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

Neocities is implementing IPFS – distributed, permanent web

ipfs.io

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

231–240 of 249 posts

Re: Neocities is implementing IPFS – distributed, permanent web

#231

Post by npongratz »

paublyrne wrote: post #95
sdoering wrote: post #78

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Isn't the right to be forgotten something, that esp. relates to search engines? They (esp. Google) have to delete the links to this content, but the content can stay on the web forever. So this isn't per se a problem. But what happens, when I act as a "mirror" in this net and have mirrored some questionable content (who ever might define questionable is up to anybody to imagine). Will I get a shake down from the auth…

I don't believe that law should be shaped by technology in principle. It should be shaped by what the majority think is right for society. But the right to be forgotten is a flawed concept to me, and I think any tech that makes its implementation more problematic will do us a favour.

> It should be shaped by what the majority think is right for society.

I would kindly suggest that we consider examples from history when laws backed by the majority have resulted in horrifying, depraved violence and deprivation; then contemplate whether it is indeed moral to shape law through majority opinion.

Re: Neocities is implementing IPFS – distributed, permanent web

#232

Post by Trombone12 »

tokenizerrr wrote: post #99
skissane wrote: post #94

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The "right to be forgotten" applies to any information service, not just search engines. However, search engines are often easier legal targets since they do business in the EU and thus can be made subject to EU law. If I have no business in the EU, and post my website on a non-EU hosting provider, EU law can demand I take down a page but has no jurisdiction to force me or force my provider. But e.g. Google, since th…

As far as I'm aware that's simply not true. See http://ec.europa.eu/justice/data-protection/files/factsheets... Furthermore the right to be forgotten only mandates hiding results when someone searches specifically for a name, for example. The results are still allowed to come up for unrelated search terms.

More relevant, is that it seems safe to include the link even in name searches that also includes additional keywords, since google lost on account of them judging a very old news about him still relevant for listing in a general name query, and the court saying: not so.

Re: Neocities is implementing IPFS – distributed, permanent web

#233

Post by [deleted] »

kang wrote: post #178
cjbprime wrote: post #167

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> uses bittorrent trackers to identify the nodes in the network It's using a distributed hash table, not trackers. Nothing's completely decentralized; distributed hash tables are pretty good, since you can join them by talking to any participating node at all.

That is true for the data lookup part where DHTs are replacing DNS in a way put still the peers need to discover each other's ip in some way. I don't know what would be the term for it since it is not completely centralised, as in the nodes collectively form the system without any central coordination, but a new node joining in still needs some information to connect to the network from some source which could be den…

[deleted]

Re: Neocities is implementing IPFS – distributed, permanent web

#234

Post by cjbprime »

kang wrote: post #178
cjbprime wrote: post #167

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> uses bittorrent trackers to identify the nodes in the network It's using a distributed hash table, not trackers. Nothing's completely decentralized; distributed hash tables are pretty good, since you can join them by talking to any participating node at all.

That is true for the data lookup part where DHTs are replacing DNS in a way put still the peers need to discover each other's ip in some way. I don't know what would be the term for it since it is not completely centralised, as in the nodes collectively form the system without any central coordination, but a new node joining in still needs some information to connect to the network from some source which could be den…

The BitTorrent DHT's never been successfully attacked or blocked as far as I know. It doesn't seem like a big concern. There are millions of nodes and you only need to find out the IP:port of one of them.

Re: Neocities is implementing IPFS – distributed, permanent web

#235

Post by ZenPsycho »

zkhalique wrote: post #215
ZenPsycho wrote: post #92

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Couldn't you do group editing through using lisp inspired link lists? See a comment thread? CONS your comment onto the end of the comment thread and push into the ether, and notify about the new list head. Take other patterns from clojure immutable data structures for various other kinds of group edited time travelling sites

It might be possible to do some sort of self contained data structure that authenticates everybody and only allows authorized access to it, which solves the Byzantine Generals problem like BitCoin does, and which resists forking and instead uses vector clocks and Operational Transformations to consolidate actions done to the tree. But even so, how would it resolve conflicts? It could be a long time until a conflict i…

Why would you want to resist forking, and incur all that other complexity when you can just have an "authoritative" source for the entry point? Similarly, if someone wants to fork the conversation off and become a new "authoritative source" why would you need to stop them?

as for conflict resolution, merging, etc, it kind of looks like a (mostly) solved problem. I don't see how conflicts could occur in a comments stream. It's append-only.

Re: Neocities is implementing IPFS – distributed, permanent web

#236

Post by fizzbatter »

fizzbatter wrote: post #158

I love IPFS, the team has done an amazing job with the implementation. As much as i love it though, i can't help but feel https://morph.is/ 's technology of a Targetted Block is required for the web. I know that is outside of IPFS' specific scope, but is that something any of the IPFS/IPNS/IPN developers are thinking of? Being able to push data to a target seems to be a tool that will empower real change - not just s…

Not sure why the downvotes without explanation. I'm requesting legitimate discussion, so meaningless downvotes only harms the community imo.

Please contribute

Re: Neocities is implementing IPFS – distributed, permanent web

#237

Post by reit »

cel wrote: post #229
reit wrote: post #199

Earlier quoted context omitted.

1) 2) 3), yes, it is still possible to directly connect to specific peers through IPFS, see http://gateway.ipfs.io/ipfs/QmTkzDwWqPbnAh5YiV5VwcTLnGdwSNsN... I think that it should be possible to build hybrid centralized/decentralized sites with IPFS, with static public content being fully decentralized and sensitive information going through direct tunnels. Of course, the more decentralized your system the better. As…

> project out there to redo the IP system in a decentralized fashion https://github.com/cjdelisle/cjdns

That's the one. Juan mentioned it in one of his talks, said that it would be possible for IPFS to sit on top of that and use it as the network layer.

Re: Neocities is implementing IPFS – distributed, permanent web

#238

Post by richmarr »

sdoering wrote: post #79
_prometheus wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Two pieces of (coming soon) good news: - very soon, you wont need to install anything to use IPFS. it will "just work" with js on today's browsers. - for best perf, yes, we need browser implementations. and... those have begun :)

OK, as apparently .js is the defacto thing to build cool sites, I for one will be left out here. On sites not known to me, I typically block most (read all) .js at first, just to make sure that these sites do not leak too much information about me to external tracking tools, advertisers or the like. So using .js seems to me a bit problematic in regards of people not enabling it by default (but this is an absolut mino…

> OK, as apparently .js is the defacto thing to build cool sites, I for one will be left out here.

I doubt they're building it in JS for giggles.

In order to make changes like this stick my guess would be that you need to reach a tipping point before interest fades, and to do that you need to take away the browser vendors ability to say 'no' or 'maybe later'.

As you point out, people who don't run JS by default represent a tiny percentage of traffic, so would have to be a secondary concern to be supported later.

Re: Neocities is implementing IPFS – distributed, permanent web

#239

Post by synctext »

hosh wrote: post #101
_prometheus wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Thanks for the kind words. :) Come join us! https://github.com/ipfs/

You guys are great! :-)

Interesting project addressing linkrot and central servers. Hopefully this line of work will attract more attention and developers.

Sadly the design contains some flaws that need addressing. From their whitepaper (http://static.benet.ai/t/ipfs.pdf) The architecture is essentially creating 1 giant Bittorrent swarm where each piece may be seeded by different people. See section 3.4.4 of whitepaper. This approach suffers from the "double coincidence of wants" problem. There will be a billion items if this takes off. Matches are rare and could take hours/days.

"Aside from BitSwap, which is a novel protocol". These types of protocols have been worked on for over 8 years. Nobody has ever been able to protect them from an Eclipse or Sybil attack. Early work: http://www.seas.upenn.edu/~cse400/CSE400_2005_2006/Wang/Writ... Deployed system from my research group, improved upon for 7 years now: http://www.pds.twi.tudelft.nl/~pouwelse/A_network_science_pe...

Re: Neocities is implementing IPFS – distributed, permanent web

#240

Post by dandelion_lover »

sdoering wrote: post #79
_prometheus wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Two pieces of (coming soon) good news: - very soon, you wont need to install anything to use IPFS. it will "just work" with js on today's browsers. - for best perf, yes, we need browser implementations. and... those have begun :)

OK, as apparently .js is the defacto thing to build cool sites, I for one will be left out here. On sites not known to me, I typically block most (read all) .js at first, just to make sure that these sites do not leak too much information about me to external tracking tools, advertisers or the like. So using .js seems to me a bit problematic in regards of people not enabling it by default (but this is an absolut mino…

One solution for people like you (and me) who care about execution of too much js could be to make the code free software. You then can allow all free js in your browser by default. See [0] for details.

[0] https://www.fsf.org/campaigns/freejs

Post reply on HN