Putting on my conspiracy hat, blocking the global web from within Russia would also make it easier to have huge sweeping "purges" toward targeted groups, without Western interference.
Distributed web not ready for Runet cutoff from the Internet
31–40 of 48 posts
Re: Distributed web not ready for Runet cutoff from the Internet
#32The sad reality of modern "decentralized" software is that organizations, people behind it don't even have any intentions to make it decentralized, to give up control, like BitTorrent did. Nobody cares about the main thing that decentralization is all about - making rule/law enforcement on others practically impossible. There was a great series of posts about decentralization from BitTorrent people recently: https://…
> the main thing that decentralization is all about - making rule/law enforcement on others practically impossible Citation needed. As far as I am aware, the main aim for dweb stuff is decentralisation , i.e. removing single points of failure, providing a more democratised means for people to store and distribute materials, and lofty-but-perhaps-unrealistic-ideas (if this article is accurate) about community networks…
If rules are enforceable on users of the system, you have too much authority in it, it cannot realistically be called a decentralized system. It's irrelevant if it happens to be a peer-to-peer system without a single point of failure on some level.
Re: Distributed web not ready for Runet cutoff from the Internet
#33The sad reality of modern "decentralized" software is that organizations, people behind it don't even have any intentions to make it decentralized, to give up control, like BitTorrent did. Nobody cares about the main thing that decentralization is all about - making rule/law enforcement on others practically impossible. There was a great series of posts about decentralization from BitTorrent people recently: https://…
> The sad reality of modern "decentralized" software is that organizations, people behind it don't even have any intentions to make it decentralized, to give up control All the examples of decentralized software mentioned in the article are fully open source. They don't need to "give up control", because they are not necessarily in control . It is of course true that they run the most used implementation of the softw…
Those people have to put a lot of work to make sure decentralization actually happens, to incentivize others to make and promote other implementations, etc. But they don't even want to talk about it. They want everyone to use the thing they control. There is no decentralization here at all.
Re: Distributed web not ready for Runet cutoff from the Internet
#34Earlier quoted context omitted.
> the main thing that decentralization is all about - making rule/law enforcement on others practically impossible Citation needed. As far as I am aware, the main aim for dweb stuff is decentralisation , i.e. removing single points of failure, providing a more democratised means for people to store and distribute materials, and lofty-but-perhaps-unrealistic-ideas (if this article is accurate) about community networks…
If rules are enforceable on users of the system, you have too much authority in it, it cannot realistically be called a decentralized system. It's irrelevant if it happens to be a peer-to-peer system without a single point of failure on some level.
What are you talking about?
Re: Distributed web not ready for Runet cutoff from the Internet
#35The sad reality of modern "decentralized" software is that organizations, people behind it don't even have any intentions to make it decentralized, to give up control, like BitTorrent did. Nobody cares about the main thing that decentralization is all about - making rule/law enforcement on others practically impossible. There was a great series of posts about decentralization from BitTorrent people recently: https://…
That was an interesting read, thank you.
Re: Distributed web not ready for Runet cutoff from the Internet
#36Earlier quoted context omitted.
> The sad reality of modern "decentralized" software is that organizations, people behind it don't even have any intentions to make it decentralized, to give up control All the examples of decentralized software mentioned in the article are fully open source. They don't need to "give up control", because they are not necessarily in control . It is of course true that they run the most used implementation of the softw…
Those people have to put a lot of work to make sure decentralization actually happens, to incentivize others to make and promote other implementations, etc. But they don't even want to talk about it. They want everyone to use the thing they control. There is no decentralization here at all.
> But they don't even want to talk about it.
I think that's a broad generalization, perhaps of your own experiences. There are enough people on the cutting edge that you can constructively talk with.
But remember it's still a meritocracy: 'they' might listen to you, but will only take you seriously if you present your own work to them.
Re: Distributed web not ready for Runet cutoff from the Internet
#37> Russia is preparing a nation-wide experiment where the whole country temporarily disconnects from the global Internet to see if the country can rely on Runet alone I think this is lie, fake news and misinformation. I tried to find the source of it. Lots of site quote RBC website (more or less respectful news agency in Russia). The closest article on this subject is this: https://www.rbc.ru/technology_and_media/08/0…
There is a source for this from Newsweek at the bottom of the original article. It’s been reported by the BBC as well.
Re: Distributed web not ready for Runet cutoff from the Internet
#38Hm, I had thought that go-ipfs saved some swarm peers between sessions, but reading over the docs now I see no evidence of this.
There is no implementation of this in their code either.
Re: Distributed web not ready for Runet cutoff from the Internet
#39One of them that will, or at least should be able to continue, is scuttlebutt. Scuttlebutt clients on an isolated LAN can share messages with each other. To go beyond the LAN, you point at a "pub server", which anyone can host anywhere. Yes, only russian-based pub servers will be available, and that assumes they are using russian based DNS to point to them (or have a known static IP). However, for the test of communi…
Both IPFS and Dat will also have working peer-discovery on an isolated LAN as well.
Re: Distributed web not ready for Runet cutoff from the Internet
#40One of them that will, or at least should be able to continue, is scuttlebutt. Scuttlebutt clients on an isolated LAN can share messages with each other. To go beyond the LAN, you point at a "pub server", which anyone can host anywhere. Yes, only russian-based pub servers will be available, and that assumes they are using russian based DNS to point to them (or have a known static IP). However, for the test of communi…
Are there any Russia-based pub servers for Scuttlebutt? Are clients configured to use these by default? Do they rely on any outside infrastructure (e.g. an authoritative DNS server located outside of Russia)?