7 ms·

Blogchain

12 points by beefman 4y ago

nikolay 4y ago
Can you spare an invite, please?
- o_____________o 4y ago
  Yikes, the amount of information they're requesting on the invitation form is insane
remram 4y ago
What's the advantage of this over an RSS aggregator?
ipnon 4y ago
It's not clear to me how a blockchain is used or needed in this application. It seems like a Blockchain and tokenization could improve blogging, especially by enabling decentralized payment and publishing without requiring a legacy publisher organization. Even if this ends up in the dust bin of the Web it's a good project moving on an interesting direction.
- 687u56h4 4y ago
  You can already do that using the Lightning network on Bitcoin, which can allow micro transactions. There isn't any need for some random platform to have this integrated just because they like "blockchain technology". This platform isn't secure because their blockchain node appears to be only about 5 nodes online when I visited the site. It does not seem like you're able to run your own node which means the project isn't even decentralized in any meaningful way. The project provides nothing and does not move anything in any direction.
- webmaven 4y ago
  > It's not clear to me how a blockchain is used or needed in this application. If what you want is decentralized discussions, a Blockchain per-se isn't a particularly good match. You would be better off with an individual account being represented as a cryptographically signed chain of blocks (posts) that only the same user (public key) can append to, with special cases for adding edits to version posts. Replies from other users are appended to their own chains with references to the post being replied to provisionally added as metadata to the original. Add in some DHTs, CRDTs, and maybe Hypercore, and you've reinvented the decentralized structure of Usenet for 2022. There are a few extra features you can layer on like Twitter-style blocklists (Usenet called them killfiles), spam filtering, and web-of-trust, but very little here is contingent on DeFi concepts. Conversation is often transactional, but those transactions are not usually monetary. About the only thing that I can think of that might be helped by a monetary transaction is establishing a new account. If it costs $1 to make a new "hello world" root post (no renewals needed), and bad actors are filtered out as spam such that they have to constantly create new accounts, that should pay for keeping the system running rather well. Paying for content can be done slightly out-of-band, for example by posting content in an encrypted form and only subscribers get decryption keys that are posted in private messages. Or the reverse, subscribers get private encrypted versions that are decryptable with their private keys. Most attempts to fold financial transactions semantics into the core of a posts and replies protocol are likely to be ill-advised (and you won't necessarily know which ones until it is too late). There are too many potentially perverse incentives that mirror the arguments for why the result of cryptocurrency hashing functions cannot be something (anything) useful in its own right.
  - remram 4y ago
    What you are describing is very similar to Matrix or Scuttlebutt. Indeed there is no reason for it to have proof-of-work or proof-of-anything to share blogs and comments.
systemvoltage 4y ago
It breaks the back button (Firefox). I should be able to back out of the website.
- romeoblade 4y ago
  Same on Safari mobile.
- sblom 4y ago
  True in every browser I've tried far. I also had two separate blogchain tabs hard-hang and they had to be killed. I'm not sure I'm ready for all of this mindboggling innovation in UX. :)
- _aavaa_ 4y ago
  Yup. I hate it
- graypegg 4y ago
  Same on iOS safari, pretty aggravating.
- onetom 4y ago
  press the back button longer, until you get a popup, then u can jump 2 steps back in the history at once. but of course it sucks, that a single press in not enough...
eps 4y ago
The operation failed for an operation-specific reason. No idea what this .app is, so I'm not sure if this is intentional (a bit or art ?) or an actual error.
deleted 4y ago
[deleted]
witheld 4y ago
I can’t use my browser’s “back” button to leave that page, very classy.
- onetom 4y ago
  me neither... unless, u press the back button long and select the 2nd previous address from the popup ;)
floatinglotus 4y ago
I’m instantly suspicious of anyone trying to solve non-existent problems with blockchain. Most of these developers clearly know nothing about how to store and move data, in this case a blockchain is literally the most inefficient method. If the point is to create an microblogging platform that is decentralized, this is NOT the technology stack I would select.
billybuckwheat 4y ago
Looks like yet something else that's a solution looking for a problem.
joseph8th 4y ago
Hmmm... No, no I don't think I will. I don't trust anything that voluntarily associates itself with blockchain.

Blogchain

12 points by beefman 4y ago

nikolay 4y ago

Can you spare an invite, please?

o_____________o 4y ago
Yikes, the amount of information they're requesting on the invitation form is insane

remram 4y ago

What's the advantage of this over an RSS aggregator?

ipnon 4y ago

It's not clear to me how a blockchain is used or needed in this application. It seems like a Blockchain and tokenization could improve blogging, especially by enabling decentralized payment and publishing without requiring a legacy publisher organization. Even if this ends up in the dust bin of the Web it's a good project moving on an interesting direction.

687u56h4 4y ago
You can already do that using the Lightning network on Bitcoin, which can allow micro transactions. There isn't any need for some random platform to have this integrated just because they like "blockchain technology". This platform isn't secure because their blockchain node appears to be only about 5 nodes online when I visited the site. It does not seem like you're able to run your own node which means the project isn't even decentralized in any meaningful way. The project provides nothing and does not move anything in any direction.
webmaven 4y ago
> It's not clear to me how a blockchain is used or needed in this application. If what you want is decentralized discussions, a Blockchain per-se isn't a particularly good match. You would be better off with an individual account being represented as a cryptographically signed chain of blocks (posts) that only the same user (public key) can append to, with special cases for adding edits to version posts. Replies from other users are appended to their own chains with references to the post being replied to provisionally added as metadata to the original. Add in some DHTs, CRDTs, and maybe Hypercore, and you've reinvented the decentralized structure of Usenet for 2022. There are a few extra features you can layer on like Twitter-style blocklists (Usenet called them killfiles), spam filtering, and web-of-trust, but very little here is contingent on DeFi concepts. Conversation is often transactional, but those transactions are not usually monetary. About the only thing that I can think of that might be helped by a monetary transaction is establishing a new account. If it costs $1 to make a new "hello world" root post (no renewals needed), and bad actors are filtered out as spam such that they have to constantly create new accounts, that should pay for keeping the system running rather well. Paying for content can be done slightly out-of-band, for example by posting content in an encrypted form and only subscribers get decryption keys that are posted in private messages. Or the reverse, subscribers get private encrypted versions that are decryptable with their private keys. Most attempts to fold financial transactions semantics into the core of a posts and replies protocol are likely to be ill-advised (and you won't necessarily know which ones until it is too late). There are too many potentially perverse incentives that mirror the arguments for why the result of cryptocurrency hashing functions cannot be something (anything) useful in its own right.
- remram 4y ago
  What you are describing is very similar to Matrix or Scuttlebutt. Indeed there is no reason for it to have proof-of-work or proof-of-anything to share blogs and comments.

systemvoltage 4y ago

It breaks the back button (Firefox). I should be able to back out of the website.

romeoblade 4y ago
Same on Safari mobile.
sblom 4y ago
True in every browser I've tried far. I also had two separate blogchain tabs hard-hang and they had to be killed. I'm not sure I'm ready for all of this mindboggling innovation in UX. :)
_aavaa_ 4y ago
Yup. I hate it
graypegg 4y ago
Same on iOS safari, pretty aggravating.
onetom 4y ago
press the back button longer, until you get a popup, then u can jump 2 steps back in the history at once. but of course it sucks, that a single press in not enough...

eps 4y ago

The operation failed for an operation-specific reason. No idea what this .app is, so I'm not sure if this is intentional (a bit or art ?) or an actual error.

deleted 4y ago

[deleted]

witheld 4y ago

I can’t use my browser’s “back” button to leave that page, very classy.

onetom 4y ago
me neither... unless, u press the back button long and select the 2nd previous address from the popup ;)

floatinglotus 4y ago

I’m instantly suspicious of anyone trying to solve non-existent problems with blockchain. Most of these developers clearly know nothing about how to store and move data, in this case a blockchain is literally the most inefficient method. If the point is to create an microblogging platform that is decentralized, this is NOT the technology stack I would select.

billybuckwheat 4y ago

Looks like yet something else that's a solution looking for a problem.

joseph8th 4y ago

Hmmm... No, no I don't think I will. I don't trust anything that voluntarily associates itself with blockchain.