Distributed: Difference between revisions

From SoylentNews
Jump to navigation Jump to search
No edit summary
m (Protected "Distributed" ([Edit=Allow only administrators] (indefinite) [Move=Allow only administrators] (indefinite)))
 
(10 intermediate revisions by 3 users not shown)
Line 1: Line 1:
== Synopsis ==
{{archival}}
Slashdot has a quite geeky use base, it might be supposed, that a lot of them would be willing to use a browser plugin to access Altslashdot, if the incentive would be save the community, disable ads etc. Still, a centralised webhosting would be needed, e.g. to attract novices or to support rare browsers.
A few proposals on distributed architecture, that would allow to maintain independency and sharing of costs.


The idea is, that if a lot of users use a bittorrent--style decentralised hosting, running the centralised web server would be cheap enough to live off ads and donations.
* [[Synced servers|Synced servers style]];
 
* [[Bit-torrent style]].
== Technology ==
* [[Bitcloud style]].
There is some discussion about a relevant technology already. See e.g. [http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20110512/02063714244/could-bittorrent-be-distributed-social-network-people-have-been-clamoring.shtml| Could BitTorrent Be The Distributed Social Network People Have Been Clamoring For?]. In fact, a rudimentary technology that would serve a static site exists already, e.g. [http://forum.bittorrent.com/topic/17182-idea-btsync-based-web-sites| btsync based web sites].
 
Surely, a lot od development would be needed. But the upside would be, that Altslashdot would be independent of businesses, dependent on users -- a good thing, as it would serve only the latter.
 
"Cheap" services like authentication or handling of user data like mod points could be done on the central server -- it is rare, that someone logs in or mods a comment, when compared to reading contents. Also, the former requires only a minimal bandwidth.
 
While centralising authentication and user data would make things much simpler, a special care should be given to limitting of permissions of the central server owners. For example, it might be an inherent part of the protocole, that:
* important data is mirrored outside the central server;
* users can vote on chosing a new central server.

Latest revision as of 20:51, 27 September 2016

Obsolete Page
This page is obsolete and only retained for archival purposes.

A few proposals on distributed architecture, that would allow to maintain independency and sharing of costs.