1. Are there controls (i.e. proof-of-stake) to enforce equitable and lasting storage of your items on others' machines?
2. What is the consensus model for marking peers as bad actors?
3. What are the redundancy guarantees? That is, how many nodes store my data?
4. What is the "currency" of sorts that I must "pay" in order to store a certain amount? Amount of hard disk I contribute back?
5. Why was the AGPL chosen? Surely adoption by any means, commercial or otherwise, would be welcome in a system that has equitable sharing guarantees. Now if I want to implement your spec in my choice license, I can't even read your reference implementation.
Maybe some fodder for the FAQ. If not answered later, I'll peruse the whitepaper.
zcash is the currency.
On IPFS, something gets on your computer only if you decide to let it, and there are blacklists to automatically keep off material you don't want.
On ORC, it seems that encrypted pieces of everything get stored, so you can wind up with all sorts of things you don't want, but on the other hand might be able to deny legal responsibility.
With FreeNet though, you can anonymously post and distribute content to others. I didn't see anything on the page or FAQ indicating if you could create a public key/link (like you can with Mega).
Anyway, my comment wasn't meant as a total comparison, just focusing on one particular issue.
Yes, I have forked my work on Storj and have given it to
Counterpoint to help raise some money to continue to develop
it. Please note that this project is not a competitor to
Storj as it is fully distributed, there is no business model
(because there are no bridges), and it is managed by a 501c3
Edit: see https://orc.network
- You acquired some "pre-mine" tokens (apparently with no vesting)
- You pre-sold those tokens before the fundraiser
- You quit the company shortly after
- You then proceeded to slander the company on Reddit (something something "radical transparency")
- You then forked the company's project and started calling it your own. But it's not "competing" because you're using a 501c3 tied to an unrelated hackerspace in Georgia as an umbrella for its fundraising (possibly risking its tax-exempt status).
I think this is a fair question to ask given the circumstances: Is your goal here to create a great open source project, or to damage Storj?
- Yes, early storj employees were given tokens on a schedule related to achieving certain milestones
- Yes, when I felt it was appropriate for my own future, I sold those tokens
- Yes, not long after I sold, I (and others) left
- No, my intent was not to slander, but simply to explain why I have disappeared from the community and why core development has slowed
- Yes I forked a free software project and our hackerspace is providing what's called a "comprehensive sponsorship" which in no way risks 501c3 status
My goal has always been to create a great project and never to harm Storj Labs. Though, admittedly, given the circumstances I understand how it might appear that way. Because of that, can we not turn this thread into what happened on Reddit?
It looks like their website is also based on the same theme.
From a commented out paragraph:
ORC is a non-profit free software project sponsored by <a href="https://counterpoint.info">Counterpoint Hackerspace</a>. It's team is composed of previous authors and contributors to <a href="https://bitcore.io">Bitcore</a>, <a href="https://storj.io">Storj</a>, <a href="https://ipfs.io">IPFS</a>, <a href="https://ethereum.org">Ethereum</a>, and <a href="https://z.cash">Zcash</a>. We are strong proponents of anonymity, decentralization, and community and we are building ORC to bring those qualities to the cloud. We are passionate about the work we've done but we <a href="https://www.generosity.com/fundraising/orc-distributed-anony... help</a> to continue hacking the planet!
That is the impression I get from the Storj and ORC faq's. They both are distributed storage networks with files split up in pieces and encrypted. Storj uses the blockchain to make files immutable, ORC uses tor hidden services and zcash to make the file owners anonymous and the servers hidden.
From the whitepaper Abstract:
"A peer-to-peer cloud storage network implementing client-side encryption would allow users to transfer and share data without reliance on a third party storage provider. The removal of central controls would mitigate most traditional data failures and outages, as well as significantly increase security, privacy, and data control. Peer-to-peer networks are generally unfeasible for production storage systems, as data availability is a function of popularity, rather than utility. We propose a solution in the form of a challenge-response verification system coupled with direct payments. In this way we can periodically check data integrity, and offer rewards to peers maintaining data. We further propose that in order to secure such a system, participants must have complete anonymity in regard to both communication and payments."
(Not saying ORC is gibberish at all, but I do have seem the most simple and stupid ideas written in tech projects whitepapers over the last years.)
Why can't a project write all it wants in HTML pages, with links, clickable topics, separated pages, images, code snippets, examples etc., everything that could make it better to read and understand?
"The ORC Project is a peer-to-peer network of computers that coordinate anonymously over Tor to allocate their unused hard disk capacity into a collective cloud. Developers can use the ORC network as an object storage platform in place of the popular cloud services offered by Amazon, Google, and Microsoft. Peers automatically pay each other based on storage used, bandwidth, and availability using the anonymous cryptocurrency Zcash for a fraction of the cost of using a traditional centralized cloud.
In the ORC network, files are encrypted on the user's computer, shredded into smaller chunks, and then stored on many different computers around the world. Redundancy is achieved through the use of erasure codes so that your data can always be recovered even in the event of large network outages. ORC is completely decentralized, meaning that no single company or organization has control of your data, only you!"
The webpage also says, "Redundancy is achieved through the use of erasure codes so that your data can always be recovered even in the event of large network outages."
Does this means files can't be lost, as long as you keep paying your bill?
>Does this means files can't be lost, as long as you keep paying your bill?
The white-paper mentions:
>"ORC will soon implement client-side Reed-Solomon erasure coding (Plank (1996)). Erasure coding algorithms break a file into k shards, and programmatically create m parity shards, giving a total of k + m = n shards".
So at first glance its seems like the usenet parchive/PAR2 redundancy methodology, but storing the parity shards locally (client side). Well that's my interpretation of this section of the white-paper anyways.
So in short: it certainly doesn't mean that the files "can't be lost", but it means the owner of the files can rebuild the files using parity shards from client side in that case that network outages affect file availability.
npm install -g @orcproject/orc
npm install -g orcproject/orc
Mostly kidding, but really, this is pretty close to "Pied Piper" isn't it?