Is anyone working on #P2P server software compatible with #ActivityPub? It seems natural to be able to donate network resources instead of cash, and would make services even more difficult to censor.
[#]Mastodon #Fediverse #BitTorrent #IPFS #WebTorrent
=> More informations about this toot | More toots from caten@mathstodon.xyz
@caten The big selling point of p2p is that there's no "server", even if there's an initial seed peer.
There's some p2p tricks you could do with selfhosting a webserver on one of the user's paired devices but connecting 'whichever is online' to dns on a client side with reasonable UX would be difficult. ipfs/kubo has some interesting p2p port forwarding tricks that I'd try here as well, it could help.
=> More informations about this toot | More toots from Arlodottxt@fosstodon.org
@Arlodottxt My meaning of "server" is in the sense that ZeroNet has "zites" that can be modified and take user input with everyone hosting as a swarm, but someone still has a key that yields admin tools for moderation. Pure P2P Mastodon would be a moderation nightmare for each user, but the ZeroNet model might be able to find a balance by having instances like those on the traditional web which could be federated or not based on their behavior.
=> More informations about this toot | More toots from caten@mathstodon.xyz
@caten Absolutely, I don't see full p2p working for social media without the federated model added in some form.
P2P fixes the client-server power imbalance, but you still need "hubs" or communities where people gather and discover each other.
Haven't played with zeronet, I planned to just use #ipfs for everything.
=> More informations about this toot | More toots from Arlodottxt@fosstodon.org
@caten Not directly, and the compatibility is difficult. The TL;DR of it is that the use of URLs implies location, while in P2P you work more with identifiers.
That is not insurmountable, but it does mean that there are significantly different assumptions between P2P and AP that make compatibility difficult or awkward.
I've long proposed moving AP towards use of identifiers, because that'll influence some design decisions, and the general response has been "not yet".
Waiting for it, though.
=> More informations about this toot | More toots from jens@social.finkhaeuser.de
@caten it seems like PeerTube is the closest thing to what you have in mind: https://joinpeertube.org/faq#why-does-peertube-use-activitypub-and-webrtc-why-not-ipfs---dtube---steemit
=> More informations about this toot | More toots from rwxrwxrwx@mathstodon.xyz
@rwxrwxrwx @caten Based on reading the whole thread, I'm not too sure whether PeerTube is P2P in the sense the original poster was interested in, but for whatever it is worth my mind immediately went to PeerTube as well.
=> More informations about this toot | More toots from soaproot@sfba.social
@soaproot @rwxrwxrwx PeerTube does indeed use P2P methods for exchanging video data, but the instances themselves are not providing their websites to users in a P2P manner from what I can see.
=> More informations about this toot | More toots from caten@mathstodon.xyz
@caten @soaproot Thank you both for clarifying. I didn't quite know what @caten was looking for when I replied. I've learned about a few interesting projects after reading through the whole thread now.
=> More informations about this toot | More toots from rwxrwxrwx@mathstodon.xyz
@caten @nextgraph together with @activitypods are a p2p approach to ActivityPub
=> More informations about this toot | More toots from nextgraph@fosstodon.org
@nextgraph @activitypods I was looking at your networking description and this still sounds pretty similar to Mastodon. In what sense is this P2P if you still need brokers to have dedicated IP addresses?
=> More informations about this toot | More toots from caten@mathstodon.xyz
@caten hello Charlotte, thanks for checking out our projects. ActivityPods is 100% ActivityPub. It needs a domain name. It will federate with other servers. While NextGraph is P2P in the sense that devices can connect directly to each other, and sync data. But for that to work, you need at least 2 peers to be online at the same time, so we introduce Brokers indeed, who help with availability. Everything is E2EE so brokers cannot see the data. You can self-host a broker, including at home.
=> More informations about this toot | More toots from nextgraph@fosstodon.org
@nextgraph I can imagine that this would help with performance, but I'm uneasy about Brokers having a stronger role than the people who bootstrap a DHT network. Even if I can do this on my own machine to some extent, I was under the impression that there would be a bunch of dedicated Brokers with a lot of network resources whose removal would dramatically impair the system.
=> More informations about this toot | More toots from caten@mathstodon.xyz
@caten brokers help mostly with availability. and maybe with performance too. There is no DHT in NextGraph because users always know on which devices and brokers they want to replicate their data. And your impression about big brokers dominating the network is wrong. That's not the way nextGraph was designed. Instead, we envision every user to have a Broker at home or office. At the beginning, we will provide some public brokers to help with onboarding. But the goal is full decentralization.
=> More informations about this toot | More toots from nextgraph@fosstodon.org
@nextgraph That's encouraging, I'm glad I was mistaken there. I suppose that moderation at the most basic level is handled by anyone acting as a Broker, since you still don't want to be broadcasting illegal content even if it's encrypted. Has anyone issued a DMCA takedown or similar to one of your public Brokers yet?
=> More informations about this toot | More toots from caten@mathstodon.xyz
@caten I am glad you find some interest in our approach :)
Moderation is a big subject, that we haven't tackled yet as our primary focus is on private data (personal, or private groups that only work on invitation). The brokers are not responsible for the content, and cannot even see the content. They only relay, store and forward encrypted blobs. Moreover, when brokers will be self-hosted, the full legal responsibility will fall on individuals hosting them. 1/2
=> More informations about this toot | More toots from nextgraph@fosstodon.org
@caten 2/2 we could imagine that a DMCA or any moderation request could be submitted to a Broker indeed, if the private key that can decrypt the content is also provided.
Another complementary mechanism for moderation will sit in the user groups. But it will be for them to organise moderation and deal with it, on a P2P basis. In any case, we are not production ready. There is still time to think about the DMCA takedown mechanism that you mentioned, that will only work for public brokers anyway.
=> More informations about this toot | More toots from nextgraph@fosstodon.org
@nextgraph Thanks for chatting about your network architecture and moderation! I'll keep an eye out for future developments.
=> More informations about this toot | More toots from caten@mathstodon.xyz
@caten I'm working on something that I hope will create various capabilities for the Autonomi p2p storage platform, including eventually ActivityPub.
It's very early stage but I've listed some of the things I hope it will support in the README. Notice that one is Solid, which I demo'd a while back using a different approach, but the new design is much more capable, without self hosting anything or breaking p2p. See:
https://github.com/happybeing/dweb/tree/main/dweb-cli
=> More informations about this toot | More toots from happyborg@fosstodon.org
welcome to #nostr. we don't have bans.
=> More informations about this toot | More toots from dfac05175167a3465031ae88bbbfbb60c5df80d5465cc91766fb73438a2af009@mostr.pub
@dfac05175167a3465031ae88bbbfbb60c5df80d5465cc91766fb73438a2af009 It looks like the nostr GitHub page explicitly says that it is not P2P, just federated the way ActivityPub is. Has this changed?
=> More informations about this toot | More toots from caten@mathstodon.xyz
nostr is client-server architechture, because it has separation of clients and relays. events can be broadcasted to any number of relays, and therefore if single relay bans something, it can still exist on 10 other relays. each client connects to multiple relays. this is very censorship resistant architechture and may even guarantee better availability of some content compared to p2p where seed uptime tends to vary more.
=> More informations about this toot | More toots from dfac05175167a3465031ae88bbbfbb60c5df80d5465cc91766fb73438a2af009@mostr.pub
@dfac05175167a3465031ae88bbbfbb60c5df80d5465cc91766fb73438a2af009 Thanks for explaining! I think I really am looking for something P2P, since I will happily take poorer performance in exchange for not depending on people with the money to host relays.
=> More informations about this toot | More toots from caten@mathstodon.xyz
@caten
Peertube is along those lines? Unless I've misunderstood?
=> More informations about this toot | More toots from ddlyh@topspicy.social
@caten I am going down this path and agree that there is some affinity between activitypub and decentralized storage but I have a few concerns after following activities of IpFS for some years now. I don’t see protocol labs as a good steward for the future of an open decentralized storage mechanism. Would be great if they handed over to w3c or linux foundation or similar. love the concept of content based addressing however and their implementation is forward thinking .
=> More informations about this toot | More toots from datacequia@techhub.social
@caten https://github.com/socketsupply/socket 100% p2p and works with AP today.
=> More informations about this toot | More toots from heapwolf@fosstodon.org This content has been proxied by September (ba2dc).Proxy Information
text/gemini