5 ms·

Fantastic. The web falling into the AmaGooBookSoft silos has been convenient, but it hasn't been good for censorship or personal sovereignty. Making it push-but

Fantastic. The web falling into the AmaGooBookSoft silos has been convenient, but it hasn't been good for censorship or personal sovereignty. Making it push-button easy to publish to IPFS a great way to return editorial control and ownership to individuals, without the downsides of needing to run and maintain servers. I hope Hearth or someone like them expands beyond websites to self-publishing of store front ends, crypto payment, social feeds, real time video, and all the other services we expect AmaGooSoftBook to provide today. And to integrate Tor as necessary.

ziikutv 9y ago
> I hope Hearth or someone like them expands beyond websites to self-publishing of store front ends, crypto payment, social feeds, real time video, and all the other services we expect AmaGooSoftBook to provide today. And to integrate Tor as necessary. Agree but I hope we take super small baby steps and get what above is accomplishing right the first time without complicating the use cases just yet.
52-6F-62 9y ago
>but it hasn't been good for censorship or personal sovereignty. On this subject— I'm going to be that guy this time because I haven't yet seen a good solution to the problem, and I ask with sincerity: What happens when somebody decides they're going to start an illicit website/content of some kind? (let's avoid semantics because I'd rather not go down that path) Everybody then has a forced part in hosting it, and there are just some subjects that do not have any redeeming aspects. Is there a resolution built in for those scenarios?
- atrus 9y ago
  I'm not sure why you'd say that everyone has a forced part in hosting it, since IPFS only pulls files you request to your computer.
  - 52-6F-62 9y ago
    After your comment I did a quick bit of reading and realized I'd made a fundamental mistake regarding how I thought I knew IPFS worked (vs. other decentralized file system formats). The mistake I'd made was thinking it worked more or less similar to Bitcoin where every node holds the whole chain, where it really works more like torrents in that you download the set of files and then reseed. Thanks for pointing out the difference. Because of my error I guess the question changes. It sounds like it may be even more damning for those who regularly view illicit content, but at the same time making it harder to shut down caches of the same illicit content. I recognize this is already a problem with torrents, but then my question becomes how do we not repeat the mistake? Is there a mode of resolution outside chasing down every single bearer of the node to try and remove the content?
    - gervase 9y ago
      This is the same question that applies to any other medium, context, or means of interaction: who decides what is illicit? Just because something CAN be used to commit a crime (say, the expectation of privacy in your own home), we don’t eliminate it to avoid that edge case. Not all technology needs a law enforcement backdoor, in my view.
      - StavrosK 9y ago
        I agree with you. Not only that, but society progresses precisely because not all crime can be caught. Ask any interracial couple a century ago, or any gay person fifty years ago, or any marijuana smoker last year. These are all things that would never have become legal if every single person who practiced them was caught right away.
      - 52-6F-62 9y ago
        >medium, context, or means of interaction The first analog that is at all comparable is hypertext and the web interface to the internet. This is much the same except it's harder to clean up. Who decides what is illicit? Like I said, I'm not trying to start a semantics discussion. I'm not talking about morally debatable subjects. There are some blatantly disgusting things out there that have ruinous effects on people who've made no decision to take part. A platform like IPFS allows that to gain a new root, and deeper this time. Hence my posed question.
tomc1985 9y ago
How is this not another silo? A big one called "IPFS"
- carussell 9y ago
  You're making a category error. IPFS (and friends—like Dat) are analogous to HTTP. Would you call HTTP a silo? No; services like Facebook and Google Drive are silo-y, but HTTP is not. The people working on the P2P web are just trying to make some design choices at the protocol level that facilitates its use in a more decentralized way than the services that HTTP has encouraged to flourish.
  - tomc1985 9y ago
    Content under HTTP can be thought of as siloed if the user doesn't have an HTTP client. Same effect no?
    - jake_the_third 9y ago
      I don't think so. Everything would be a silo by that definition. A better way to think about it is that silo is something who's owner can cut you off. HTTP is a protocol where ownership does not apply.

ziikutv 9y ago

> I hope Hearth or someone like them expands beyond websites to self-publishing of store front ends, crypto payment, social feeds, real time video, and all the other services we expect AmaGooSoftBook to provide today. And to integrate Tor as necessary. Agree but I hope we take super small baby steps and get what above is accomplishing right the first time without complicating the use cases just yet.

52-6F-62 9y ago

>but it hasn't been good for censorship or personal sovereignty. On this subject— I'm going to be that guy this time because I haven't yet seen a good solution to the problem, and I ask with sincerity: What happens when somebody decides they're going to start an illicit website/content of some kind? (let's avoid semantics because I'd rather not go down that path) Everybody then has a forced part in hosting it, and there are just some subjects that do not have any redeeming aspects. Is there a resolution built in for those scenarios?

atrus 9y ago
I'm not sure why you'd say that everyone has a forced part in hosting it, since IPFS only pulls files you request to your computer.
- 52-6F-62 9y ago
  After your comment I did a quick bit of reading and realized I'd made a fundamental mistake regarding how I thought I knew IPFS worked (vs. other decentralized file system formats). The mistake I'd made was thinking it worked more or less similar to Bitcoin where every node holds the whole chain, where it really works more like torrents in that you download the set of files and then reseed. Thanks for pointing out the difference. Because of my error I guess the question changes. It sounds like it may be even more damning for those who regularly view illicit content, but at the same time making it harder to shut down caches of the same illicit content. I recognize this is already a problem with torrents, but then my question becomes how do we not repeat the mistake? Is there a mode of resolution outside chasing down every single bearer of the node to try and remove the content?
  - gervase 9y ago
    This is the same question that applies to any other medium, context, or means of interaction: who decides what is illicit? Just because something CAN be used to commit a crime (say, the expectation of privacy in your own home), we don’t eliminate it to avoid that edge case. Not all technology needs a law enforcement backdoor, in my view.
    - StavrosK 9y ago
      I agree with you. Not only that, but society progresses precisely because not all crime can be caught. Ask any interracial couple a century ago, or any gay person fifty years ago, or any marijuana smoker last year. These are all things that would never have become legal if every single person who practiced them was caught right away.
    - 52-6F-62 9y ago
      >medium, context, or means of interaction The first analog that is at all comparable is hypertext and the web interface to the internet. This is much the same except it's harder to clean up. Who decides what is illicit? Like I said, I'm not trying to start a semantics discussion. I'm not talking about morally debatable subjects. There are some blatantly disgusting things out there that have ruinous effects on people who've made no decision to take part. A platform like IPFS allows that to gain a new root, and deeper this time. Hence my posed question.

tomc1985 9y ago

How is this not another silo? A big one called "IPFS"

carussell 9y ago
You're making a category error. IPFS (and friends—like Dat) are analogous to HTTP. Would you call HTTP a silo? No; services like Facebook and Google Drive are silo-y, but HTTP is not. The people working on the P2P web are just trying to make some design choices at the protocol level that facilitates its use in a more decentralized way than the services that HTTP has encouraged to flourish.
- tomc1985 9y ago
  Content under HTTP can be thought of as siloed if the user doesn't have an HTTP client. Same effect no?
  - jake_the_third 9y ago
    I don't think so. Everything would be a silo by that definition. A better way to think about it is that silo is something who's owner can cut you off. HTTP is a protocol where ownership does not apply.