On Sun, 21 May 2017 01:45:20 -0400 Steve Kinney <admin@pilobilus.net> wrote:
Now I think you're describing Freenet. How doth Freenet suck, let me count the ways...
actually freenet seems like the best project of its kind. It's not garbage produced by the pentagon, and it tries to be really decentralized.
massive computational overhead was the main thing,
I never experienced that, although it would be nice if they didn't use java.
last time I tried it which was ages ago. It really needed its own dedicated box to "just work."
nonsense.
But it does distribute files, increase the availability of more popular ones (via increased redundancy of storage), and is censorship resistant due to distributed storage of data which itself is encrypted and anonymized.
yes, the concept is pretty 'cypherpunk'.
I think a project that aims to improve on the implementation of the basic ideas in Freenet could be a big winner.
:o)
Users actual use of the network would be through different apps... be it submitting infohashes, or compute jobs, etc.
Does eliminating all the reward tracking overhead provide substantial resources back to support free use.
ie: Most people and their computer resources sit idle, probably more than enough to provide back whatever multimedia they want to consume. If true, all balances out, no need to bother track accounting with "pay to play" style system?
I like "pay to play" as it offers at least some firm guarantee to the consumer offeror.
But an accounting free system is more fun as in free beer :)
Hybrids might work too.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Exabyte https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zettabyte https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yottabyte https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Orders_of_magnitude_(data)
100M users donating 10GiB slack space is about 0.93 EiB of non redundant storage, excluding overhead.
Example, at 4x redundancy, that probably easily covers lossless versions of all movies (at least 1080p) and all audio (FLAC), all wikipedia, all OS and apps.
Approaching mini-NSA scale... not a bad start.