Movatterモバイル変換


[0]ホーム

URL:


Skip to content

Navigation Menu

Sign in
Appearance settings

Search code, repositories, users, issues, pull requests...

Provide feedback

We read every piece of feedback, and take your input very seriously.

Saved searches

Use saved searches to filter your results more quickly

Sign up
Appearance settings

my search for the perfect peer to peer app

License

NotificationsYou must be signed in to change notification settings

milahu/p2p-killerapp

Folders and files

NameName
Last commit message
Last commit date

Latest commit

 

History

6 Commits
 
 
 
 
 
 

Repository files navigation

my search for the perfect peer to peer app

wanted specs

efficient protocol

binary protocol based on flatbuffers

flatbuffers is a quasi-standard for efficient binary protocols

flatbuffers is a new version of protobuf (protocol-buffers)

text protocols are slow and verbose

the protocol should be machine-readable first, and human-readable second

the "canonical" form of the data should be optimized for high speed and small size.this form is used for storage and transfer of data

from the machine-readable format, users can always generate human-readable formats, aka "disassembly".but this case is rare, because most people dont need to "read the source"

bad examples

  • JSON: nostr, ...
  • XML: xmpp, ...

see also

efficient implementation

fuck javascript

fuck java

seriously...people who still believe that javascript and java are a good ideashould be kicked out from any serious discussion

bad examples

transparent moderation

aka: transparent censorship

aka: censorship without meta-censorship

lets be honest:there are no "neutral platforms",because only dead people are "neutral",and all life has bias.

there are only publishers,and every publisher has his bias (or his jurisdiction),so every publisher wants to moderate content

one problem with the current situation of moderation isthat the current moderation is not transparent:content is removed and leaves no trace,aka "censorship" and "meta-censorship" (censoring the process of censorship)

to get "transparent moderation"publisher must have the freedom to remove contentsbut they must leave a trace (the metadata of the contents)so the censored content can be found on a different publisherwho has decided "this content is legal in my domain"

publishers can decide to block all content by default, and only publish the metadata.in this stage, the content is "unreviewed and blocked".when the publisher has reviewed the content,he can either publish the content as "reviewed and accepted",or explicitly mark the content as "reviewed and blocked",or leave the content as "unreviewed and blocked"

the metadata has no human-readable information,so it is always safe to publish the metadata.usually, this is a sha256-checksum and a signature of that checksum,like in the nostr protocol.the metadata also should have a pointer to the previous event,so everyone can see the fullchain of events

the censored content looks like acensor bar in a censored paper document,so that at least you can see that there was some content, but it was removed

see alsoredaction

Redaction or sanitization is the process ofremoving sensitive information from a documentso that it may be distributed to a broader audience.

It is intended to allow the selective disclosure of information.

Typically, the result is a document that is suitable for publicationor for dissemination to others rather than the intended audience of the original document.

When the intent is secrecy protection, such as in dealing with classified information,redaction attempts to reduce the document's classification level, possibly yielding an unclassified document.

When the intent is privacy protection, it is often called data anonymization.

bad examples? virtually every app fails here.either the moderation is too aggressive (censorship),or the moderation is too permissive (no separation between metadata and content)

https://www.cato.org/briefing-paper/shining-light-censorship-how-transparency-can-curtail-government-social-media

As Ray Bradbury observed, "There is more than one way to burn a book,"and recent experience demonstrates that the same is true of government censorship.

When most people think about government censorship,they imagine the firemen in Fahrenheit 451 burning booksor the Great Firewall in China blocking websites.

But government censorship, at least in the United States,increasingly occurs in a more subtle fashion:government officials informally pressuring or encouraging private actors,such as social media companies, to suppress the speech of, or deny services to,individuals with disfavored views—in other words, censorship by proxy.This practice has also been colloquially referred to as "jawboning."

...

In matters of national security, law enforcement, and beyond,government officials regularly make statementsthat encourage private actors to suppress information,and not all of this is objectionable.

Consider, for example, an FBI agent who requests that a newspaperdelay publishing certain details about an ongoing criminal investigationbecause doing so could undermine attempts to capture the suspect.

...

There is an easier and more effective way to address censorship by proxy: transparency.

Federal officials should be required to publicly report attemptsto suppress Americans' exercise of speech and associational rights.

Censorship by proxy, as practiced today,depends on secrecy and practical obscurity to evade public and legal accountability.

Forcing attempted censorship out of the shadows stands to deterthe worst abuses and ensure that officials who aren't deterred can be held to account.

offline first

do not rely on the internet

this should also work over ad-hoc decentral networks

  • LAN
  • WLAN
  • bluetooth
  • NFC
  • QR codes
  • printing and scanning of paper documents

similar to

  • berty
  • briar
  • ssb
  • retroshare

nomadic identities

this is required to give power to users

if some publisher censors my content or deletes my accountthen i am in full control of my dataand simply can go to a different publisherand re-publish (re-upload) my content there

similar to

  • ssb
  • retroshare

chain of events

i want to make sure that i receive a full chain of eventsfrom some peer through some serverand the server did not remove some events (censorship)

similar to

  • git: chain of commits
  • ssb: chain of events

this is missing in the nostr protocol

see also

social p2p network based on flatbuffers binary protocol moderation federation "offline first" scuttlebutt berty

compression

checksums and signatures should be stored in binary form,not as hex strings, not as base64 strings

there should be ways to store text contents in a compressed form,allowing different compression algorithms and compression levels

some content has better compression with bzip2,some content has better compression with zstd,...

the compression should not be limited to one compression algorithm,and it should allow to add new compression algorithms in the future

see also

voting, tagging, trust

TODO

aggregation of multiple sources

every peer can upload its content to multiple publishers

globally, there are many many publishers,and i want to subscribe to the news feeds of many peers

but i dont want to use some fancy webinterface for every publisher,like protonmail.com, which offers no IMAP server for free accounts.

instead, i want a "news aggregator" (RSS reader, newsreader) to aggregate contentfrom many peers over many publishers

this should be more efficient than RSS,more similar to git, where only missing data is transferred from server to client= incremental updates

see also

About

my search for the perfect peer to peer app

Topics

Resources

License

Stars

Watchers

Forks


[8]ページ先頭

©2009-2025 Movatter.jp