4 ms·
In theory this seems like a great solution to many data privacy problems, but I suspect strongly that this leads in reality to very hard to support products as
by Roritharr 8y ago
In theory this seems like a great solution to many data privacy problems, but I suspect strongly that this leads in reality to very hard to support products as you can't make that many assumptions about the data stores. Performance and reliability of datastorage makes up a large chunk of the user-experience of any web-app, so having this out of ones control is a tough proposition for anyone actually wanting to build a business ontop of this.
- chatmasta 8y agoIn reality everyone’s data will be stored at the same four cloud providers.
- hanniabu 8y agoSadly this will be true for 95% of the storage
- microcolonel 8y agoIt seems to me that an API intended to make this storage a commodity would lower the barrier to entry, possibly increasing the natural number of participants in the market.
- y4mi 8y agoDon't worry, these competitors will host their service on one of these providers
- Freak_NL 8y agoIs that a big problem if data is end-to-end encrypted?
- microcolonel 8y agoCynicism like this makes its own truth each time it's repeated.
- fiatjaf 8y agoDo you think this is worse than having it all in one cloud provider? The number of providers doesn't matter, actually. It could be just one, as long as it is easy to switch whenever you need. See GitHub.
- Fellshard 8y agoYou'd need shared protocols for data, of some sort. Probably similar to the original dream for XML schemata.
- binbasti 8y agoActually, this has been pretty much a non-issue for us in production over the last 5 years. As the reference JS client library works offline first, it'll just sync data whenever the remote becomes available again. In fact, that's a nice bonus for offline-first web apps in general, not just with remoteStorage.