Live data from Hacker News

The future is not self-hosted, but self-sovereign

robertmao.com

61–70 of 205 posts

Re: The future is not self-hosted, but self-sovereign

#61

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I have created nanotimestamps which basically allow you to embed a lot of data into blockchain itself with basically 0 gas fees. I don't really like crypto that much from a currency perspective given its history with scam but I like the technology just a little bit so I built it. If someone is interested on someway to monetize or I don't know just talk about it, I am more than happy to. Regarding zk human proves, the…

> I have created nanotimestamps which basically allow you to embed a lot of data into blockchain itself with basically 0 gas fees. How is this possible? Is it something that EVM-based chains can support? Curious to hear more. > Regarding zk human proves, there are some zkmail Zkmail doesn’t prove that you’re a unique human. Worldcoin does, but it requires trusting a single company with everyone’s iris data, which is…

Its really complicated but I will try to sum it up.

Basically nano cryptocurrency has no gas fees so if you can get even 10^-30 nano, you can technically do unlimited transactions forever (there is some caveat)

You can get such nano from faucets and then you have basically an eternal source of doing transactions.

What are transactions? Transactions are a way of sending money from A public key to B public key

Now what if we actually take some data and parse it into chunks and then we can create a lot of addresses using some vanity generator whose seed we can know

Then we got all the seeds of the vanity addresses whose lets say top 4 letters of the first address can form a word... now we do the transactions and then we take a transaction id and in the end we send money to original account

by that transaction id or that special account we can actually see a loop of sorts and thus tada! we get some data that we can actually store in blockchain itself.. for 0 fees!!

Now what was my use case! sounds really silly but I wanted to use worldoftext and I wanted to prove that I am the first person to write some text..

Now so what I did was take a unique hash of text and then embed it into blockchain.., and since blockchain has some time, we have essentially timestamped some text and we can also prove that we are the owner of the account that created that text...

Oh yeah, I have also created my own cryptocurrency which actually used algorand's vrf function with it to create a sort of way for randomness to be integrated in it too/ in sense create a cryptocurrency too with this usecase lol

Side note: in order to improve the efficiency you could lose the 10^-30 nano to send to a completely different account which we don't control and since most faucets give like 10^-10 nano ish and like honestly, that is a more practical approach

How is nano still alive? because for each transaction the person doing the transaction has to do some work function, I recommend the 2nd latter approach but I like both approaches. I have some bun code which can automate this whole thing too and Its all on github and uh my practical approach is with me T-T, I think I legit accidentally deleted it but uh yea I built it using claude and its kinda Ai slop but it works :/

Someone gifted me the domain name for my work and some dollars too, Y'know.. I personally feel like the thing that I did was really innovative and I am the most proud of it but I personally feel like the decentralization aspect would never make me earn a single cent out of it and that's okay to me but I don't have too much money and I wish someday that I could work on such things without thinking about money :/

Fun fact: nano cryptocurrency creator actually said on reddit that such behaviour is unintended and that's exactly what I like doing.. Doing unintended things to do something useful.

I also created a whole youtube video and some other which I might share privately https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8hHG8gOkZBE

I will update my HN to show some contact info I guess too

Re: The future is not self-hosted, but self-sovereign

#62
I am in the Philippines this week. I am hoping the future is one where everyone has reliable internet access. My self host stuff is not terribly useful without it.

Christ, the ISP's here need to learn about QoS. ISP's everywhere need to learn how to keep their DNS running well.

We have not yet solved the basics. Of course we cannot solve the hard stuff.

Re: The future is not self-hosted, but self-sovereign

#63
post #60

Deeply disagree. Looking at the current selfhosted landscape and saying "nice but nobody will want to do this" is like looking around in 1970 and saying "nobody will want to own computers, you just rent them for tasks". I say this after copious amounts of invested time over a timespan of 15 years to selfhost. The software landscape changed immensely. Especially now with AI, the software output and ability to learn is…

how are you disagreeing? self-hosting is not being ruled out. do you think me, my siblings, our parents and children, each of us should self-host their stuff when we could perfectly well just share one machine? we are going to trust each other. but why wouldn't we. it's easier to share our photo albums this way. it's that or facebook. pretty much. and again, self-hosting is not ruled out, it's still an option. what r…

> each of us should self-host their stuff when we could perfectly well just share one machine?

Actually yes. The golden rule of selfhosting is that you don't host for others. Then you are just hosting, with all the annoyance that comes with it. Also I might have different needs than my siblings, different software, settings and so on. Extreme example: police warrant for a sibling, and they take the family server away? Who is legally responsible for what is hosted there? Families could share a single car, or a single bathroom, realistically multiple families even - yet anyone who can afford it will opt to avoid that.

So along with sovereignty I will always opt for the most independence and freedom. The only reason people think otherwise is because because of alleged technical infeasibility.

Re: The future is not self-hosted, but self-sovereign

#64

Deeply disagree. Looking at the current selfhosted landscape and saying "nice but nobody will want to do this" is like looking around in 1970 and saying "nobody will want to own computers, you just rent them for tasks". I say this after copious amounts of invested time over a timespan of 15 years to selfhost. The software landscape changed immensely. Especially now with AI, the software output and ability to learn is…

> "nobody will want to own computers, you just rent them for tasks"

Very prescient indeed for someone in 1970 to predict the success of AWS

Re: The future is not self-hosted, but self-sovereign

#65
post #54
post #49

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That hypothetical self hosting appliance would require constant system administration work, far worse than even the most complex "smart" washing machine.

> constant system administration work why is that an inescapable truth? If the needs of such a self-hosted system is not changing, there's a theoretical argument that there shouldn't be any need to make administrative work. if the environment changes such that this need arises, like changing/new protocols, new services, etc, it stands to reason that the seller of this appliance would release a new version, or an upda…

No, but I don't host a mail server on it?

Re: The future is not self-hosted, but self-sovereign

#66
post #52

So far nobody explained one simple use case - self-hosted Instagram. How does that work? I want to see the pictures of my friends, and they want to see mine. And I also want to see the pictures of some influencers. What's the self-hosted Instagram setup that makes this work, while all the involved parties are self-hosted?

Federated social media through a common protocol.

For example: https://pixelfed.org/ Which is literally the fediverse alternative to instagram.

Re: The future is not self-hosted, but self-sovereign

#68
post #60

Earlier quoted context omitted.

how are you disagreeing? self-hosting is not being ruled out. do you think me, my siblings, our parents and children, each of us should self-host their stuff when we could perfectly well just share one machine? we are going to trust each other. but why wouldn't we. it's easier to share our photo albums this way. it's that or facebook. pretty much. and again, self-hosting is not ruled out, it's still an option. what r…

> each of us should self-host their stuff when we could perfectly well just share one machine? Actually yes. The golden rule of selfhosting is that you don't host for others. Then you are just hosting, with all the annoyance that comes with it. Also I might have different needs than my siblings, different software, settings and so on. Extreme example: police warrant for a sibling, and they take the family server away…

it's not technical infeasibility, it's lack of personal capacity, either skill or time wise. some people simply can't do that, so if i want them to share things with me i have to make it easy for them. the alternative is facebook (or something else like it).

and i am not talking about hosing for your own private use but for shared use. family photos for example, chats, other family stuff. there isn't going to be a warrant because i see everything that is posted. if he needs different software he can still host that himself, that's besides the point. i am not running a hosting service, i am running a platform for the family to use. a private facebook alternative.

i don't know about your family relationships, but for me family means to support and stand by each other.

Re: The future is not self-hosted, but self-sovereign

#69
post #60

Earlier quoted context omitted.

how are you disagreeing? self-hosting is not being ruled out. do you think me, my siblings, our parents and children, each of us should self-host their stuff when we could perfectly well just share one machine? we are going to trust each other. but why wouldn't we. it's easier to share our photo albums this way. it's that or facebook. pretty much. and again, self-hosting is not ruled out, it's still an option. what r…

> each of us should self-host their stuff when we could perfectly well just share one machine? Actually yes. The golden rule of selfhosting is that you don't host for others. Then you are just hosting, with all the annoyance that comes with it. Also I might have different needs than my siblings, different software, settings and so on. Extreme example: police warrant for a sibling, and they take the family server away…

Now you lost me. Expecting one server per person in a household is unrealistic. Even if software becomes perfect, what about the hardware aspect? Expecting a family of 5 to have 5 servers all available and reachable from anywhere sounds like a nightmare, and just a waste of electricity.

Your whole premise is that self hosting software can become a one-click deploy, if they can achieve that I'm sure different settings per user is possible. If who is legally responsible about what your brother does with the family serve is really such a big question, then let's just accept widely adoption of self hosting is not going to happen.

Re: The future is not self-hosted, but self-sovereign

#70

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> each of us should self-host their stuff when we could perfectly well just share one machine? Actually yes. The golden rule of selfhosting is that you don't host for others. Then you are just hosting, with all the annoyance that comes with it. Also I might have different needs than my siblings, different software, settings and so on. Extreme example: police warrant for a sibling, and they take the family server away…

Now you lost me. Expecting one server per person in a household is unrealistic. Even if software becomes perfect, what about the hardware aspect? Expecting a family of 5 to have 5 servers all available and reachable from anywhere sounds like a nightmare, and just a waste of electricity. Your whole premise is that self hosting software can become a one-click deploy, if they can achieve that I'm sure different settings…

if the servers are all in the same house then the police is not going to ask who's server they can take, they are just going to take all of them. so if that is a concern, it would be lost. but GP is not talking about people living together, but not sharing with relatives who live elsewhere.
Post reply on HN