4 ms·

It is somehow telling that you link to a Twitter post instead to a post on clutter.social.

pjkundert 4y ago
Yup. This is a web app (so, hosting is required), and it was built in a few days by a newbie and is hosted on a few machines by some randos. But, isn't that ... interesting? That something like this could be built and deployed and -- theoretically scale globally? Just think of what could be done with a bit of planning and a (tiny) revenue model?
- kitified 4y ago
  > Yup. This is a web app (so, hosting is required), and it was built in a few days by a newbie and is hosted on a few machines by some randos. But, isn't that ... interesting? That something like this could be built and deployed and -- theoretically scale globally? Sure. It is interesting that someone can build a web app, host it on temporary machines, and then one day scale it into a major business model. That's not new to blockchain. That's how the internet works at a fundamental level. What specifically drives blockchain to be useful or novel or interesting in this model? How is this application better for being on chain?
  - pjkundert 4y ago
    Because: this specific App (not "something like" it, but this one written in a few days by a newbie), could potentially scale to 1B users -- and nobody could stop it. Some static assets would need to be tuned in a real App, to be hosted by a CDN like Cloudflare (or, possibly provided by the App's hosting nodes themselves if no CDN is desired), but the App itself would scale. If a certain fraction of those users decided to install it (instead of use it via the Web interface), this scaling would be "free" -- paid for by the eg. 10% who installed it. I've been doing this professionally for 40 years, 30 of which I've spend searching for solutions to specific problems in this domain. I was there in '09 and downloaded Satoshi's reference implementation, and again in '15 for Ethereum; that's "blockchain"; what you call "being on chain". They didn't solve the problems I was trying to find solutions for (scalable consistency in occasionally connected systems). This is new.
    - dmitriid 4y ago
      > could potentially scale to 1B users -- and nobody could stop it. Some static assets would need to be tuned in a real App, to be hosted by a CDN like Cloudflare You've just show at least one way how it would be stopped. Who exactly is going to pay for static assets delivered to 1B users via Cloudflare? > but the App itself would scale. Of course it wouldn't. None of the blockchains have the required throughput. Yes, they want you to believe they have it, but they don't. > that's "blockchain"; what you call "being on chain". They didn't solve the problems > This is new. So they didn't solve the problems, but somehow this "app by a newbie" is suddenly solving all these problems and "scales to 1B users" because blockchain? Oh. And it doesn't scale because you can't even link to a post on it because "someone needs to pay for hosting". So it couldn't scale beyond a single user?
      - pjkundert 4y ago
        Hmm, okay. For others that come later in search of information, I'll address some of these. > ... one way it can be stopped. Yes, this newbie developer made some decisions that couldn't scale to 1B users. Alternatively, each node can serve static assets, thus scaling linearly w/o CDNs. This isn't required for most apps, as they aren't targets for state-level actors seeking to deplatform them from CDNs. But, if a totally free client self-hosted app is desired, this is possible. > ... None of the blockchains have the required throughput. Obviously. That's why "this is new." Blockchains enforcing global consensus on a "total order" of unrelated events cannot: the laws of physics forbid it, besides it being wasteful and unnecessary. Holochain does not enforce such unnecessary "total order" consensus; it is not necessary, as it turns out, for maintaining state consistency in distributed systems. That is the breakthrough. This is a low-research "Bro" comment. > ... can't even link to ... it because "someone needs to pay for hosting" Ya, I was just being considerate. It's a newbie's app, hosted by a few people. The point is, there is something new going on here; something that some hackers on HN might be interested in. I know the 2018 "Me" would have been interested! If you're not, that's fine - carry on! However, no more low-research "Bro" comments, okay? ... Ah, I see that you are rabidly anti-Crypto, and that's fine: fill your boots! But, for those visitors who are interested in amazing things, don't be discouraged! There are indeed new things happening here that are worth investigating.

Yup. This is a web app (so, hosting is required), and it was built in a few days by a newbie and is hosted on a few machines by some randos. But, isn't that ... interesting? That something like this could be built and deployed and -- theoretically scale globally? Just think of what could be done with a bit of planning and a (tiny) revenue model?

kitified 4y ago
> Yup. This is a web app (so, hosting is required), and it was built in a few days by a newbie and is hosted on a few machines by some randos. But, isn't that ... interesting? That something like this could be built and deployed and -- theoretically scale globally? Sure. It is interesting that someone can build a web app, host it on temporary machines, and then one day scale it into a major business model. That's not new to blockchain. That's how the internet works at a fundamental level. What specifically drives blockchain to be useful or novel or interesting in this model? How is this application better for being on chain?
- pjkundert 4y ago
  Because: this specific App (not "something like" it, but this one written in a few days by a newbie), could potentially scale to 1B users -- and nobody could stop it. Some static assets would need to be tuned in a real App, to be hosted by a CDN like Cloudflare (or, possibly provided by the App's hosting nodes themselves if no CDN is desired), but the App itself would scale. If a certain fraction of those users decided to install it (instead of use it via the Web interface), this scaling would be "free" -- paid for by the eg. 10% who installed it. I've been doing this professionally for 40 years, 30 of which I've spend searching for solutions to specific problems in this domain. I was there in '09 and downloaded Satoshi's reference implementation, and again in '15 for Ethereum; that's "blockchain"; what you call "being on chain". They didn't solve the problems I was trying to find solutions for (scalable consistency in occasionally connected systems). This is new.
  - dmitriid 4y ago
    > could potentially scale to 1B users -- and nobody could stop it. Some static assets would need to be tuned in a real App, to be hosted by a CDN like Cloudflare You've just show at least one way how it would be stopped. Who exactly is going to pay for static assets delivered to 1B users via Cloudflare? > but the App itself would scale. Of course it wouldn't. None of the blockchains have the required throughput. Yes, they want you to believe they have it, but they don't. > that's "blockchain"; what you call "being on chain". They didn't solve the problems > This is new. So they didn't solve the problems, but somehow this "app by a newbie" is suddenly solving all these problems and "scales to 1B users" because blockchain? Oh. And it doesn't scale because you can't even link to a post on it because "someone needs to pay for hosting". So it couldn't scale beyond a single user?
    - pjkundert 4y ago
      Hmm, okay. For others that come later in search of information, I'll address some of these. > ... one way it can be stopped. Yes, this newbie developer made some decisions that couldn't scale to 1B users. Alternatively, each node can serve static assets, thus scaling linearly w/o CDNs. This isn't required for most apps, as they aren't targets for state-level actors seeking to deplatform them from CDNs. But, if a totally free client self-hosted app is desired, this is possible. > ... None of the blockchains have the required throughput. Obviously. That's why "this is new." Blockchains enforcing global consensus on a "total order" of unrelated events cannot: the laws of physics forbid it, besides it being wasteful and unnecessary. Holochain does not enforce such unnecessary "total order" consensus; it is not necessary, as it turns out, for maintaining state consistency in distributed systems. That is the breakthrough. This is a low-research "Bro" comment. > ... can't even link to ... it because "someone needs to pay for hosting" Ya, I was just being considerate. It's a newbie's app, hosted by a few people. The point is, there is something new going on here; something that some hackers on HN might be interested in. I know the 2018 "Me" would have been interested! If you're not, that's fine - carry on! However, no more low-research "Bro" comments, okay? ... Ah, I see that you are rabidly anti-Crypto, and that's fine: fill your boots! But, for those visitors who are interested in amazing things, don't be discouraged! There are indeed new things happening here that are worth investigating.