5 ms·
I wonder if there’s a “git over BitTorrent”. Having a cryptographically signed (by authors, not by GitHub) and fully open source git hosting network would be a
by dannyw 2y ago
I wonder if there’s a “git over BitTorrent”.
Having a cryptographically signed (by authors, not by GitHub) and fully open source git hosting network would be a boom for FOSS security in general.
- dgellow 2y agohttps://radicle.xyz/ https://radicle.xyz/
- ekianjo 2y agoclose but it does not use Bittorrent for the P2P part?
- miohtama 2y agoBittorrent as a distribution protocol is not suitable for Git-like traffic, so Radicle is doing their own p2p.
- alurm 2y agoAs I understand, Bittorrent is not a persistent data structure. Git and IPFS are. Radicle is another interesting approach. They used IPFS but switched to a custom protocol, as I understand, for performance.
- ultra_nick 2y agoIPFS can do that https://docs.ipfs.tech/how-to/host-git-repo/ https://docs.ipfs.tech/how-to/host-git-repo/
- zmgsabst 2y agoWhat’s stopping you from making torrents of your repos now? (Not as a rhetorical question; I don’t quite understand your vision, so I’m hoping you’ll clarify the usage.)
- marci 2y agoThey are probably talking about a "serverless" bittorrent. Some kind of Git-over-DHT. It would require this to be accepted: http://bittorrent.org/beps/bep_0050.html http://bittorrent.org/beps/bep_0050.html (Decentralized Mutable Torrent)
- lll-o-lll 2y agoOoh, I really like this idea! A decentralized form of pub-sub based git sounds fantastic. Of course, much of what makes github et.al. desirable, is the extras on top. Pull Requests, Issues, Wiki, search, etc. Making a “local first” decentralized GitHub would be much work.
- Jochim 2y agoThe torrents would be snapshots of the repo at a particular point in time. Updates couldn't be fetched through the torrent via git pull. I'd assume that op wants a torrent that can be pushed/pulled from.
- ekianjo 2y agogit is decentralized by design. you dont need bittorrent.
- oefrha 2y agoNo. With BitTorrent, I can tell a client to go fetch this torrent or hash (magnet link) and it can do that without any specific hardcoded server. Centralized trackers help but there’s always the DHT. With git you need to give the client an exact host, which can be gone for any number of reasons.
- Shawnj2 2y agoAs much as it pains me to say this this might be a good use of blockchain
- YetAnotherNick 2y agoCare to explain? If you just mean verified tree, git already is that.
- amne 2y agoI think he means uncensorable or at least very very hard to censor. The problem is it could be very expensive. Think NFT but the metadata is the source code of the emulator. You're not removing that from the blockchain, ever. It also needs to be a popular blockchain, like ETH, BTC, SOL or whatever people still use today. There are "coins" where your stake is disk space but if it's not a widespread thing it just dies off (conway GoL style)
- yesbut 2y agoI think he's referring to the distributed portion of a blockchain. A centralized github-type for profit business is required to respond to these takedown requests. Nintendo's lawyers would need to go after every individual node hosting this vc blockchain.
- baq 2y agoBlockchain is just a slow database. What you want is a peer to peer system which actually has peers instead of a couple super nodes and ephemeral drive-by clients.
- fidelramos 2y ago"Just" a slow database that allows coordinated writes in a decentralized way, effectively solving the Byzantine Generals problem. That's what made Bitcoin a novel idea.
- TheNewAndy 2y ago
- YetAnotherNick 2y agoGit commit messages could be cryptographically signed. And git, the protocol is fully open source. Also there are many open source UI. Care to explain what is the usecase of git of torrent compared to gitlab?
- Dibby053 2y agoDistributed hosting means there isn't a single point of failure. Even without DMCAs it's fairly common to try cloning a random gitlab or plain git repo only to find it's down.
- YetAnotherNick 2y agoI have multiple torrent downloads pending for more than an year. Just because it is distributed doesn't mean it is safe from being lost.
- Dibby053 2y agoNobody is arguing that, but it's certainly less likely to go down or be lost than a typical direct download link. It's also easier/cheaper to self-host very popular repos with P2P, because it scales nicely.
- forty 2y agoOr we can simply have a git hoster which is not in the US and as such is not impacted by DCMA
- arp242 2y agoUS copyright tends to be less restrictive and more relaxed than many other countries.
- sunaookami 2y agoNot true as you can see here.
- GardenLetter27 2y agoThe DMCA is crazy though, you can just request a takedown and the onus is on the host. And then if it turns out you didn't actually have the right to do that... well that has to be sorted out later.
- ldng 2y agoYeah... presumed guilty
- saddlerustle 2y agoThe overarching terms of the DMCA are specified by the 1996 WIPO Copyright Treaty, which every developed country has implemented.
- 4gotunameagain 2y agoIt might be, but enforcement is a different thing. For example russian search engines are not blocking streaming websites like US/EU ones do.
- Yeul 2y agoCountries don't care about copyright until they make stuff worth stealing.
- carom 2y agoGit is a decentralized service.
- miohtama 2y agoWe have https://radicle.xyz/ https://radicle.xyz/ Often discussed here. However, many Hacker News commenters love to bash it because it is associated with cryptocurrencies.
- deleted 2y ago[deleted]