4 ms·

My startup has been trying to make decentralized computing easy, but I'm just not sure there's a huge market for it. We took OpenStack and made it so you could

My startup has been trying to make decentralized computing easy, but I'm just not sure there's a huge market for it. We took OpenStack and made it so you could connect nodes from anywhere on the net and rent them out, whether it was a server in a datacenter or even someone's desktop machine. I'm just not sure there's a huge demand for it though; originally we were thinking that people would care about price, but it turns out most companies don't care that they're being fleeced by AWS. If they do care, they're probably using DO. Anyway, here's a demo of everything working: http://youtu.be/998IYD_WomY http://youtu.be/998IYD_WomY It connects a bunch of desktop machines around the Bay Area on different networks (Comcast, Sonic.net) and blends them in with a "dataceter grade" cloud server. The real problem with decentralization though is that the asymmetric nature of the first (last?) mile makes it really hard to do anything useful with individual nodes. If we all had symmetrical gigE FttH/FttP everything would be a lot more rosy, but so far that's really only been happening in a few places.

kragen 12y ago
I'm not sure that's "decentralization" in the sense that I mean. A "decentralized" system, to me, is one where no single person or group of people can deny others access to it, for example by deleting their accounts or turning the system off. Decentralized systems allow distributed innovation more robustly than centralized or merely distributed systems, and so they tend to outcompete centralized and distributed systems when they clash economically. I haven't watched your video, though.
- Patrick_Devine 12y ago
  Yes, it's only part of a solution. It's a decentralized platform, and what you're asking for are truly decentralized applications. The platform can potentially enable decentralized applications while letting you manage them in a centralized way. I'm just not sure about your economics argument though; convenience usually trumps any kind of economic reason for using a distributed system over a centralized one. This is particularly so with most internet services because the cost for most things always approaches free. I mean, we're reading HN on a website, and not through alt.hackernews, right?
- yen223 12y ago
  > Decentralized systems allow distributed innovation more robustly than centralized or merely distributed systems, and so they tend to outcompete centralized and distributed systems when they clash economically. I don't think this is necessarily true. The Internet started out about as decentralized as it gets, but eventually the Internet coalesced around a few core services - first it was AOL and Myspace, now it's Google, Facebook, Twitter, Youtube, etc. And meanwhile, too many decentralized services have fallen by the wayside - anyone still using Diaspora? Centralized systems offer efficiency and convenience - decentralized systems have more moving parts and thus more friction. This is a hurdle that decentralized systems have to overcome in order to become successful, and they rarely do, sadly.

kragen 12y ago

I'm not sure that's "decentralization" in the sense that I mean. A "decentralized" system, to me, is one where no single person or group of people can deny others access to it, for example by deleting their accounts or turning the system off. Decentralized systems allow distributed innovation more robustly than centralized or merely distributed systems, and so they tend to outcompete centralized and distributed systems when they clash economically. I haven't watched your video, though.

Patrick_Devine 12y ago
Yes, it's only part of a solution. It's a decentralized platform, and what you're asking for are truly decentralized applications. The platform can potentially enable decentralized applications while letting you manage them in a centralized way. I'm just not sure about your economics argument though; convenience usually trumps any kind of economic reason for using a distributed system over a centralized one. This is particularly so with most internet services because the cost for most things always approaches free. I mean, we're reading HN on a website, and not through alt.hackernews, right?
yen223 12y ago
> Decentralized systems allow distributed innovation more robustly than centralized or merely distributed systems, and so they tend to outcompete centralized and distributed systems when they clash economically. I don't think this is necessarily true. The Internet started out about as decentralized as it gets, but eventually the Internet coalesced around a few core services - first it was AOL and Myspace, now it's Google, Facebook, Twitter, Youtube, etc. And meanwhile, too many decentralized services have fallen by the wayside - anyone still using Diaspora? Centralized systems offer efficiency and convenience - decentralized systems have more moving parts and thus more friction. This is a hurdle that decentralized systems have to overcome in order to become successful, and they rarely do, sadly.