Decentralize All the Things
techcrunch.com
Decentralize All the Things
1–10 of 68 posts
Re: Decentralize All the Things
#2Uhhh, either I don't get what they are trying to say or the article doesn't really say anything at all?
They state the example that a bitcoin like blockchain isn't the right solution for distributed email? Well no shit? A few paragraphs before that they even say "blockchain is a distributed database", well you don't want a distributed database to deliver messages to individuals.
And yes, torrent doesn't need a database everyone agrees upon to distribute Linux ISOs, obviously.
And uhh, yes different protocols for different usecases are needed? What does that have to do with making more thinkgs work the way bittorrent does?
Bitcoin distributes its database "like bittorrent does". And on top of that there's stuff to make everyone agree what goes into that database. For for torrent you give people a hash of the file they'll have in the end because the file doesn't change. Otherwise it's just as peer to peer, distributing the blockchain should be just as fast as torrent, agreeing upon stuff isn't.
Here's a proposed protocol for distributed mail: https://bitmessage.org/wiki/Main_Page
Did I miss the message they were trying to convey?
Re: Decentralize All the Things
#3I predict that "decentralized" will be the next big buzzword. That is all.
Re: Decentralize All the Things
#4Uhhh, either I don't get what they are trying to say or the article doesn't really say anything at all? They state the example that a bitcoin like blockchain isn't the right solution for distributed email? Well no shit? A few paragraphs before that they even say "blockchain is a distributed database", well you don't want a distributed database to deliver messages to individuals. And yes, torrent doesn't need a databa…
The article is only attempting to get the news out that there's an emerging movement to decentralize, and that the underlying technologies aren't baked. If you knew that already, you probably didn't get a ton out of the article.
Re: Decentralize All the Things
#5I predict that "decentralized" will be the next big buzzword. That is all.
I'll see your bet, and raise you: "Block chain computing."
Re: Decentralize All the Things
#6Everybody has a project they kick around in the back of their head but will probably never get around to doing.
My project is an O/S. It should be built from the ground up to be networkable, self-updating, and handle biometrics and P2P trust. And of course heavy use of encryption. In addition, it should operate along two streams: everything should have an execute and a verify stream running simultaneously.
The reason this is my dream project is that we've reached the point where several weaknesses of the existing architecture are coming together to create problems. They need to be solved at the lowest level possible in the stack.
I agree with the author: the initial decentralized nature of the internet has been perverted by all of the major players. There is a brutal fight underway by big companies trying to build walled gardens. These companies do not have my best interests in mind.
Re: Decentralize All the Things
#7Uhhh, either I don't get what they are trying to say or the article doesn't really say anything at all? They state the example that a bitcoin like blockchain isn't the right solution for distributed email? Well no shit? A few paragraphs before that they even say "blockchain is a distributed database", well you don't want a distributed database to deliver messages to individuals. And yes, torrent doesn't need a databa…
> They state the example that a bitcoin like blockchain isn't the right solution for distributed email? Well no shit? A few paragraphs before that they even say "blockchain is a distributed database", well you don't want a distributed database to deliver messages to individuals.
I think what they were going for was that the blockchain would act as a central point of organization for a distributed network of peers that are performing the actual task of sending messages.
You're right that the article led to no conclusion though. I felt like I hadn't consumed any content. But then I kind of expected that from an article like this on Techcrunch.
Re: Decentralize All the Things
#8[deleted]
Re: Decentralize All the Things
#9I have been playing with an idea to decentralize search (or, more generally, information processing).
I would consist of
- a publicly available hierarchical type system (similar to how classes look like in an OOP language with multiple inheritance). For example, URL is a type, or set of search terms is a type.
- any number of nodes on the net. Each of them would provide a mapping from a set of input data to a set of output data (data is defined in the terms of the types). For example, Google would provide a mapping from set of search terms to URLs, but that's a very generic node.
- the nodes also advertise the cost of one mapping operation. The cost is given in some kind of currency (?).
- there should be routers that can find a route between a set of input types to a set of output types. The route is composed of nodes, obviously, that pass information between them and finally the output is the stuff the user wanted.
- the user pays the sum of the cost needed for his query (transformation)
- the user could pay nothing if some nodes have negative cost. There could be a node that takes a set of URLs (search results) and produces a set of URLs that are basically the original URLs + some advertisements. Therefore if somebody specifies that he wants a transformation from types X to types Z (and provides data of types X) under cost C, then the routers should find a set of nodes under these constraints
- nodes could provide mappings that are the same as other nodes, and the routers would slowly insert them into mapping chains, and rate them based on some user feedback (this is essentially a genetic algorithm)
This system could very much help good competition in the distributed information processing industry. Nowadays nobody can really compete with Google or Bing because you need to build _everything_ in one step. A distributed infrastructure like this that's based on the evolution of components would lower the barriers to entry dramatically. Also, data would be shared across participants, not owned only by the one single market leader.
Ok, this is just a very naive and early idea, and it's also too big to implement in my spare time at the moment, but I think it'd be an interesting way to apply the good old Unix principles for building internet services.
Re: Decentralize All the Things
#10Uhhh, either I don't get what they are trying to say or the article doesn't really say anything at all? They state the example that a bitcoin like blockchain isn't the right solution for distributed email? Well no shit? A few paragraphs before that they even say "blockchain is a distributed database", well you don't want a distributed database to deliver messages to individuals. And yes, torrent doesn't need a databa…
Did I miss the message they were trying to convey?
Nope, you had it in your first sentience, the article doesn't really say anything at all. I've recently started considering TC's coverage "tech-adjacent", a poorly-formed idea that their target audience is people who work in or with tech-heavy fields, but would never be called on to design or implement systems themselves. TC can talk tech-adjacent stuff to techies, or tech to tech-adjacent, but talking tech to techies elicits a uncanny vally-ish reaction.
FWIW, I think what the article inadvertently speaks to is that the apprehensiveness to strongly centralized systems I've watched grow for at least a decade is starting to resonate with even more people.