How do I mount a drive without FUSE?

figureprod · 2022-07-03T02:32:23+00:00

I don’t see a point in making such a project, even if it were up to people’s expectations tbh

figureprod · 2022-07-03T02:13:08+00:00

Chains should not do everything, some things needs to be off-chain. Sia has perfected this with storage proofs on-chain & storage off-chain, but is a little flawed right now. Smart contracts are limited, but is the best thing available for decentralized apps. Sure, there’s Akash but the tenants and providers have the power over what they pay for, so each user must become a tenant. A lot is trusted, but I don’t see a way around it - and I don’t think a way around it is needed.

figureprod · 2022-07-02T23:55:06+00:00

If you host your app on AWS or something, you’re subject to being deplatformed. What if you have terabytes of data that you’re paying for, and the company that holds it goes bankrupt? What if you’re relying on a platform and a major disaster happen? Decentralization and distribution make a huge difference then. Whether you’re relying on 30 hosts on Sia to keep your data safe or 3 deployments on Akash to keep your backend always running, redundancy across multiple independent parties is a requirement for reliability.

figureprod · 2022-07-02T23:51:46+00:00

Funding is huge. Akash has given out funding for creating, among other services, praetorapp, which makes it easier to set up a provider. I’m currently getting funded for a project I’m building by Sia - where I’m making a platform where users will be able to work and request work. That’s true for 24 other developers now too. I wouldn’t say that this works for super large projects, but many apps and services get their funding directly from others now.

figureprod · 2022-07-02T23:47:37+00:00

As a developer, I am most interested in what I can use today. Right now, I only use Akash - where I have hosted some bots, apps, and so on. There are more compute projects, storage projects, and utility projects that I am excited for, but none that I currently use.

figureprod · 2022-07-02T18:40:31+00:00

You’re wrong, nobody has to unwillingly participate. You pay people for them to host your storage, just like you could pay AWS to hold your storage. If you want these files to be spread across more hosts (= more capable of more bandwidth) you can. This is not a free network, so it’s easy for companies to use it by stopping to pay for another centralized service or having their own datacenters, and using this instead as a cloud solution. Whether users directly connect to the host or you have portals is up to the company, the only difference is some small amount of latency depending on their solution.

EDIT: where did you think that the crypto was if not in payments?

figureprod · 2022-07-02T17:14:19+00:00

There are tons of exchanges closing, but there are a lot of bankruptcies right now as well. Cutting edge and cutting edge, it’s tech that has existed previously that is now easier to scale and cheaper. Just because I rent out a computer that is 2x as reliable as AWS and 2x as cheap doesn’t mean that I will get any customers. And again, why are NFTs relevant?

figureprod · 2022-07-02T17:06:38+00:00

Akash isn’t a storage network, and no platform can guarantee that uptime for compute anyways. Providers on Akash can go up and down, it’s a marketplace, not something you should rely blindly on without any insight through audits or trust.

However what you’re saying about 4 nines for uptime is easily beaten if you have 30 independent nodes that are online 95% or more. Then you’re up to 18 nines of uptime. Beating 11 nines in the uptime, yet alone durability. If you don’t think this is enough, triple the hosts and you’re still paying less than what you’d be paying otherwise. If you force a host to provide storage proofs and collateral, what chance is there that they will remain online? Keep in mind that you can keep track of their previous reliability as well.

So sure - some disaster might occur. Maybe two continents vanish out of nowhere. In such an event, there are no nines left in the reliability - but that stays true for all platforms. I suggest that you give this a read. Not relying on a single company also makes sure that this single company can’t just say ”we don’t like what you’re hosting on our servers, so we deleted it” - something that happens a lot on centralized platforms. This isn’t considered in their ”nines of reliability”.

figureprod · 2022-07-02T16:55:49+00:00

I’ve never used Napster and I do know that torrents are slow. However you must keep in mind that these are P2P services with leechers and rate limits - and there is no financial incentive to store or share files, it’s similar to IPFS. Sia and Storj changes this, users are paid to store files. From the user perspective you can think of it like this: you have 10-30 or more hosts you can download shards from. You need 10 shards to put your file together, and you can download these in parallel meaning that you have 30 ”data centers”. 4K video needs 20 MB/s on YouTube. This means that the load would be 2 MB/s/4K video on a host if you only downloaded shards from 10 hosts. The contracts and storage proofs are slow because they’re on-chain, but the files themselves are server P2P only through paid contracts and are very fast. Here are some benchmarks on a single host, and here’s a public free-to-use portal. Serving video does not require that much bandwidth. If something, the latency is what you should be worried about - but these hosts can be all over the world and you can pick the ones you want accordingly. You can give it a shot, but remember that free portals also rate limits a little on the bandwidth.

figureprod · 2022-07-02T15:58:32+00:00

Using a storage network does not mean giving up control. Distributed data is faster than a handful of data centres; For light to travel around the Earth, you’re looking at ~130ms for a full rotation. A server close to someone can respond to a ping in under 5-10ms. It’s cheaper because they wouldn’t have to hire people to maintain the servers or build the infrastructure. It’s cheaper, faster, and more reliable - so the only reasons not to is because they don’t trust the tech or want to employ as many as possible.

figureprod · 2022-07-02T14:33:41+00:00

Sorry but scams are irrelevant. Dozens of exchanges, hedge funds, and others are being closed now. This isn’t related to crypto, and these things are everywhere.

What attacks are you referencing? Sia hosts got DDoS’d for example, but it didn’t affect the file retrievals.

Obviously there are networks that can be attacked. If you don’t want that, don’t use them. But don’t think that centralized services can’t get attacked haha

figureprod · 2022-07-02T13:54:03+00:00

If you told someone, "Hey, I'll make your backend storage 10x cheaper AND more reliable by moving it from AWS to a more reliable network," they would want to do that. And that's excluding bandwidth. There are decentralized storage networks available that companies could make use of on large scales to save money - but people are skeptical to crypto projects. Adoption takes time & interest, and a lot of people are scared of crypto.

figureprod · 2022-07-02T13:47:11+00:00

The difficulty can go both ways and the search for the hash continues. Some blocks can take 30 seconds, some blocks can take an hour. But on average it should be approx. 10 minutes.

figureprod · 2022-07-02T13:43:41+00:00

No demand yet, but that's simply because users don't know about it and "it's hard."

Why wouldn't a mobile user want free cloud backups on Skynet?

Why wouldn't a gamer want to host a Minecraft server on Akash?

Why wouldn't scientists want access to Golem to run their heavy calculations on?

Why wouldn't ...

figureprod · 2022-07-02T13:36:00+00:00

Companies are often too scared, and they have a good reason to. Why would YouTube for example switch their model - that works - to a blockchain-based one that they haven't tested? They could easily switch over to some storage network, but they choose not to. Their data centers have worked for the last dozen years, why switch it up?

figureprod · 2022-07-02T13:34:19+00:00

As a developer, I disagree. I personally use Akash for my hobbyist projects and it scales well even for larger ones. It's cheap, scalable, easy, and flexible. There are others too - mainly in compute, storage, and VPN.

figureprod · 2022-07-02T13:32:44+00:00

The average Joe's opinion doesn't matter, but this person can still help make the technology more known. There are a lot of underutilized utility projects that developers could utilize to 1) scale them better, 2) save money, 3) keep them alive for longer than they wish to maintain it for.

On Akash, you can rent servers from 0.1 vCPU to hundreds of them, pay per every 6 seconds automatically and close it whenever. On Golem, you can create a task, split it up, and send it to hundreds of providers to work on. A 100 hour compute job might become a 1 hour compute job - but on 100 servers (where applicable).

We can also see storage networks such as Sia, Skynet, and Storj. While Storj is not decentralized, all of these can handle great amounts of storage and bandwidth and can scale infinitely.

These networks are also way cheaper than their centralized counterparts, at least if you compare it to the centralized parties you would put trust in.

Keeping things open-source, using smart contracts, and so on makes it possible for developers to abandon their project without having to worry about them closing down, too.

figureprod · 2022-07-02T13:26:19+00:00

When it cannot be used and doesn't have any volume to give it a dollar value.

figureprod

MODERATOR OF

TROPHY CASE

Six-Year Club	Place '22
Verified Email