(no title)
jonathanpierre | 6 years ago
And all this is really a red herring, both in relation to the unspecified use of blockchain and in relation to resistance to state censorship.
jonathanpierre | 6 years ago
And all this is really a red herring, both in relation to the unspecified use of blockchain and in relation to resistance to state censorship.
icebraining|6 years ago
This is not restricted to the blockchain, of course. Something like e.g. SSB fits the bill.
jonathanpierre|6 years ago
It would still be just as easy to censor. If a censor goes beyond simple DNS manipulation and drops packages to specific IPs, he can just as easily add the few hundred IPs of database servers to that list as he can add the few hundred IPs of the frontend web servers.
Now, your example of SSB shows very well why this is a red herring. Even if Mediawiki put in the huge work to use SSB as a storage backend, nothing would change at all regarding censorship. What you really want is, I assume, a federated version of Wikimedia's architecture.
Feel free to develop such a system but I don't think anything but a complete rewrite of Mediawiki would allow for that, and even then, I doubt it would be much more censorship resistant, unless you also take on such features like using TOR hidden services or invite-only networks, which are both perfectly possible right now (and are in fact available right now).
And as I said, there is a multitude of options to access the data right now. For example, to build mirrors of Wikipedia for citizens of countries where Wikipedia is blocked. However, it's not necessarily trivial and it doesn't get easier simply by sprinkling some cryptography over the storage layer of all places.