8 ms·

Anyone can run a Sia node, and anyone will (eventually) be able to run a Tupelo node, but only GitHub manages GitHub. It's decentralized because these networks

Anyone can run a Sia node, and anyone will (eventually) be able to run a Tupelo node, but only GitHub manages GitHub. It's decentralized because these networks were designed not to be managed by a single entity, unlike GitHub.

pdonis 7y ago
GitHub's source code is open, so anyone can run a GitHub node too. The node that GitHub itself runs became a centralized place for people to share development because of network effects, not because anything in the code itself prevents more than one node from existing.
- remram 7y ago
  GitHub is not open-source, though alternatives like GitLab and Gitea are.
- BoorishBears 7y ago
  If you make your own GitHub "node", it won't have any of the information GitHub.com has. If I'm understanding correctly, the idea with this is every "node" has a portion of a canonical truth. Not sure that would still get people to use it, but at least more feasible than making your own GitHub instance in relation to growing network effect
- nedbat 7y ago
  Did you mean that Git's source code is open?
masukomi 7y ago
anyone who is running git is _already_ running a distributed git node which is not managed by a single central entity. there are many _many_ web based git apps (many of which provide github like features) that anyone can, in theory, set up. why would I want to set up a sia node instead?
- asdkhadsj 7y ago
  Perhaps the Sia node gives you access to a "master" repo. Aka a single entity that represents a centralized repo, but hosted on a decentralized system. Not sure though.
  - lucideer 7y ago
    There's no such thing as a "master" repo in Git. "origin" is the default name for a cloned remote, and the convention used for adding a default remote, but nothing distinguishes the origin remote from any other remote. It isn't a master remote other than being default. One could add a Git remote (and name it "origin") that's backed by a decentralised system currently: e.g. one could do: git remote add origin ./some/ipfs/mount
    - asdkhadsj 7y ago
      > There's no such thing as a "master" repo in Git. "origin" is the default name for a cloned remote, and the convention used for adding a default remote, but nothing distinguishes the origin remote from any other remote. It isn't a master remote other than being default. You're over thinking my example. As I said, by "master" repo I meant the centralized repo that many _(most?)_ git users have, somewhere. Aka Github, Gitlab, etc. You're conflating Git's design with users patterns of centralization and distributed teams. Notably that often there is a single, centralized branch(es) on a single repo that everyone merges to. This centralization could be distributed. It sounds trippy, but as you put it if your origin is on IPFS, you effectively have a single, mutable repo instance hosted on a decentralized platform (IPFS). My guess is that is what Dgit is. A single mutable instance, hosted on a decentralized platform (Sia). So back to my example, many people do indeed have a "master"/centralized repo. It's not a part of git, it's a user convention on top of git. But I didn't say it was in git.
      - pdonis 7y ago
        > hosted on a decentralized platform (IPFS) What's the difference between this kind of "decentralized platform" and GitHub?

pdonis 7y ago

GitHub's source code is open, so anyone can run a GitHub node too. The node that GitHub itself runs became a centralized place for people to share development because of network effects, not because anything in the code itself prevents more than one node from existing.

remram 7y ago
GitHub is not open-source, though alternatives like GitLab and Gitea are.
BoorishBears 7y ago
If you make your own GitHub "node", it won't have any of the information GitHub.com has. If I'm understanding correctly, the idea with this is every "node" has a portion of a canonical truth. Not sure that would still get people to use it, but at least more feasible than making your own GitHub instance in relation to growing network effect
nedbat 7y ago
Did you mean that Git's source code is open?

masukomi 7y ago

anyone who is running git is _already_ running a distributed git node which is not managed by a single central entity. there are many _many_ web based git apps (many of which provide github like features) that anyone can, in theory, set up. why would I want to set up a sia node instead?

asdkhadsj 7y ago
Perhaps the Sia node gives you access to a "master" repo. Aka a single entity that represents a centralized repo, but hosted on a decentralized system. Not sure though.
- lucideer 7y ago
  There's no such thing as a "master" repo in Git. "origin" is the default name for a cloned remote, and the convention used for adding a default remote, but nothing distinguishes the origin remote from any other remote. It isn't a master remote other than being default. One could add a Git remote (and name it "origin") that's backed by a decentralised system currently: e.g. one could do: git remote add origin ./some/ipfs/mount
  - asdkhadsj 7y ago
    > There's no such thing as a "master" repo in Git. "origin" is the default name for a cloned remote, and the convention used for adding a default remote, but nothing distinguishes the origin remote from any other remote. It isn't a master remote other than being default. You're over thinking my example. As I said, by "master" repo I meant the centralized repo that many _(most?)_ git users have, somewhere. Aka Github, Gitlab, etc. You're conflating Git's design with users patterns of centralization and distributed teams. Notably that often there is a single, centralized branch(es) on a single repo that everyone merges to. This centralization could be distributed. It sounds trippy, but as you put it if your origin is on IPFS, you effectively have a single, mutable repo instance hosted on a decentralized platform (IPFS). My guess is that is what Dgit is. A single mutable instance, hosted on a decentralized platform (Sia). So back to my example, many people do indeed have a "master"/centralized repo. It's not a part of git, it's a user convention on top of git. But I didn't say it was in git.
    - pdonis 7y ago
      > hosted on a decentralized platform (IPFS) What's the difference between this kind of "decentralized platform" and GitHub?