Does anyone else see it as an issue that the decentralized website solution to databases is to create a copy of a SQLite database on every user's machine?
I'm following the developement of zeronet for the past 3 years. I'm not convinced that it is the final solution to the decentralized internet. A main thing that bothers me is the insane lookup-time for site with a low distribution. The same problem occurs with ipfs btw. It takes up to one minute to find a the correct node when only one node hast the content-hash.
By putting an SQLite database file (.db) inside a torrent, we can query its content -- by prioritizing pieces based on the SQL query -- and quickly peek at the content of the database without downloading it entirely.
Is the content I would host visible to me? How could I avoid to host child pornography? I'm eligible for hosting such a content im not aware of?
That's the questions I would like to get answered.
Last time I used that project I was trying to migrate my wordpress to zeroNet and I failed because my wp-content/images is over 3Gb and ZeroNet website is (was?) limited to 100Mb. Has this changed, are they tools that migrate images to separate addresses and link them correctly in html files?
ZeroNet is better at dealing with such sites now but it's still problematic when a site grows past a threshold where requestors need to be prompted to increase the size. Nodes that are just seeding don't automatically seed the changed site since they don't respond to the size change request.
One way of dealing with it is to make the images "Optional content". This means they are not sent to requestors of the site immediately - they are requested only when specifically wanted. Users can choose to seed optional files - in which case they'll mirror them all - or they only seed the ones they've looked at. Optional files don't count towards site size limits.
You might never have been censored, but then you likely never said much that would upset powerful people. But you live in a society that is rich and (mostly) free because others have done so.
If you are interested in this, you might be interested in Archain (https://www.archain.org/) - a different solution to a decentralised sister internet.
I don't know whether it is banned there or not, but when you join ZeroMe (zeronet's decentralized twitter) you quickly realized how it's populated with chinese sites and profiles
I believe it is 100% feasible to create a decentralised, secure network for static content - i.e. static sites. Combined with powerful (and secure) client-side APIs we are on a good track to success. I am not sure what this is but I am sure going to give it a try.
Curious about using Tor for anonymity. Tor explicitly asks users not to use it for bittorrent for many reasons. So if I have a ZeroNet site serving a nice big video over bittorrent, does my visitors' using Tor for anonymity go against their best practices?
ZeroNet doesn't use bittorrent for file transfers. The bittorrent network is only used for the DHT to map site addresses to IP addresses (or TOR hidden service names).
File transfer is done over a service that ZeroNet runs on a particular port with its own protocol.
All sites that viewed an existing site contain a copy of it and share the data. There is a "thundering herd" problem of multiple requesters for the site initially being distributed but once that's done then multiple nodes will have it and can seed it. The original site shutting down is no problem at that point.
IPFS shares the same problem and knowing when it's safe to shut down a node in both IPFS and ZeroNet is difficult.
Freenet solves this by having an insert of data sent directly to peers immediately. The site isn't stored on the inserting node. Once the insert is done it's safe to close the node and the content is still available.
oh man, i hate those software that automatically try to guess the user language! even more annoying when it chooses the wrong language for you. in my case PT (Portugal) instead of PT-BR.
ZeroNet does not pay you for hosting. Maidsafe is more file storage, ZeroNet is more about distributed site sharing. ZeroNet could be implemented on top of Maidsafe but not vice versa. There's also the fact that ZeroNet works today, has been working for a year or two, whereas Maidsafe is still in test stages.
[+] [-] eberkund|8 years ago|reply
[+] [-] brad0|8 years ago|reply
Every time there's a change to the db you need to download a whole new copy afaik.
Ideally you'd use a log based store. To do this you need to fundamentally change your idea for how a website works.
With a distributed log store chances are you won't have the same data as another person.
[+] [-] jchanimal|8 years ago|reply
[+] [-] koalalorenzo|8 years ago|reply
[+] [-] unknown|8 years ago|reply
[deleted]
[+] [-] deevolution|8 years ago|reply
[+] [-] code-is-code|8 years ago|reply
[+] [-] brad0|8 years ago|reply
[+] [-] j_s|8 years ago|reply
By putting an SQLite database file (.db) inside a torrent, we can query its content -- by prioritizing pieces based on the SQL query -- and quickly peek at the content of the database without downloading it entirely.
[+] [-] SeriousM|8 years ago|reply
[+] [-] exadeci|8 years ago|reply
[+] [-] mtgx|8 years ago|reply
http://www.scmp.com/news/hong-kong/economy/article/2113521/n...
https://blockstack.org/
[+] [-] akerro|8 years ago|reply
[+] [-] lkjhgfdsa57|8 years ago|reply
One way of dealing with it is to make the images "Optional content". This means they are not sent to requestors of the site immediately - they are requested only when specifically wanted. Users can choose to seed optional files - in which case they'll mirror them all - or they only seed the ones they've looked at. Optional files don't count towards site size limits.
[+] [-] mtgx|8 years ago|reply
[+] [-] ukd1|8 years ago|reply
[+] [-] TekMol|8 years ago|reply
All the stated benefits are non-issues for me:
* Uncensored
I never been censored.
* No hosting costs
I serve hundreds of thousands of users per month for something like $20.
* Always accessible
Just like hosting costs, my downtime is negligible.
[+] [-] fghtr|8 years ago|reply
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/First_they_came_...
[+] [-] adrianratnapala|8 years ago|reply
You might never have been censored, but then you likely never said much that would upset powerful people. But you live in a society that is rich and (mostly) free because others have done so.
[+] [-] insomniacity|8 years ago|reply
Have you never self-censored?
[+] [-] acover|8 years ago|reply
[+] [-] jxs41u|8 years ago|reply
[+] [-] NoB4Mouth|8 years ago|reply
[+] [-] 627467|8 years ago|reply
[+] [-] RachelF|8 years ago|reply
http://www.scmp.com/news/hong-kong/economy/article/2113521/n...
[+] [-] _pdp_|8 years ago|reply
[+] [-] kodablah|8 years ago|reply
[+] [-] bascule|8 years ago|reply
[+] [-] lkjhgfdsa57|8 years ago|reply
File transfer is done over a service that ZeroNet runs on a particular port with its own protocol.
[+] [-] thedonaldo|8 years ago|reply
https://thecedrus.com/tag/lovequotes
[+] [-] unknown|8 years ago|reply
[deleted]
[+] [-] intrasight|8 years ago|reply
https://blog.adguard.com/en/ad-blocking-is-under-attack/
[+] [-] koalalorenzo|8 years ago|reply
[+] [-] sova|8 years ago|reply
[+] [-] harshgupta|8 years ago|reply
[+] [-] lkjhgfdsa57|8 years ago|reply
IPFS shares the same problem and knowing when it's safe to shut down a node in both IPFS and ZeroNet is difficult.
Freenet solves this by having an insert of data sent directly to peers immediately. The site isn't stored on the inserting node. Once the insert is done it's safe to close the node and the content is still available.
[+] [-] thriftwy|8 years ago|reply
I guess there's a lot of opaquenets already, and it's not the feature richest, but this one you can have running in under five minutes.
I was actually using it for some torrents but currently ZeroTV is down :(
[+] [-] lucaspottersky|8 years ago|reply
argh.
[+] [-] 0simber|8 years ago|reply
[+] [-] bfrog|8 years ago|reply
[+] [-] lkjhgfdsa57|8 years ago|reply