Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Why Decentralised Applications Don’t Work

ingrids.space

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

21–30 of 311 posts

Re: Why Decentralised Applications Don’t Work

#21

Post by swiley »

thesausageking wrote: post #12

The author's definition of what makes a "decentralized application" is too strong and I don't agree that email isn't an example of a decentralized application. She argues that it's not because it's really hard to run your own mail server. To me, "decentralized" doesn't mean every user has to run their own node. It means it's an open network, anyone can join, and there's no centralized control / censorship. You can bu…

It's important to be able to pick which server you use, if only servers maintained by app developers are allowed companies like Apple dictate the moderation policies.

Re: Why Decentralised Applications Don’t Work

#22

Post by c01n »

endisneigh wrote: post #11

Is there even a single decentralized app that is mainstream? BitTorrent is great but I wouldn’t exactly call it mainstream. I do wish more sites used it for downloads though. I haven’t sat down and researched this, but an argument could be made that inherently a centralized app, who is trusted, available and resilient, will always be superior. Any thoughts?

> Is there even a single decentralized app that is mainstream?

www

Re: Why Decentralised Applications Don’t Work

#23

Post by dominojab »

ClumsyPilot wrote: post #14
marcinjachymiak wrote: post #8

This is a really myopic view on uses of crypto and the BitTorrent protocol. There's so much more going on than criminal applications. BitTorrent is used in a lot of settings for data distribution and for software distribution. Saying it's just for pirating reveals the author's laziness. Several of these use-cases are listed in the wikipedia page: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/BitTorrent As for crypto, I recommend peo…

If bittorent is used by hundreds of millions of people, if thsts not mainstream then nothing is. How it's being used is a different problem, but it's certainly effective and popular.

Its used by hundreds of millions to share popular files between themselves. Sharing files 1:1 is easier and more efficient with sFTP or other protocols.

Re: Why Decentralised Applications Don’t Work

#25

Post by tartoran »

bawolff wrote: post #13
thesausageking wrote: post #12

The author's definition of what makes a "decentralized application" is too strong and I don't agree that email isn't an example of a decentralized application. She argues that it's not because it's really hard to run your own mail server. To me, "decentralized" doesn't mean every user has to run their own node. It means it's an open network, anyone can join, and there's no centralized control / censorship. You can bu…

I think that's the problem with 99% of articles about decentralized/federated/etc systems. Nobody can agree on what properties they want and everyone ends up talking past each other.

Exactly that is both the strength and the weakness. The strength consists in the inability of any one party to dominate the network. The weakness is the noise and ineffectiveness of communication.

Re: Why Decentralised Applications Don’t Work

#26

Post by pixodaros »

reidjs wrote: post #7

As someone who’s made and used a few dapps that “worked” and made a (small) profit, I would recommend passing on this article.

I certainly found it simpler to hard-code my own website than make either Wordpress or Hugo do what I wanted it to do. My host provides metrics and all the technical things with DNS, and search engines and my own network deliver me visitors. Browsers in 2021 are very powerful at turning simple HTML into something pretty. If one search engine blacklisted my site, people who are in to what I am in to would switch to another which does not.

I think that the "abusive relationship with platforms like Medium, Twitter, and Instagram" is mostly psychological.

Re: Why Decentralised Applications Don’t Work

#27

Post by granshaw »

thesausageking wrote: post #12

The author's definition of what makes a "decentralized application" is too strong and I don't agree that email isn't an example of a decentralized application. She argues that it's not because it's really hard to run your own mail server. To me, "decentralized" doesn't mean every user has to run their own node. It means it's an open network, anyone can join, and there's no centralized control / censorship. You can bu…

IMO what you’re describing is usually not considered “decentralized”, but rather “open protocols” or “open standards”

Re: Why Decentralised Applications Don’t Work

#28

Post by GuB-42 »

endisneigh wrote: post #11

Is there even a single decentralized app that is mainstream? BitTorrent is great but I wouldn’t exactly call it mainstream. I do wish more sites used it for downloads though. I haven’t sat down and researched this, but an argument could be made that inherently a centralized app, who is trusted, available and resilient, will always be superior. Any thoughts?

Email is a great example, despite what the article says. You can certainly have email without Google. If fact, Microsoft may actually be bigger in the business world.

A lot of large companies also run their own servers, consumers can use icloud, protonmail, yahoo,... or the one from their ISP.

The argument in the article is that GMail controls email. It is definitely not true. Email is still how people do business, and business email is not owned by Google.

Re: Why Decentralised Applications Don’t Work

#29

Post by quelsolaar »

Whats the biggest downside to having all the data? You are responsible for it.

Google, Twitter and Facebook, store and link to data and are therefor responsible for all kinds of things, like keeping porn away from kids, securing data, dealing with privacy, verifying age, dealing with local laws, managing the needs of rights holders, moderating discussions, deciding if Donald trump should be banned or not and so on, all while paying big $ to store all this crap. They are put in an impossible position that is taking a big tole on all of them, and may even give them so many political enemies that they get broken up.

A smart designer of a Decentralized application could see not storing data in a centralized storage, as an advantage because it lets them side step all of these problems.

Re: Why Decentralised Applications Don’t Work

#30

Post by monocasa »

granshaw wrote: post #27
thesausageking wrote: post #12

The author's definition of what makes a "decentralized application" is too strong and I don't agree that email isn't an example of a decentralized application. She argues that it's not because it's really hard to run your own mail server. To me, "decentralized" doesn't mean every user has to run their own node. It means it's an open network, anyone can join, and there's no centralized control / censorship. You can bu…

IMO what you’re describing is usually not considered “decentralized”, but rather “open protocols” or “open standards”

I don't think so as there exist centralized, open protocols.

Email is (at the server level) a peer to peer network, only tied to DNS/BGP as the only central points, with a global namespace. That can't be said for a lot of open standards.

Post reply on HN