it clear that they are inaccessible when the computer is off. People that aren't already wi…

Setting aside the fact that most people would look unfavorably on yet another box in their homes, how does any of this help you avoid the blocking and tracking of the ISP? Your ISP will still know what you are doing, and will have the ability to block you from doing it should the need arise. I also feel like people are proposing solutions based on technologies as they stand today. Chosen solutions to the decentraliza…

> Your ISP will still know what you are doing, and will have the ability to block you from doing it should the need arise.

Putting an automatically configured VPN on such a box would be extremely easy, no?

Re: Re-decentralizing the Web, for good this time

#38
post #32
post #8

I think the part ignored by so many is the need to decentralize the computers into the home. I'm not talking meshes or shared resources. For the majority of use cases, we don't need distributed storage, compute, etc. Just start making these self-hosted "servers", "data pods", etc as easy to install as desktop software and make it clear that they are inaccessible when the computer is off. People that aren't already wi…

Setting aside the fact that most people would look unfavorably on yet another box in their homes, how does any of this help you avoid the blocking and tracking of the ISP? Your ISP will still know what you are doing, and will have the ability to block you from doing it should the need arise. I also feel like people are proposing solutions based on technologies as they stand today. Chosen solutions to the decentraliza…

> Setting aside the fact that most people would look unfavorably on yet another box in their homes, how does any of this help you avoid the blocking and tracking of the ISP?

Meh, don't need another box, just keep the family desktop on. But even without that, there is still value. The ISP tracking isn't much of an issue using an existing network like Tor. Software starts up, reads the locally encrypted Sqlite DB for your list of "friends'" onion IDs and connects to your friends gRPC services they are hosting on their machines as onion services. Maintains that stream, begin receiving fed data from these other servers (locally caching as you receive which is more ideal in an ephemeral world than live retrieval, but can be a mix of both depending on settings). All without the ISP knowing a thing except that you are connected to Tor.

> Which brings me to the big problem with solutions like these, ie - inevitable recentralization.

Yup. Can't get easily get around this. People are going to gravitate towards what's easier and what they want on the outside ignoring what's on the inside. It happens to most continually adopted standards, even if it's just a more trusted server w/ more uptime. And that's ok, I don't want to win some ideological battle at the cost of user happiness. I completely agree the software must be so easy you can't tell what's under it, but I don't think it requires that radical/creative thinking. Just user-oriented effort instead of the constant barrage of difficult-to-setup tech demos.

Re: Re-decentralizing the Web, for good this time

#39
Maybe I missed it somewhere, but I didn't quite follow how this is going to gain a foothold. Solid has the same problem any new social media platform has - before people want to use it, people have to be using it. Facebook and Google certainly have no incentive to promote it.

Re: Re-decentralizing the Web, for good this time

#40
The web cannot be decentralized without putting an end to SSL. As long as certificate-issuers are the arbiters of commerce and browsers push users to trust unsecured websites more and more, malicious governments will be able to silence people by revoking their certs.

There are stronger alternatives. We need to make a push to begin using them.

Post reply on HN