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

Gitchain: Decentralized P2P Git Repos aka "Git meets Bitcoin"

kickstarter.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 45 posts

Re: Gitchain: Decentralized P2P Git Repos aka "Git meets Bitcoin"

#31

Post by rcpt »

Taek wrote: post #29
rcpt wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I agree. The idea is to safeguard against github going down by storing data in a dht. I don't see why just hosting a repository on https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/MaidSafe won't work here.

MaidSAFE doesn't have any releases yet. It would work but the software isn't complete yet. At 7 years and counting, you can't be sure that anything is around the corner.

Here they mention that the testnet will be available in a few weeks https://groups.google.com/forum/m/#!topic/maidsafe-developme...

Re: Gitchain: Decentralized P2P Git Repos aka "Git meets Bitcoin"

#33

Post by pjc50 »

colordrops wrote: post #30
voltagex_ wrote: post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You should see some of the stuff that's in the Bitcoin blockchain... one day the community is going to have to make a decision on how to purge that data.

What could possibly be so bad as to have every single node in the network compromise the blockchain?

At a guess, child porn which would make it illegal to posess?

Re: Gitchain: Decentralized P2P Git Repos aka "Git meets Bitcoin"

#34

Post by chuckup »

I find it interesting you are using kickstarter to fund this, when everyone (and their dog) seems to get ridiculous amounts of BTC thrown at them when they post their project ideas to bitcointalk. Why not raise funds in BTC?

Also, in this thread you say "There are proof of storage techniques" - I have seen others talk about this (paying people to store data: StorJ, maidsafe) and it seems flawed - you can never know how many copies of your data are truly floating around. If you give me a financial incentive to store "multiple copies of data" I will do it in the cheapest possible way, which means storing it on 1 machine and lying about it.

There is a big difference between storing 20 copies of a file on 1 hard drive vs 1 copy x 20 hard drives, but there is no algorithm that can tell me (the file owner) which is occurring. How do you plan on monetizing "store other people's data" fairly?

Re: Gitchain: Decentralized P2P Git Repos aka "Git meets Bitcoin"

#35

Post by zimbatm »

cjbprime wrote: post #13
yrashk wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The object themselves are stored across the peers, not the connection information.

Please could you explain why? Trackerless bittorrent is just as decentralized, and seems more scalable.

Does trackerless bittorrent provide a way to update a file ?

The git objects themselves are content-addressable (the key is the hash of the value) but you still need a unique ID that references the HEAD of this chain of objects. This id needs to be updateable.

Re: Gitchain: Decentralized P2P Git Repos aka "Git meets Bitcoin"

#36

Post by u124556 »

kolev wrote: post #24

Just because you can do something in the blockchain, it doesn't mean you should . The blockchain is a good innovation, but it's not gonna complete with the status quo.

I don't think it's meant to replace the status quo but to add a way to keep repositories that the status quo would refuse to host themselves.

Re: Gitchain: Decentralized P2P Git Repos aka "Git meets Bitcoin"

#37

Post by joeyh »

Here are two ways to decentralize git usefully:

1. Add the ability to git push over git:// to any git repository, which results in a patch being presented to the repository owner in some useful way Ie, reverse github pull requests, that work anywhere. http://joeyh.name/blog/entry/idea:_git_push_requests/

2. True P2P git pull/push over telehash. Something I plan to implement as soon as there's a working telehash implementation. Will allow peers to collaborate from anywhere without a central point of control, and with built-in encryption too. http://telehash.org/

(To be clear, telehash has a DHT, but it's used to find routes to peers, not for distributed data storage.)

Re: Gitchain: Decentralized P2P Git Repos aka "Git meets Bitcoin"

#38

Post by patrickaljord »

joeyh wrote: post #37

Here are two ways to decentralize git usefully: 1. Add the ability to git push over git:// to any git repository, which results in a patch being presented to the repository owner in some useful way Ie, reverse github pull requests, that work anywhere. http://joeyh.name/blog/entry/idea:_git_push_requests/ 2. True P2P git pull/push over telehash. Something I plan to implement as soon as there's a working telehash imple…

There doesn't seem to be any code for these though. Gitchain has a (very early) prototype https://github.com/gitchain/gitchain

Re: Gitchain: Decentralized P2P Git Repos aka "Git meets Bitcoin"

#39

Post by wmf »

chuckup wrote: post #34

I find it interesting you are using kickstarter to fund this, when everyone (and their dog) seems to get ridiculous amounts of BTC thrown at them when they post their project ideas to bitcointalk. Why not raise funds in BTC? Also, in this thread you say "There are proof of storage techniques" - I have seen others talk about this (paying people to store data: StorJ, maidsafe) and it seems flawed - you can never know h…

Maybe you could use erasure coding instead of replication so that dedupe isn't possible. There's still a Sybil attack where multiple blocks end up getting deleted by the same peer.

Re: Gitchain: Decentralized P2P Git Repos aka "Git meets Bitcoin"

#40

Post by im3w1l »

wmf wrote: post #39
chuckup wrote: post #34

I find it interesting you are using kickstarter to fund this, when everyone (and their dog) seems to get ridiculous amounts of BTC thrown at them when they post their project ideas to bitcointalk. Why not raise funds in BTC? Also, in this thread you say "There are proof of storage techniques" - I have seen others talk about this (paying people to store data: StorJ, maidsafe) and it seems flawed - you can never know h…

Maybe you could use erasure coding instead of replication so that dedupe isn't possible. There's still a Sybil attack where multiple blocks end up getting deleted by the same peer.

You have to make sure that somehow the person storing the erasure codes can't first deduce the original data, and then from this regenerate the erasure codes. Maybe that is not a hard problem?
Post reply on HN