4 ms·

That’s what Urbit is: https://www.urbit.org https://www.urbit.org

nineteen999 6y ago
> totally separate from any legacy system It most certainly is not. It's a macOS and Linux userspace application, no more no less[1]. How on earth do you consider that totally separate from any legacy system? [1] https://urbit.org/using/install/ https://urbit.org/using/install/
- alexmingoia 6y ago
  Urbit runs as a VM with a translation layer for things like networking, file system, etc. Using a host OS is expedient to build a working OS that the user actually wants to use, since hardware support is an uninteresting implementation detail. Eventually, one could write a native hardware kernel in Nock/Hoon, and do networking without TCP/IP/DNS between Urbit computers.
  - nineteen999 6y ago
    > that the user actually wants to use Only a handful of people would rather use something like Urbit than established systems. > Eventually, one could write a native hardware kernel When it does, you can call it an OS. For now, it's a user space application.
    - dfischer 6y ago
      Definitely agree with you. The practical implementation that it is, vs what it advertises itself as visionary-wise.
      - nineteen999 6y ago
        > what it advertises itself as visionary-wise All puff. The amateurs over at /r/osdev are much closer to running directly on hypervisors or bare metal than Urbit will ever be.
        dfischer 6y ago
        I hear you - I'm in a similar opinion.
    - pjmlp 6y ago
      It hardly any different than Inferno or Android for that matter.
      - nineteen999 6y ago
        Android bundles a Linux kernel, or it won't run, it doesn't expect you to supply your own. It also doesn't try to reinvent DNS or TCP, the VM bytecode format or all the other things that Android leveraged to make itself into a useful platform so quickly. The other difference is that Android has millions of users, Urbit, not so much.
      - Volt 6y ago
        Inferno can run on bare metal, so I'd say it's different. Urbit -- I'll believe it when I see it.
  - olah_1 6y ago
    > Eventually, one could write a native hardware kernel in Nock/Hoon Sounds like the dream of the "lisp machine". Is it more viable than that?
- dfischer 6y ago
  I think it's what Urbit markets itself as, but the implementation is "just a VM" - with the potential to innovate further. The networking layer is where I thought they'd make a difference but they ended up settling just for the same address space issue we have today IMO without trying to disrupt TCP/IP/BGP/DNS. I severely dislike the Ethereum decision.
  - alexmingoia 6y ago
    Urbit disrupts IP/DNS in that it replaces IP and DNS addresses with cryptographic identities. Identities aren't limited as anyone can create a comet, an identity without a parent (self-signed identity). There is a hierarchy of limited identities which serve as a routing network to propagate software updates and network packets. Since in reality you need to choose some computer to receive software updates from and send network packets to. Comets could communicate without the galaxy/star/planet hierarchy but they would have to choose some other way to route packets (DHT or something). Urbit can function without Ethereum. AFAIK galaxies (super nodes/identities) participate in Ethereum as a consensus mechanism voluntarily. Nothing is stopping them from changing that.
    - dfischer 6y ago
      I have no idea why those chose Ethereum as a backing cryptographic protocol. It stains the project in my opinion. I don't see it disrupting IP/DNS with cryptographic identities. I'd argue that Kademlia DHT does that in a more significant way. Not really sure what Urbit does uniquely in that regard really. I do crave some one-time use generated address that maps to a DHT/Kademlia cluster to provide deterministic privacy against p2p networks that doesn't depend on BGP autonomous centralized entities. Know of anything like that out of curiosity? Ha.
      - dfischer 6y ago
        After more thinking the solution I'm looking for is some hybrid between PJON/Yggdrasil
      - alexmingoia 6y ago
- deleted 6y ago
  [deleted]
steeleduncan 6y ago
Many things about Urbit look great, but reading that site it talks about how the Urbit ID would be at the centre of your online life, payments, etc. Then later it explains how a company has been granted permission to sell the address space of these Urbit IDs. Potentially it is better to purchase an Urbit ID directly, rather than indirectly purchasing Apple ID through buying their hardware, or a Google/Facebook ID by donating your data. Nevertheless, despite being presented as a free and open system, it seems like Urbit would centralise power with those selling Urbit IDs to an extent that Google, Apple, Facebook, etc have not yet achieved.
- alexmingoia 6y ago
  You can use a self-signed identity (comet), instead of scarce identity (galaxy/star/planet).

> totally separate from any legacy system It most certainly is not. It's a macOS and Linux userspace application, no more no less[1]. How on earth do you consider that totally separate from any legacy system? [1] https://urbit.org/using/install/ https://urbit.org/using/install/

alexmingoia 6y ago
Urbit runs as a VM with a translation layer for things like networking, file system, etc. Using a host OS is expedient to build a working OS that the user actually wants to use, since hardware support is an uninteresting implementation detail. Eventually, one could write a native hardware kernel in Nock/Hoon, and do networking without TCP/IP/DNS between Urbit computers.
- nineteen999 6y ago
  > that the user actually wants to use Only a handful of people would rather use something like Urbit than established systems. > Eventually, one could write a native hardware kernel When it does, you can call it an OS. For now, it's a user space application.
  - dfischer 6y ago
    Definitely agree with you. The practical implementation that it is, vs what it advertises itself as visionary-wise.
    - nineteen999 6y ago
      > what it advertises itself as visionary-wise All puff. The amateurs over at /r/osdev are much closer to running directly on hypervisors or bare metal than Urbit will ever be.
      - dfischer 6y ago
        I hear you - I'm in a similar opinion.
  - pjmlp 6y ago
    It hardly any different than Inferno or Android for that matter.
    - nineteen999 6y ago
      Android bundles a Linux kernel, or it won't run, it doesn't expect you to supply your own. It also doesn't try to reinvent DNS or TCP, the VM bytecode format or all the other things that Android leveraged to make itself into a useful platform so quickly. The other difference is that Android has millions of users, Urbit, not so much.
    - Volt 6y ago
      Inferno can run on bare metal, so I'd say it's different. Urbit -- I'll believe it when I see it.
- olah_1 6y ago
  > Eventually, one could write a native hardware kernel in Nock/Hoon Sounds like the dream of the "lisp machine". Is it more viable than that?
dfischer 6y ago
I think it's what Urbit markets itself as, but the implementation is "just a VM" - with the potential to innovate further. The networking layer is where I thought they'd make a difference but they ended up settling just for the same address space issue we have today IMO without trying to disrupt TCP/IP/BGP/DNS. I severely dislike the Ethereum decision.
- alexmingoia 6y ago
  Urbit disrupts IP/DNS in that it replaces IP and DNS addresses with cryptographic identities. Identities aren't limited as anyone can create a comet, an identity without a parent (self-signed identity). There is a hierarchy of limited identities which serve as a routing network to propagate software updates and network packets. Since in reality you need to choose some computer to receive software updates from and send network packets to. Comets could communicate without the galaxy/star/planet hierarchy but they would have to choose some other way to route packets (DHT or something). Urbit can function without Ethereum. AFAIK galaxies (super nodes/identities) participate in Ethereum as a consensus mechanism voluntarily. Nothing is stopping them from changing that.
  - dfischer 6y ago
    I have no idea why those chose Ethereum as a backing cryptographic protocol. It stains the project in my opinion. I don't see it disrupting IP/DNS with cryptographic identities. I'd argue that Kademlia DHT does that in a more significant way. Not really sure what Urbit does uniquely in that regard really. I do crave some one-time use generated address that maps to a DHT/Kademlia cluster to provide deterministic privacy against p2p networks that doesn't depend on BGP autonomous centralized entities. Know of anything like that out of curiosity? Ha.
    - dfischer 6y ago
      After more thinking the solution I'm looking for is some hybrid between PJON/Yggdrasil
    - alexmingoia 6y ago
deleted 6y ago
[deleted]

steeleduncan 6y ago

Many things about Urbit look great, but reading that site it talks about how the Urbit ID would be at the centre of your online life, payments, etc. Then later it explains how a company has been granted permission to sell the address space of these Urbit IDs. Potentially it is better to purchase an Urbit ID directly, rather than indirectly purchasing Apple ID through buying their hardware, or a Google/Facebook ID by donating your data. Nevertheless, despite being presented as a free and open system, it seems like Urbit would centralise power with those selling Urbit IDs to an extent that Google, Apple, Facebook, etc have not yet achieved.

alexmingoia 6y ago
You can use a self-signed identity (comet), instead of scarce identity (galaxy/star/planet).