4 ms·
From the project README: > Websites get seized by losing control over a webserver or a domain. If we > replace both the webserver and the domain with torre
by nprescott 10y ago
From the project README:
> Websites get seized by losing control over a webserver or a domain. If we
> replace both the webserver and the domain with torrents and blockchain then
> there's nothing left to seize.
>
> When you open index.html in the browser, here's what happens:
> - Bitcoin address 1DhDyqB4xgDWjZzfbYGeutqdqBhSF7tGt4 is searched for the
> latest outgoing transaction containing OP_RETURN script. Inside the
> script there is a torrent infohash of webpage.html.
> - webpage.html is downloaded from torrent via webtorrent and displayed.
I'm at 10 minutes waiting and the page hasn't loaded anything yet, the console reports wasm loaded correctly. It might be more useful to change the URL to the repo catilac linked. The idea sounds interesting, if a bit circuitous.
Edit:
Now that I think about it more, I'm a little confused about how this "decentralizes" anything, because the page is still required to get the bitcoin address in the first place? What prevents someone from seizing a domain or webserver and modifying this particular bitcoin address, other than the work involved? Can anyone familiar with IPFS speak to similarities or differences?
- swiley 10y agoKeep in mind that some ISPs actively attack bittorent and it won't work with them if it accepts unencrypted connections. That might be why it's not working for you (if you've never used bittorent successfully there before)
- bastawhiz 10y agoIt isn't using bittorrent, it's a web page. It uses webtorrent, which operates over WebRTC. WebRTC is encrypted and doesn't use bittorrent's TCP/UDP ports. In fact, ISPs would have a hell of a time even discerning WebRTC traffic containing a video call and a webtorrent connection.