8 ms·

I never edit articles on Wikipedia, so I just looked up how it is done there. The editing users are currently merging the changes. The same could be done with E

I never edit articles on Wikipedia, so I just looked up how it is done there. The editing users are currently merging the changes. The same could be done with Ethereum and a contract. (Although it would be a bit tricky right now because the computational cost of calculating a diff for complex articles would make the operation expensive). However, there're a couple of outstanding Ethereum Updates that would make this process easier and faster. I'd suppose that in around one year it should be possible to implement this in a fast and cheap way. Alternatively, one could use 'Whisper', which is Ethereum's 0MQ alternative, and let multiple users work on the same document at the same time (like Google Docs or a multitude of other editors). Ethereum is still a very young project, but it would allow to implement a truly decentralized Wikipedia. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Help:Edit_conflict https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Help:Edit_conflict https://github.com/ethereum/wiki/wiki/Whisper https://github.com/ethereum/wiki/wiki/Whisper

duskwuff 9y ago
> I never edit articles on Wikipedia, so I just looked up how it is done there. I think you've misconstrued how edit conflict resolution works. There is no "locking" involved. If two editors both open the same revision of a page and save changes, the second editor to submit changes may encounter an edit conflict. In most cases, conflicts are resolved automatically by the wiki engine. If this isn't possible, the second editor is prompted to merge their changes manually, or to reapply their changes. This is not a locking mechanism. Having an article open for editing does not lock it for future changes; it just records the revision that you started with to help resolve a conflict, should one arise.
lgierth 9y ago
You can also find an experimental PubSub system in IPFS [1]. One example use is peer-to-peer chat, Orbit [2]. [1] https://github.com/ipfs/go-ipfs/issues/3397#issuecomment-261670830 https://github.com/ipfs/go-ipfs/issues/3397#issuecomment-261... [2] https://github.com/orbitdb/orbit https://github.com/orbitdb/orbit

duskwuff 9y ago

> I never edit articles on Wikipedia, so I just looked up how it is done there. I think you've misconstrued how edit conflict resolution works. There is no "locking" involved. If two editors both open the same revision of a page and save changes, the second editor to submit changes may encounter an edit conflict. In most cases, conflicts are resolved automatically by the wiki engine. If this isn't possible, the second editor is prompted to merge their changes manually, or to reapply their changes. This is not a locking mechanism. Having an article open for editing does not lock it for future changes; it just records the revision that you started with to help resolve a conflict, should one arise.

lgierth 9y ago

You can also find an experimental PubSub system in IPFS [1]. One example use is peer-to-peer chat, Orbit [2]. [1] https://github.com/ipfs/go-ipfs/issues/3397#issuecomment-261670830 https://github.com/ipfs/go-ipfs/issues/3397#issuecomment-261... [2] https://github.com/orbitdb/orbit https://github.com/orbitdb/orbit