Web3 is expensive P2P • Hacker News Board

Re: Web3 is expensive P2P

#381

Post by the_other » Thu, May 19, 2022, 11:20 AM UTC

web4 wrote: post #375

the_other wrote: post #349

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Can you actually see the large game houses collaborating on the standards that would permit item game-interoperability? I’m struggling.

doubtful . these will come from creators and indie game devs first whenever they get over their hatred of crypto and blockchain. eventually major game houses and consoles will follow suit. similar thing happens in rest of digital art and media worlds. photographers, musicians, and artists all doing NFTs, then later Instagram, Spotify, Adobe, major art auction houses all begin to explore NFTs as they can then capture…

> doubtful . these will come from creators and indie game devs first whenever they get over their hatred of crypto and blockchain. eventually major game houses and consoles will follow suit.

The indies could do this without crypto. They'd need a standard, Drop-box, and to collaborate on a little messaging system so their payment DBs can update one another. Pow! Same functionality, equivalent level collaboration, no crypto-bro middlemen, 1000th the environmental burden.

Re: Web3 is expensive P2P

#382

Post by mpeg » Thu, May 19, 2022, 11:46 PM UTC

freeone3000 wrote: post #116

mpeg wrote: post #74

Earlier quoted context omitted.

People are also fine running their own Discord servers, just like they did IRC channels/networks back in the day.

You're not running discord servers on your own hardware, though. You don't have any of the data locally and it all goes through Discord's server. Actual decentralized services are fine as long as users can run it as easily as they can run a centralized application.

Most people didn’t run their own irc network either, they just operated a channel and backed up the data themselves.

Re: Web3 is expensive P2P

#383

Post by web4 » Sun, May 22, 2022, 4:10 PM UTC

the_other wrote: post #381

web4 wrote: post #375

Earlier quoted context omitted.

doubtful . these will come from creators and indie game devs first whenever they get over their hatred of crypto and blockchain. eventually major game houses and consoles will follow suit. similar thing happens in rest of digital art and media worlds. photographers, musicians, and artists all doing NFTs, then later Instagram, Spotify, Adobe, major art auction houses all begin to explore NFTs as they can then capture…

> doubtful . these will come from creators and indie game devs first whenever they get over their hatred of crypto and blockchain. eventually major game houses and consoles will follow suit. The indies could do this without crypto. They'd need a standard, Drop-box, and to collaborate on a little messaging system so their payment DBs can update one another. Pow! Same functionality, equivalent level collaboration, no c…

great! now Dropbox owns all of our assets instead of Steam. brilliant. /s

PoS removes the environmental burden.

Re: Web3 is expensive P2P

#384

Post by sliken » Thu, May 26, 2022, 4:16 AM UTC

threeseed wrote: post #306

Animats wrote: post #290

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Nothing wrong with p2p. But often it's simply overkill. P2P may have a comeback, because home connections are becoming more symmetrical. DSL usually had relatively low uplink rates, and COMCAST cable was worse. But fiber is usually symmetrical, and 5G wireless typically has an uplink bandwidth of half the downlink rate. This makes P2P more feasible.

You still need to solve the Wifi router issue. Automatically exposing ports is very flaky and doing so manually is way beyond the understanding of almost anyone.

IPv6 often "just works" and last I checked Google's traffic in the USA is over 45%. Makes P2P way easier.