I think this decentralization and federation is what web3 is all about, without all the corporations calling everything to do with monkey pixel art that costs a million dollars “web3”

  • veaviticus
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    5
    ·
    2 years ago

    A much better use of resources, but you shard the data amongst potentially untrusted hosts (ie, anybody can stand up a lemmy instance and start hosting posts/comments, and then get sick of hosting it and delete their instance and all the uploaded data).

    Federation only allows access to the network of servers, it doesn’t protect the data at all, which means at any moment an entire community of useful historical information could just be wiped away (especially since there’s currently no monetary incentive to continue hosting, its only being done out of desire to be part of the network).

    I guess I’d rather see the blockchain (or simpler caching/mirroring) approach, something like the torrent network, so that no single person has access to delete content. We can all choose to not view or not mirror content we don’t agree with, but nobody can single-handedly own or modify the data

    • cryball@sopuli.xyz
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      2 years ago

      Unless each node holds all the data, it is not guaranteed to stay available. Mirroring content across 2, 3, or even 10 servers wouldn’t guarantee that it will remain eg. after 10 years. Even torrents die after they are no longer popular and people stop seeding them.

      I still hold my opinion that using an actual blockchain to hold the conversations is not scalable solution at all. Only unique thing it would enable is for unwanted content to remain permanently in the system.