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

Holepunch Unveils P2P Platform "Pear Runtime"

pears.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

41–50 of 56 posts

Re: Holepunch Unveils P2P Platform "Pear Runtime"

#41

Post by api »

zrm wrote: post #24
api wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No it's mostly the battery limitations. Keeping links open P2P requires keepalive because NATs will time out. Even with IPv6 there are usually stateful firewalls in the way that will time out. This means you're constantly sending little packets, and if you have a lot of links there's a lot of keep alive cycles that have to be serviced. This keeps radios and baseband hardware from being able to sleep, draining the bat…

This seems like it should be solvable by having the stateful firewall support e.g. Port Control Protocol (RFC6887). Obviously that has to be done by the network rather than the client, but what's stopping them? It can't be resource consumption, it's an efficiency measure for the network too and "we don't kill your battery life" is an advertisable feature.

Mobile carriers have less than zero incentive to do this, so it’s dead.

Middle boxes in general have to be treated like natural laws or acts of god by developers. There’s like zero chance of affecting them outside the very narrow homelab segment. Even enterprise vendors generally can’t persuade companies to alter policies there.

Re: Holepunch Unveils P2P Platform "Pear Runtime"

#42

Post by broken-kebab »

rglullis wrote: post #39
garydevenay wrote: post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[flagged]

The fact that you are using loaded words (stolen from the population) and putting words in my mouth (by asserting that I agree with banks getting bailouts) shows that you are absolutely dishonest.

But exchange like:

- A is better than B!

- B has bailouts fearure!

Clearly implies that you either really mentioned bailouts as a positive feature, or that commentary of yours makes no sense. Why do you call your opponent dishonest? If you mean something else it's probably better to explain than to immediately enter holywar mode.

Re: Holepunch Unveils P2P Platform "Pear Runtime"

#43

Post by rglullis »

broken-kebab wrote: post #42
rglullis wrote: post #39

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The fact that you are using loaded words (stolen from the population) and putting words in my mouth (by asserting that I agree with banks getting bailouts) shows that you are absolutely dishonest.

But exchange like: - A is better than B! - B has bailouts fearure! Clearly implies that you either really mentioned bailouts as a positive feature, or that commentary of yours makes no sense. Why do you call your opponent dishonest? If you mean something else it's probably better to explain than to immediately enter holywar mode.

My point is that you can not compare Tether with a bank and say "Tether has more reserves than banks" and ignore why it is so.

It's pure gaslighting and I'm honestly surprised that so many people are buying this bullshit.

Re: Holepunch Unveils P2P Platform "Pear Runtime"

#44

Post by actionfromafar »

rglullis wrote: post #31
oohffyvfg wrote: post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

because using kleptocurrencies implies bad engineering decisions. code will likely have Blockchain were you could have used a queue, etc. it's like seeing something was a java applet or activex component in the 2000s

Non-sequitur.

Yes, I guess. But it's still a signal if you are in a hurry.

Re: Holepunch Unveils P2P Platform "Pear Runtime"

#45

Post by humbleferret »

jmakov wrote: post #36

Any particular reason their products are a downloadable app instead of a web app running in the browser? Like write it in Rust, compile to Wasm, call it a day. Or am I missing sth?

I can't speak for Rust+Wasm, but I would assume that web applications might face performance issues. Additionally, there could be WebRTC blocking by some ISPs, potentially leading to a less consistent user experience.

Re: Holepunch Unveils P2P Platform "Pear Runtime"

#46

Post by humbleferret »

mempko wrote: post #18

Love to see P2P coming back. Back in 2013 I built a P2P application platform called Firestr ( https://www.firestr.com ) that was targeted as an all in one platform to build and share graphical P2P apps. The apps were built using a built-in collaborative app editor. You could build P2P apps with friends using P2P! You create a conversation with one or more people and can then launch apps into that conversation. The pe…

That's really cool—big props to you! Really dig being able to effortlessly create and share graphical P2P apps with others.

I'm keen to test this with others and dive deeper. The docs were a bit vague on what 'identity' means—is it just a username, or more like a public key? The idea of connecting or 'joining' others in P2P apps seems complex for many. Sharing keys or long strings might be intimidating for widespread use.

Did Firestr gain much traction? Was there an effort to expand it? It seems like an opportune moment for a comeback!

Re: Holepunch Unveils P2P Platform "Pear Runtime"

#48

Post by mempko »

humbleferret wrote: post #46
mempko wrote: post #18

Love to see P2P coming back. Back in 2013 I built a P2P application platform called Firestr ( https://www.firestr.com ) that was targeted as an all in one platform to build and share graphical P2P apps. The apps were built using a built-in collaborative app editor. You could build P2P apps with friends using P2P! You create a conversation with one or more people and can then launch apps into that conversation. The pe…

That's really cool—big props to you! Really dig being able to effortlessly create and share graphical P2P apps with others. I'm keen to test this with others and dive deeper. The docs were a bit vague on what 'identity' means—is it just a username, or more like a public key? The idea of connecting or 'joining' others in P2P apps seems complex for many. Sharing keys or long strings might be intimidating for widespread…

Thanks for the positive feedback!

Identity is a public key. You have a contact list that you add keys too. When two people exchange keys and add them to their lists, they automatically connect and can have conversations. Exchanging keys you needed another channel (email, sms, etc) or use the introduction system inside the app where you can introduce one person to another.

In regards to total users? I have no idea. By it's design there isn't a central user list. I have no idea who is talking with who using it.

I believe one limitation was that identities were really tied to a device and I never made a phone version of it. So it being limited to desktop limited it's reach as a communication system.

Maybe it can inspire others. I would love to see P2P as the main way to communicate.

Re: Holepunch Unveils P2P Platform "Pear Runtime"

#49

Post by throwuwu »

Uptrenda wrote: post #11
humbleferret wrote: post #9

I've been following Holepunch developments for a while. There does not seem too much publicly available about who's building with it, but I personally regularly use Holepunch's Keet[1] for video calls with friends in parts of the world with censored Internet. I'm able to chat with voice and image quality surpassing anything else I've used. [1] https://keet.io/

It's frigging cool. It's super hard to make a meaningful model for p2p applications because they need all kinds of data structures that are research tier or have scarce real-world data. It's not just connectivity that's hard. If they manage to do everything decentralized and create meaningful constructs. This could be the start of actually realizing all the rhetoric these kind of projects have been promising. This se…

Sounds like a job for Conflict-free Replicated Data Types https://crdt.tech/

Re: Holepunch Unveils P2P Platform "Pear Runtime"

#50

Post by p1mrx »

pooper wrote: post #40
petergrace wrote: post #35

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes, I could ping your phone if there wasn't a firewall blocking it between you and me.

Thank you for answering. I have so many questions but I'll start with this... When I ping an ipv4 address from outside the home, if something responds to the ping it is my modem/router, right? As in even if I had no computers in the house, you couldn't tell the difference when you ping my ipv4 address, right? My Internet service provider owns my IPv4 address, not me, right? What changes with ipv6? The ISP still owns…

> When I ping an ipv4 address from outside the home, if something responds to the ping it is my modem/router, right? As in even if I had no computers in the house, you couldn't tell the difference when you ping my ipv4 address, right? My Internet service provider owns my IPv4 address, not me, right?

Right. IPv4 addresses are expensive, so it's uncommon to have more than one at home.

> What changes with ipv6?

Not a lot. You just have many addresses instead of one. If there were no firewall, someone could ping your router or individual devices, as they have different addresses.

> The ISP still owns the IP addresses and is free to reassign them wherever?

Yes.

> It isn't like a phone number where I own the number and have a right (in the US) to port it?

Correct. You would need direct BGP access to use a portable IPv4/IPv6 address. That generally is not available on residential connections.

Post reply on HN