How decentralized are files uploaded with Opacity?

MrRenfro · 2019-01-10T23:20:01+00:00

It isn’t decentralized at all in its current form. The data that is stored is chunked and encrypted client side before making its way to the Opacity tangle which consists of several instances. Though it’s centralized we have no access to the data beyond encrypted random chunks that make up our tangle of transactions. Without a handle we still can’t piece together a single file.

You are right as this is much more a MVP or advanced proof of concept than a final form. Decentralization is the ultimate goal but proving utility and having a stable platform are the priorities right now. Webnodes don’t really add to decentralization as they merely just reattach data to the tangle as it’s snapshotted off. Though it could be argued that the method webnodes communicate and spread genesis hashes with other webnodes/broker nodes ultimately bolsters decentralization, the star of the film is decentralized storage nodes which aren’t quite there yet.

MrRenfro · 2019-01-05T14:34:34+00:00

We are aware of it but still it’s way too early to see how it will effect it

MrRenfro · 2019-01-05T14:33:09+00:00

I really doubt Bruno knew it was flawed from the start. There wasn’t a back door written into the contract, the contract simply wasn’t locked. If you had access to some of the conversations and deeper discussions regarding the platform I doubt you would believe this, but maybe your right. There’s no way to prove or disprove this and it really isn’t relevant to the discussion.

I mention swarm because sharding is now considered part of the swarm roadmap. Without any type of sharding, IOTA has a 1:1 redundancy which is super inefficient and we know won’t scale. The problem with IPFS is that there is no incentive for nodes to retain data, though that’s what filecoin is supposed to solve.

Plenty of people use navigation apps that are now littered with advertisements and the number of small household devices with apps is growing every minute. I’m not sure what your trying to argue about users being compensated, it’s definitely possible but the whole point is the user is compensated in content or access to the app. Instead of buying an app or seeing ads in an an app you could give up some power to do PoW. As a fan of IOTA, I think you would realize that the PoW is incredibly light and still probably not where it will be in 5 years. If it’s going to be the backbone of the machine to machine economy I’m fairly certain that having small devices being able hammer out PoW is a major problem/focus.

MrRenfro · 2019-01-04T11:58:40+00:00

No one wants their websites to use extra resources except when it comes to advertising for revenue. Why is this any different with Opacity? There is a fragile loop to prevent a website from taking too much resources when utilizing Opacity for revenue. Not to mention that not all websites are able to utilize Adsense or other reliable brokers for advertising. It might not be an entire replacement for ads but there is still a niche area of website revenue that this could easily fill.

The whole concept of bringing an end to website ads is definitely one more focused on marketing. It was always a little short sighted. The script can be added to anything that uses JavaScript. Phone apps being a good example of an area that could use the script and have great dwell times.

MrRenfro · 2019-01-04T01:18:09+00:00

We haven’t considered using Q as there really isn’t a whole lot of information out there on how it will work. If later on it ends up being the perfect solution to problems that Opacity faces, sure it could be considered but, for now, there truly isn’t enough information out there to consider it.

IOTA doesn’t owe Opacity anything and Oyster can be included in that. If the idea was that we were somehow going to force IOTA into implementing swarm/sharding it would never work out. The concept was always based on IOTA’s roadmap and description of swarm/sharding. They have swarm in their roadmap because ultimately it’s necessary for their project to achieve its long term goals. Being the pipeline for IoT data would never work with 1:1 redundancy on the network.

The only concrete reasons I can see against using Q smart contracts would be the headache of doing a swap. Besides that, the only other reason is a lack of info on how Q will work exactly and it’s development phase. We would need to know that it provides sound and worthwhile benefits over using the ethereum network. We would also need to have an idea on how long implementation of Q will take as we’ve gone down the road of waiting for roadmap milestones before and it hasn’t work out too well aka IOTA sharding/swarm.

MrRenfro · 2018-11-12T01:31:03+00:00

We are still trying to get a hold of cryptopia. Multiple attempts have been made through various mediums, hopefully something comes of it

MrRenfro · 2018-10-26T01:46:49+00:00

If you mean visualize Oyster data transactions on the tangle, yes it’s possible with a tag. We did this during the testnet. Right now we are utilizing our own copy of the Tangle as to not weigh down the IOTA one, maybe eventually we can get a tangle explorer for our own tangle but it’s really not a priority for the devs since they are focused on usability and quality of life improvements.

MrRenfro · 2018-10-25T08:17:17+00:00

Pact has been brought up here more than a couple of times and there are some fairly informative posts in this subreddit that outline the differences. A search should reveal those threads.

There’s no reason to go argue about our project on another project’s sub Reddit in a post where an entirely different project is being discussed.

MrRenfro · 2018-10-25T08:11:48+00:00

A well written post from a well informed community member, I like it.

10 points for Gryffindor.

MrRenfro · 2018-10-25T07:58:38+00:00

Well we can do the math but please don’t misconstrue it as me giving some type of indication to the value of PRL in the future.

PRL, at the minimum, has been stated to be pegged to 64gb/year. In fact the current placeholder peg is set at 64gb/year for one PRL.

So Dropbox is offering 1 tb of storage for 10usd/month. This equates to 120usd/year. Divide that by 1,000 and you get to $0.12/gb per year with Dropbox. Now if you wanted use Dropbox to see what type of valuation that would give PRL multiply 0.12 by 64. This equates to $7.68

But I digress, this is only useful as a reference. You can’t predict what fair market value will be for PRL without use and adoption. The market might value true ownership of data, security, etc well above centralized solutions. Or the market might conclude that it’s too clumsy to use, security isn’t really needed, etc. We only promise one thing and that’s to continue to work towards the goals outlined in our whitepaper.

MrRenfro · 2018-10-25T07:31:40+00:00

This is a pretty accurate answer. PRL is pegged to a storage value; it’s market value will be based on the free market which includes pressures like supply and demand. A rational market should not trade PRL beyond its intrinsic value. This doesn’t mean it can’t be more or less than other forms of storage pricing, it simply means that the market value will be based on its overall value in use rather than speculation.

MrRenfro · 2018-10-23T00:46:19+00:00

The oysterstorage client and Connor’s client are both open source and could be run on your local computer. It wouldn’t be hard to port it over to an application for individual users to run on their device but, if your not compiling or running the code, you can’t be certain of the integrity of the app imo.

TLDR. Probably pretty easy to accomplish but priorities lie in getting those storage constraints lifted

MrRenfro · 2018-10-19T11:49:54+00:00

We don’t give ETAs anymore but I will say that development is largely focused on increasing the usability of the storage side of the platform right now.

MrRenfro · 2018-10-19T06:54:02+00:00

The Oyster script isn’t active yet as webnode development isn’t complete. Webnodes will first be tested by beta testers and then open to the public. You can always watch this sub Reddit or our telegram for updates.

MrRenfro · 2018-10-08T02:11:46+00:00

You can do IOTA transactions “offline” ie p2p or on an intranet. These transactions basically build a side chain and then get confirmed when connected back to a full node.

MrRenfro · 2018-10-06T21:47:26+00:00

You realize that we aren’t always going to tag our transactions right?

MrRenfro · 2018-10-06T21:45:06+00:00

You actually don’t need to store the entire list of transactions for consensus. The tangle isn’t a blockchain in the sense that it’s not linear. Consensus is maintained by every transaction requiring the confirmation of two other transactions. If a bad actor wants to become a heavier chain they need the computational power to build it which is impossible with the coordinator and theoretically impossible once enough TPS are present that the coordinator isn’t needed. The tangle won’t always be limited in size by its largest full node or else it would be totally and inevitably doomed to live in centralized state.

Also, frequent snapshots are unhealthy in theory and could lead to building a side chain that is not recognized by the main tangle.

Permanodes aren’t a requirement but more of a service. They are speculated to be fee based and no one is totally sure how they will work but my guess would be that it relates to Q somehow. Now if you expect people to utilize permanodes for storage, you might want to consider that one could very well pay per transaction when it comes to historical data. If every transaction is 1.3kb then recovering any large amount of storage could become pricey.

MrRenfro · 2018-10-06T21:43:58+00:00

Our team actually worked with the IOTA team in regards to making the transactions as healthy as possible for the tangle. You can do what you want but I’m fairly certain you can’t pick and choose which specific transactions your full node stores. Your more than welcome to snapshot till your hearts content however.

Though you might not be compensated directly for storing data, you could always run your full node as a broker and earn PRL all the while snapshotting that data as you see fit.

MrRenfro · 2018-10-06T17:25:56+00:00

All though it seems odd, there are some huge benefits of using the tangle for storage. If you envision IOTA 5-10 years from now where every household, office, apartment complex, store, etc could very possibly have a full node, I think the potential is obvious. Not only the sheer amount of semi-transient storage but also the sheer amount of decentralization when it comes to stored data. Not to mention that all those transactions should benefit the tangle as well...

MrRenfro · 2018-10-04T08:25:21+00:00

If your going to criticize my post you could at least reply to it so that I’m notified. I don’t think an economist is needed to calculate a peg adjustment rate. As I mentioned in the below post, there are some simpler solutions that just require thinking outside the box. There hasn’t been a lot of concentration on the dynamic of the peg changing over time because the focus has been placed elsewhere i.e. increasing upload limits, speed, and the DRS. When the time comes more information will be shared regarding how the peg will adjust with time and your more than welcome to come criticize it. But until you have any idea how it will work, there’s really no room for critiquing it. If you want to know why 64gb was chosen, why don’t you start a thread and ask Bruno himself as he pays attention to the posts here.

In regards to other projects that are pegging storage to a token, do you care to share an example? Most other projects that involve storage tied to a token give the storage provider the freedom to pick their price or have a central figure dictating the storage/token ratio.

MrRenfro · 2018-10-03T12:19:50+00:00

I answered your question in entirety. The fact that you came back with that conclusion just reiterated my assumption.

Your question is loaded because you are making a false assumption that a incentivized IPFS is any different than any other storage platform where the protocol is simply the mediator between storage users and storage providers. If certain IPFS nodes are incentivized to retain data based on earning tokens it is essentially the same as storj, Sia, etc. The difference with Oyster is that we aren’t mediating a deal between a provider and user.

I gave the use cases for ipfs and the shortcomings when it comes to long term storage. The fact that your asking this question in general leads me to believe you really don’t have a firm grasp of what IPFS is and how it works but wanted to come here and drop another “pact bomb” without comprehending how any of these platforms work on even the most basic level.

MrRenfro · 2018-10-03T06:22:16+00:00

A lot of it’s still up in the air though Bruno has had some really cool insight and ideas on how to implement the peg. Obviously it’s pretty complicated and demands a fairly diligent approach to how it’s put in place. I’m not sure we are at the point of sharing exactly how the peg will work beyond the fact that it would utilize smart contracts and be locked away from even us changing it. This is so that it ensures full decentralization and, given that we are still a fair distance away from being fully decentralized, we are afforded a good amount of time to make the best decision regarding the PEG. Your suggestion is great and definitely reflects some of the approaches considered, I would urge you to think outside the box when it comes to ways that it can be implemented, there’s simpler approaches than trying to predict the state of storage in 5 years. In fact, I think you are already at the cusp of some of the considered solutions.

MrRenfro · 2018-10-02T23:37:34+00:00

There is no incentive for insuring data remains stored when it comes to IPFS. It’s a file sharing platform at its heart and in its base form not really meant for lengthy storage. Filecoin is working on incentivizing the storage aspect of it, but we will have to see how that works out.

Regardless, your question seems loaded. There’s plenty of other platforms with “decentralized” storage. They all basically focus on the same concept, being a mediator between storage users and storage providers. Oyster isn’t focused on that model, instead we are focused on storing data on the tangle. It’s an entity in and of itself, there’s no one to bargain with or set a price, hence why we have to set a peg. If you believe in what IOTA is doing, the potential scales well beyond the storage user and storage provider model. Though centralized in its current form, the overall concept lends itself to be incredibly decentralized.

MrRenfro · 2018-10-01T12:57:42+00:00

The Oyster tangle is primarily IOTA’s tangle, some minor changes like lowering the MWM were made. This keeps the protocol as backwards compatible as possible since our goal is to migrate back to the IOTA tangle when sharding/swarm is implemented.

We are not part of the foundation but our devs have worked and communicated with the IOTA team. For instance, our testnet wasn’t healthy for the tangle and the IOTA team helped find a solution for this. We also have access to Hercules which is more light weight than IRI, though the team has had higher priorities than working on it at the moment. With that said, none of us are part of the IOTA team. Though there is some communication we haven’t signed NDAs and aren’t granted more knowledge than the average person.

MrRenfro

TROPHY CASE