> Distributed File Sharing or computation without the whole tokenomics
They went hand in hand even back in the day: private torrent trackers were all about tokenomics where tokens were the number of bytes you've seeded (uploaded) minus you've downloaded.
I'm not saying it's impossible to imagine distributed file sharing otherwise, but to "guarantee" the availability of (especially unpopular) content, you need some incentive mechanisms either built in to the protocol or externally imposed.
Does someone know why SHA-3 isn't considered instead? Wouldn't its sponge construction—that allows outputting ("squeezing") any amount of data[0]—allow git to maintain backward-compatibility with existing tooling by continuing to use the same 20-byte output?
Is it that for d:=160, min(d/2,256) = 80 bits of collision resistance too low to justify the change?
One issue with SHA-3 is that it currently (unfortunately) lacks hardware acceleration support, while SHA-256 can be ridiculously fast on modern x86 and ARM chips. BLAKE3 is another potential alternative, it can be used as XOF and can be very fast without hardware support.
I do not recommend logging out as I believe it's broken now.
I was trying to add 2FA to my account when I was asked to log out and could not log in back. Either it was fortuitous or I was the one who inadvertently broke it. :|
edit (12-29T00:49Z): Inspecting dev console logs, it seems to be trying to load resources from `ton.local.twitter.com` which is unresolvable.
HTTP is the new TCP. I wonder why all of those projects (IPFS, SSB, Dat/Hypercore) developed their own protocols rather than piggybacking on HTTP instead---thus requiring desktop daemons, specialised browsers, or web gateways.
I think the issue is the lack of separation between peer-to-peer synchronisation (e.g., nodes sharing messages with each other) and peer-to-browser communication (e.g., a browser requesting a file). I get that the former may require a specialised protocol, but the latter should be available through plain HTTP.
If you want your protocol to be used in browsers you need to speak their language. I'm claiming that it's not something to overlook, especially since asking people to install and run additional software standalone/alongside is impractical.
It's presumably deliberate: by keeping annas-blog.org clean from copyrighted content (or links to copyrighted content), they will be able to retain a public channel despite the illegal nature of their work.
They went hand in hand even back in the day: private torrent trackers were all about tokenomics where tokens were the number of bytes you've seeded (uploaded) minus you've downloaded.
I'm not saying it's impossible to imagine distributed file sharing otherwise, but to "guarantee" the availability of (especially unpopular) content, you need some incentive mechanisms either built in to the protocol or externally imposed.