I'm one of the creators of the Beaker browser[1] and the reason we use Dat is that as a p2p protocol, it offers a lot of neat properties, including making datasets more resilient. As long as one peer on the network is hosting a dataset, it will be reachable, even if the original author has stopped hosting it.
I won't speak authoritatively on behalf of the Dat team, but I believe one of their goals is to make it difficult for public scientific datasets to be lost, and data living on a centralized server is particularly vulnerable to that.
Because Dat is just a protocol, decentralization is a choice. For quick, ephemeral exchanges direct P2P works brilliantly. For longer lived data sets, sharing it with a (commercial) mirror might make sense. Or perhaps you host it yourself. The beauty is that you, as a user of the protocol, get to decide what works best for you.
We have a few approaches to the disappearing data.
First, we are working with libraries, universities, or other groups with large amounts of storage/bandwidth. They'd help provide hosting for datasets used inside their institutes or other essential datasets.
Second, we started to work on at-home data hosting with Project Svalbard[1]. This is kind of a SETI@home idea where people could donate server space at home to help backup "unhealthy" data (data that doesn't have many peers).
Finally, for "published" data (such as data on Zenodo or Dataverse), we can use those sites as a permanent HTTP peer. So if no data is available over p2p sites then you can get it directly from the published source.
As others said, decentralization is an approach but not a solution. It gives you the flexibility to centralize or distribute data as necessary without being tied to a specific service. But we still need to solve the problem!
That’s something we think about a lot, and decentralization isn’t a silver bullet solution to data loss, but I do think it’s more resilient than what we typically do now.
To counter that, you can take measures to mirror important datasets with a dedicated peer. It requires effort, but it at least makes it much, much harder for example, for a government agency to take down public data without warning.
This may not always be the case, but, so far, blockchains have low throughput and fat datasets that you have to sync. Compared to other databases, they don't perform that well, so if you don't need decentralized strict consensus, a blockchain isn't a good choice.
Ah cool! I hadn't seen quilt before. You are spot on with the differences.
Dat is targeting similar users to Quilt. But we are also looking more broadly at libraries, labs, or other larger academic/gov't organizations managing data. There are a lot of data publishing tools in the sciences such as Zenodo. We'd love for it to be easier to download/publish data to those places. Dat is decentralized, so it really fits well in integrating other data tools.
You can use Dat to replace file transfer software like rsync, so it is a bit more general purpose.
Another difference not mentioned is that Dat really starts at the protocol level while Quilt is more software-focused. Dat protocol is a peer-to-peer protocol for syncing files, modeled off Git and BitTorrent. We built the data management software on top of the protocol.
Edit: I should mention we don't offer any hosting right now, all the data up there is temporarily cached. There is public hosting via Hashbase[1] from the Beaker team. The cool part about Dat being p2p is that it's really easy to switch hosts or use multiple hosts.
> If I uploaded a bunch of data that was obtained illegally there is nothing stopping me from doing that right?
The hosting provider is responsible for removing illegal content. Dat itself doesn't track any content. The datproject.org is more of a registry, not a host.
> Also, is your peer to peer network able to be attacked by nefarious users like a sybil attack? Is there a situation where I could alter or forge data?
No, only authorized people can write to each dat key (currently only the owner, but multi-writer is coming soon). All the writes are signed with the writers private key and then verified whenever content is downloaded.
1. Quilt is for profit while Dat is non-profit.
2. Dat has ~20 datasets that are public Quilt has 50+ that are public
3. Dat is on a shared network while Quilt is hosted on a centralized server
4. Both of them offer version control and hosting. Quilt has private hosting for a fee. Dat seems to have only public hosting
5.Quilt is funded by YC. Dat is funded by non profits.
6. Quilt has a Python interface while Dat has one in Javascript
I understand who Quilt is targeting but I'm having trouble understanding who Dat is targeting?