Live data from Hacker News

Introducing Tent - the decentralized social web

tent.io

171–180 of 229 posts

Re: Introducing Tent - the decentralized social web

#171
post #97

A few years back, I started getting interested in a similar idea. I'm definitely intrigued in seeing how well it goes. Good luck to you. Of course, as ideas go, I allowed myself to think further into the possibilities, and found some interesting avenues. For instance, why allow the facebooks, twitters, etc to own domain over our content? Let people store their own data, and offer API endpoints giving facebook, twitte…

I have also thought about this idea that users of a social network could keep all their data and just let different clients (Facebook, Twitter) access it. I think it would be a great idea! If I want to change my email address? Change it in one place. If I want to let my friends know something? Update it in one place. It's very DRY you know? But then I think, why even let Facebook use my data? If we have these data st…

I've been thinking about this for a while too, and I agree that the peer-to-peer element is essential. So far, it appears that all the would-be open social media apps/protocols/whatever rely on you having your own server. That, frankly, is a deadly failing. Per Metcalfe's Law, social networks are only valuable when they are maximally inclusive, and the requirement to have your own server is something that will always exclude the majority of (non-technical) users. The need for easy non-technical access means that there are only two viable paths for any social media application. Either:

1.) Go to web page and use application, or 2.) Download app and use application

This is how Facebook / Twitter / etc. do it., and they're clearly doing it right. But there's no law which says that the application needs to keep its data on a third-party server. Why not have it run a Peer-to-peer service?

In fact, I think that Peer-to-peer is especially suitable to social networking, given that social networks are typically highly clustered (eg., people who are my friends are much more likely to be each others' friends as well). This means that if the every client application is able to redistribute copies of friends' status updates as well as its own status updates, then a sync between any given pair of clients is likely to allow them to bring a large subset of their friends' statuses up to date.

Of course if you're rebroadcasting your friends' status updates as a P2P host, then the question of spoofing/authentication becomes paramount. Obviously that would have to be solved by having all status updates transmitted in encrypted formats which can only be decrypted / authenticated with a users' public key.

Oh, and once you've got dual-key authentication embedded in widely-used social trust networks, you could probably solve a lot of other authentication problems while you're at it.

All of this would need to be completely transparent to the user, of course. If it's any more difficult to set up and use than standard Facebook / Twitter, it will fail. But I don't see any fundamental obstacles to making it that easy.

Unfortunately I don't have time to do anything about this!

Re: Introducing Tent - the decentralized social web

#173

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A DNS requires people to agree about who owns a certain identifier, which would be problematic in a decentralized system (though there are proposals like namecoin). I think a better system could be publishing a triple (name, keyfingerprint, current-server) on a shared datastore (e.g. DHT). The user doing the search would still need to find some out-of-protocol way to identify the right person, though. EDIT: Kadmelia…

Telehash would be pretty for the messaging, too. ;) http://telehash.org

Telehash discussion here: http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=4420634 - hopefully :)

Re: Introducing Tent - the decentralized social web

#174
post #97

A few years back, I started getting interested in a similar idea. I'm definitely intrigued in seeing how well it goes. Good luck to you. Of course, as ideas go, I allowed myself to think further into the possibilities, and found some interesting avenues. For instance, why allow the facebooks, twitters, etc to own domain over our content? Let people store their own data, and offer API endpoints giving facebook, twitte…

The applicability of this is limited. Why? Imagine trying to get this to work for your grandmother.

Re: Introducing Tent - the decentralized social web

#175
post #7

Why is it that every new protocol seems to want to piggy back on HTTP? It seems to me that maintaining state would be a useful feature for a social protocol. Another issue is that this assumes that the web will be the client of choice in the future... with mobile apps being as big as they are in the social space, this seems a bit shortsighted. Don't get me wrong, I like the idea behind having a "social server", but I…

My thoughts are similar. All due respect, this is a brittle approach and vary narrowly targeted.

Relying on HTTP, SSL, Ruby, JSON does not inspire confidence . When I see "Ruby 100%" on the github page for something that aims to move us forward out of centralisation, it makes me shudder. You need to think beyond the web, and get lower level (Tor hidden services, being outside the centralised web, are the right idea, but Tor has a certain stigma). You do need to get below the level of partisan languages- for a number of reasons, one of which is to make it open and easy for anyone to build on, not just web developers and people who know certain languages. That's a given. Get people connected (stateful) and all that will follow.

Something more like cjdns. It's the connection that's important, not the web or whatever else you chose to use the connection for. A webserver is one of many things that can be offered over a connection. I don't want to make the connection through an all-purpose application like a web browser, written by some company (Chrome in all its complex glory is trying to supplant your OS's DNS fer chrissakes, wake up- in the end, it's all about control). I want a very small and simple open source app that handles the connection to my peers and which works via the OS, not "the web". It makes the connection, keeps it alive and otherwise stays out of the way.

I think these kids need to go back to the drawing board. But anyone working on stuff like this should not give up!

Whatever the successor to centralised social networking is, it will largely be a matter of timing. The best solution might not prevail. Instead it might be the one that hits the news at exactly the right time and catches on for some unexplainable reason.

There will be more to come. That's a promise.

Re: Introducing Tent - the decentralized social web

#176
post #171

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I have also thought about this idea that users of a social network could keep all their data and just let different clients (Facebook, Twitter) access it. I think it would be a great idea! If I want to change my email address? Change it in one place. If I want to let my friends know something? Update it in one place. It's very DRY you know? But then I think, why even let Facebook use my data? If we have these data st…

I've been thinking about this for a while too, and I agree that the peer-to-peer element is essential. So far, it appears that all the would-be open social media apps/protocols/whatever rely on you having your own server. That, frankly, is a deadly failing. Per Metcalfe's Law, social networks are only valuable when they are maximally inclusive, and the requirement to have your own server is something that will always…

And even if it is just as easy, or easier, to set up as facebook or twitter, it still might fail because of the user and the egg problem.

As much as I would love to use and have a network like this, until all the people I keep in touch with through facebook use it, I'll still have a facebook.

I wonder if it's plausible, even possible, to have all those p2p benefits (encryption, authentication, privacy) and some how also have interoperability with facebook?

Re: Introducing Tent - the decentralized social web

#177

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But do you have any concrete suggestions of protocols, or are you criticizing the choice based on an hypothetical protocol that would be very similar but incompatible with HTTP and all its existing tools (millions of tested and deployed caching servers, load balancers, etc), and for which whole new libraries would have to be written, just so you can make it somewhat more efficient?

I think you're grossly over-estimating the difficulty of defining a protocol. It's no more difficult than defining the protocol for which you'll use HTTP as transport. Load balancers know how to load balance straight TCP. HTTP caching servers are an HTTP-centric idea. The 'libraries' you'll need can be much, much smaller when all you need is a bit of framing and serialization, instead of a complete complex RFC compli…

Yes, but who cares? You're just sending json down the wire. Fuck it.
Post reply on HN