But from all I can tell this is just a good old website. Somebody has control over the domain name. Points it to servers of his choice. And the servers deliver content of his choice. What's decentralized about it?
We don't need the domain, you can take the https://github.com/dtube/production repository, ipfs add -r it on ipfs, and use DTube this way -> https://ipfs.io/ipfs/QmRWPnY8h7Eg4v74GtKT6UBy2kUAN139QwYPUrg...
(few bugs but it works apart from /home not being rendered on first load, you need to click the logo)
What is decentralised:
- The website (its fully static and can be hosted on ipfs)
- The video storage (IPFS)
- The account system / commenting / voting / subscribing
(when you do that, it directly creates the transaction on the blockchain)
What isnt decentralised:
- The upload endpoints (upldr*.d.tube). You can legitimately avoid it if you have a local IPFS node running and you add files yourself, however it's really not convenient for users.
- The search endpoint (asksteem.com). This is used for the search, tags browsing, and related videos.
- Server side rendering stuff for robots only (we enabled that recently)
P.S: I am the founder of DTube
By removing the certbot role from the ansible config and adding a locally running debian 9 vm as a upldr host in the inventory file.
You can run the ansible script and it will provision a full upldr node, you'd then have to edit your local hosts file to point upldr1,2,3,4,5&6 to the IP of the VM.
Then running your local copy of dtube any uploads will be sent to those nodes will be processed on the upldr host you created.
This is all untested but it should work fine, nginx might throw some cors issues but those are easily remedied.
I've been meaning to try it out for a while but life has been doing its thing
P.S. I do ops things for DTube.
You could put the file into ipfs via another method and then using the upload feature of DTube specify the hash, so if someone is willing to let you upload to their node then you can do things that way.
Not to say that our current systems of manual moderation are perfect, but at least it's a step removed from mob rule, with recourse usually available if a video is wrongly flagged for simply expressing unpopular opinion.
If a video tries to express unpopular viewpoints at DTube, it would seem impossible for it to ever get listed again without waiting for the tides of public opinion to turn, which could take much longer if these kinds of moderation systems become prevalent and the majority could silence the voices of the minority so directly.
Decentralized moderation is a hard problem, and I don't claim to have a good solution myself, but I'd rather take centralized services over decentralized ones with moderation implemented as rule by majority with no recourse. That seems like a dangerously slippery slope towards dystopia.
Still tyranny of the majority (or of the influential stakeholders, actually), but it's a different issue.
the popularity of this thread on hackernews makes it obviously needed, and im quite certain with our popularity we would get quality pull requests from the community
But search (discoverability) is precisely where one of the biggest problems with YouTube lies. The trouble is that YouTube has enormous power over content creators by its centralized search portal only.
But yes I agree. Us controlling related videos and the search engine, is basically the same as YouTube. If we want to make a video popular, we can, and that's bad.
Sadly decentralised search for DTube would be a very interesting project, but not something we are willing to spend months of developer time on. If we ever see a good enough decentralised solution for search, we will adopt it, even if it reduces our quality a little.
We have our own gateway that we use for pictures (snap1.d.tube).
These IPFS gateways are a bit like a CDN system. The same file will load through any gateway. example https://ipfs.io/ipfs/Qmb14Qr2Jk55SDu3dtUNccZw7GDpzCHa8VeoZok... is the same as https://snap1.d.tube/ipfs/Qmb14Qr2Jk55SDu3dtUNccZw7GDpzCHa8V... or through any IPFS gateway.
Also if you run ipfs locally and use the localhost:8080 gateway, then it's also going full p2p.
you can even mount ipfs as a readonly filesystem and cat that hash and get the content.
Once you've managed to connect to a node you can usually explore the topology of the network and find other peers so you only need the centralized resource temporarily to bootstrap new nodes. I'm not too familiar with IPFS but I imagine it works in a similar way.
Yeah, "Bootstrapping" a distributed network requires some sort of entrypoint. There are a couple of solutions, I'll share what IPFS is using.
First we have mDNS for local discovery. When you start a IPFS node, it starts announcing it's addresses over the local network. So this solution is pretty decentralized, as it'll connect with any node it can find. This doesn't work over the backbone though.
Secondly, we (Protocol Labs) run a couple of "bootstrap" nodes. They are normal IPFS nodes, but they run behind DNS and a static IP. Then in the standard distribution of IPFS Core (go-ipfs and js-ipfs) we hardcode the addresses. So when you start your node, it connects to the bootstrap nodes, which then shares which nodes they are connected with, so everyone ends up connected. This ends up introducing a bit of centralization, but because they are normal IPFS nodes, the community could agree to also connect to other bootstrap nodes, the only thing needed is a static address (optional really, but "Good to have") and a IPFS node running there.
Lastly, we have Signalling servers for webrtc and websocket connections (mainly for js-ipfs in the browser). This basically acts as a centralized endpoint for nodes to find each other. This is probably the most centralized solution to the bootstrapping problem.
So most parts of it could at their core be used in a distributed fashion, but are actually accessed via CDNs. E.g. you could use ipfs-companion to alter all instances of ipfs.io URLs to point to a local IPFS daemon that is connected to the IPFS network in a distributed fashion.
I did just that and streamed a video on DTube via a local IPFS daemon and the result was pretty underwhelming, since it took quite some time for the video to load, but I don't dare to evaluate why that is so. After that it does have the nice benefit though that the same video streams instantly on any other machine in my home network!
In a transitional phase to a distributed web I'd expect a lot of websites to employ a similar approach of using CDNs at first (since not everybode has local nodes running), but its sad to see that some of the flagship projects like DTube aren't even open source (and I have no idea if they ever plan to be) and/or have a distributed version available.
Could be that you just started the IPFS node and it didn't really have any time yet to connect to a large enough number of peers.
But yeah, as you said, the benefit is that after the fetch from the internet backbone, the content now lives much closer for the next time.
Disclaimer: I work for Protocol Labs on IPFS
PS: Keep up the great work on IPFS!
Sure for popular content like Google.com. or the top 1000 of YouTube will work. But the rest will always crawl to a stand still, since the content will always be on a far away or slow node...
Popular content is free to host while content that isn't popular is costly to host.
The more unpopular your content the higher the cost becomes.
Currently, without monetization in place, popular content is easy to host while unpopular content is not. Monetization levels the playing field.
Content that is not popular enough to remain in the IPFS caches will require filecoin or some other form of paid hosting to keep it around, thusly increased cost.
How could Apple or Google or Amazon or Facebook make money by promoting a distributed internet?
Perhaps unprofitability is a feature, not a bug.
Individuals can choose to seed content they care about (given an effective UI), which means the content will be available as long as enough people care about it. “Enough” does need to be a sufficiently small number.
I'd like to think so, but a more cynical take is that efforts like this to trade on 'distributed' will either (and most likely) fail or, if they do get traction, ditch the distributed backend once it's served its purpose as a selling-point to attract early adoption.
With IPFS+Filecoin and a few other parts, it
might become quite trivial to host your own
However, until DTube release a client so that the network can build, it's just a centralized video platform using IPFS and STEEM as storage backends. Unless clients are made available, it might as well use S3 and Postgres.
Of course, the second time you load the content (or if another node on your local network already loaded it) via a local node, it'll be much faster than the public gateway d.tube is running.
Disclaimer: I work for Protocol Labs specifically on IPFS.
(I believe someone stated DTube was running behind a CDN.)
1. the content text and meta data is on the STEEM blockchain
2. Dtube is storing the videos etc on IPFS
so by reading the STEEM blockchain, we can get the content even without DTUBE.
Dtube is an app, just another one to talk to the STEEM blockchain and they make revenue by taking a small part of the revenue from the content creators.
The video content comes from ipfs - if you run a local node and install the browser extension to redirect requests from gateway.ipfs.io to your local node - then you have no dependence upon a single service.
HTML for a DApp, and IPFS, connect to a local Ethereum node. The local node uses a P2P (decentralized) connection[^3] to the Ethereum network. It therefore relies on the availability of the network, but not of any single org. (Your ISP can still disconnect you, though, at the physical layer or several other layers.)
What I'm saying is that a dapp can be contained into your .html and query the different APIs or the Ethereum network via your own clients/nodes.
You download Google Chrome. For all you know it's phoning home all your passwords to Google in a way they can decrypt and they can empty your bank account.
Similarly, as a user, contributing upvotes, comments, etc. nets you a curation reward, but this comes in trickles mostly unless you lease your steem power to vote bots.
Also worth noting that the whole steem platform on the currency end of things is completely centralized, so if that matters to you, this is important to know.
This is a central Youtube-like clone it seems. I can't scale in bandwidth and has a central governance model.
Plus the coin is worthless:
"The number of Steem available is set to double annually, making its supply growth exponential - a possible drag on its future value in the market"
"IPFS is cool, but there is no magic. Someone needs to seed the files, and your browser cannot permanently store huge files (local storage is limited to 50MB on most browsers), so seeding through the app directly is not possible as of today. " (https://steemit.com/video/@heimindanger/introducing-dtube-a-... thnx ForkLDing).
Disclaimer: working for 13 years on an academically-pure Bittorrent-based decentralised solution with my university lab.
As far as I can tell - and I'm sure there's a lot I've misunderstood - STEEM is essentially a market for on-line influence. You gain STEEM for upvotes etc. and the more STEEM tokens you have (STEEM Power), the more influence you have in terms of who gets STEEM tokens.
Now, this sounds kind of pyramid-y to begin with, but without significant inflation, such a system would seem doomed to form an oligopoly of a few users who, by virtue of their "STEEM Power" would gain an ever-increasing share of the tokens minted, pushing everyone else out and probably killing the whole ecosystem. Of course, that may still happen even with inflation.
Unlimited money creation is never sustainable, history shows. An online attention coin can't change economics. The future of television probably is not build on a high inflation economy or destructive hyperinflation.
I figured people here might actually do any amount of research instead of just saying vague statements like "resting on your laurels". You have no idea what you are commenting on because it is 2 year old information, but you are acting like an expert. Pathetic.
There is a lot more you need to read and that is ok, you barely have any understanding of the fundamentals.
People are able to allocate their steempower to other users. If large accounts are misbehaving, small and medium sized accounts band together to make it stop, it is mutually assured destruction. Anyone can band together with anyone else and allocate power from their account to someone else. The super majority of people are good natured and want free speech and band together to combat against abusive/bad actors, of which there is only a handful on steemit and there is no issue at all
Also the supply is not set to double every year, this source is completly outdated. This model was changed more than a year ago. Current inflation rate is 9.5% per year, reducing by 0.5% per year until it reaches 1% per year (I believe)
The coin isn't worthless at all... It's publicly traded at around 3$ today on many exchanges.
Lastly the quote about IPFS is mine, and I actually believe we will be able to make people seed the video they are currently watching through our embed player soon, thanks to the progress of js-ipfs.
Also, I don't think I need to mention the fact that Steem is not a coin for trading (even though it has 3 sec transactions and literally 0 transaction fees thanks, again, to DPOS), so the big initial inflation that will slow down by a big margin every year is potentially good for the coin.
The wiki has this quote (emphasis mine)
>Tribler is a Bittorrent-compatible alternative to Youtube. It is designed to protect your privacy, build a web-of-trust, be attack-resilient, and reward content creators directly. We are building a micro-economy without banks, without advertisers, and without any government
I see this sentiment in almost all blockchain/crypto circles, including a lot of government funded research groups.
1.) How does that get unified in the mind of contributors? How does working to abolish the very thing that enables you to do your research without having to make bank doing it
2.) It seem to me that in general people want government. See Thomas Hobbes et.al. for studies in academia, or whichever region descended into anarchy most recently. Whenever things are "improving" you see government emerging. Why is so much rhetoric directed against government, when really what everyone is talking about is abusive government?( Which is a much messier problem to even define, but seem to me to be ultimately the correct problem people are trying to solve. That might be be done through building decentralized government -I think so -, but there are cases where centralization makes sense.)
I'd like to dispel the "anarchy == chaos" sentiment. Anarchy as a political philosophy has a long history of deep thought behind it. I personally see it more as a direction than an end goal. Anarchism is a desire to abolish all unnecessary and/or involuntary hierarchies. As Noam Chomsky puts it in [this interview], "it’s not at all the general image that you described — people running around the streets, you know, breaking store windows — but anarchism is a conception of a very organized society, but organized from below by direct participation at every level, with as little control and domination as is feasible, maybe none."
In fact, a functioning anarchist polity exists in the world right now: the [Democratic Federation of Northern Syria]. Other such political arrangements have existed for brief periods in the past (one other example is [Revolutionary Catalonia]). Why have none of them lasted? It seems more to do with traditional hierarchical nation-states attacking and re-subverting them than any internal failing.
I don't know of the Thomas Hobbes studies that you reference when you say that _people want government_, but I would question it. I find it self-evident that "shared resources require _governance_", but I see no reason that such governance needs to look like a traditional nation-state. People don't want _chaos_, people don't want _mob rule_. But again, the problems of chaos and mob rule can be solved without traditional nation-states. I'm sure societies that trend toward anarchism could also find (voluntary, non-coercive) ways to fund basic research.
So yes, I say. Let's find ways to build economies without governments. Let's find ways to offload some of the centralized work of governments to decentralized technologies. Money, for example. Keeping official ledgers, for example. Let's think about how we can restructure society so that power is more diffuse, rather than being so concentrated. Governments already exist, and will continue to be a useful (if fraught) tool for governing many things, but maybe they don't need to micromanage all of it anymore.
>Why have none of them lasted? It seems more to do with traditional hierarchical nation-states attacking and re-subverting them than any internal failing.
Different perspective(slightly provocative): people in a competing anarchic polity who had chosen to centralise more to be more efficient wiped out a competitor. It just looks like a nation state to you, because you frame it that way. Really it's people acting in what they perceive to be their best interest.
>But again, the problems of chaos and mob rule can be solved without traditional nation-states.
Sure, I mainly agree. But I think the next step is scaling the swiss model upwards, or making organizations like the EU more democratic. Anarchy is basically the equivalent "rewriting the whole codebase from scratch" in software: simpler in execution, but throws out the baby with the bathwater(and then not thinking through things properly and relying on "charity" and other notions).
>So yes, I say. Let's find ways to build economies without governments. Let's find ways to offload some of the centralized work of governments to decentralized technologies. Money, for example. Keeping official ledgers, for example. Let's think about how we can restructure society so that power is more diffuse, rather than being so concentrated. Governments already exist, and will continue to be a useful (if fraught) tool for governing many things, but maybe they don't need to micromanage all of it anymore.
Agreed. How do we deal with taxation? This is the elephant in the room: lots of people don't like taxes (even though they payed for starting almost everything good in this world, including the transistor and the internet), so how do we replace that system for funding common goods in our decentralized world?
Good to hear we are still nicely under the radar:-)
We are the oldest and largest ledger research lab of Europe. (117 contributors for all repos, https://github.com/Tribler/tribler/graphs/contributors)
> 1.) How does that get unified in the mind of contributors?
Fascinating question. Universities have all sorts of measures to shield the actual researchers from providers of funds. Academic independence is deeply culturally and procedural embedded. For instance, as a tenured professor, I can't realistically be fired for creating "illegal innovations".
> 2.) It seem to me that in general people want government.
In my opinion, an economy is too important to leave to governments to run and tune. Sadly we don't have an alternative to government-led economies. Self-governance and self-regulation indeed leads to abusive behavior. e.g. Google "moral hazard banking".
But isn't that decision itself a governing decision, just one where we decide to tune for competition (for example)? It seems to me you can't avoid governance, as soon as there is power, there is either governance by the strong (robber barons) or by a system which tries to balance and - as you called it - tune things (e.g., an elected government enforcing anti-monopoly laws to improve competition)
The following Github issues all contain the detailed class project descriptions, as first item. Engineering projects are creating a storagecoin, fully self-replicating bots, self-sovereign identity. All for 4-5 engineers to do in 10 weeks. Last post is the final project report.
Key lesson of "Blockchain Engineering" class: blockchain is 1% hashing/crypto and 99% Engineering.
(thank you for clicking around on our website!)
Thus, the importance of community. We all yearn for a return to the era of community-oriented sites, built by enthusiasts and maintained by the life-force of real people, whose intentions are not commercial in nature but rather community oriented.
So, I look forward to the eventual retiring of this heinous term, "whales". It is the community that matters.
In other words, is it reasonable to expect STEEM to not primarily attract those with commercial intentions?
Its not unreasonable to give people - no matter whether their intentions are commercial or otherwise - a means of safe exchange of value, without commercialising that exchange. Or, is it?
The trouble with the current way "influence" or money is distributed in STEEM blockchain is that, 2 - 3 whale accounts has more influence and means to influence the entire community even if the entire community stands together.
Though I am hopeful that this will be addressed by the EOS's community project.
It's a strictly technical solution to the problem of video hosting centralization.
Depending on your point of view it might be a good, bad or neutral thing.
In my opinion, it's good that we first try to have a solution that is first proven to work and then try to think about how (or if we should) integrate a remuneration system to the solution.
EDIT: Nevermind, found it, link below:
The DTube FAQ answer for "Where does the money come from" just says "The STEEM blockchain keeps printing new STEEM everyday. These new printed STEEM are given out as rewards." I'm hoping there's more to it than that, but I couldn't find what the mechanism for bringing value into the STEEM ecosystem is.
As far as I can tell, users of DTube don't pay anything to watch videos, or to comment, or to like videos, but their likes determine who gets paid on the STEEM blockchain. So who buys STEEM tokens and why?
"Every day, the Steem blockchain mints new STEEM tokens and adds them to a community's "rewards pool". These tokens are then awarded to users for their contributions, based on the votes that their content receives. Users who hold more tokens in their account as "Steem Power" will get to decide where a larger portion of the rewards pool is distributed."
A fresh account will give like 0.002 per vote, while my account with 5000 Steem gives about 2$ per vote.
Also, people who vote get 'curation rewards' from the system. Depending on how early you voted and helped discovered a content, you get rewarded for it, even if it's only a small share, it adds up
Imagine if Facebook used a crypto for their ads instead of money. And you gain money back from people who like your ad making the ad cheaper or even profitable.
In order to have visible advertised content, advertisers need to buy STEEM in order to vote on it and gain visibility.
See 8chan for instance: I really like the blend of reddit's flexibility (where anybody can create their own board) coupled with 4chan-style anonymity and lack of karma/upvotes etc...
Unfortunately 8chan became the destination for the generally super far-right 4channers who were too extreme even by 4chan standards. It's like 4chan's 4chan if you will. With such a reputation good luck convincing people to join your knitting-themed board on 8chan.
Similarly, Dailymotion is reputed for porn/NSFW/copyrighted content not available on Youtube and Voat is like 8chan but for redditors.
> Regardless of your opinions on the subject it's a bad thing for the platform [DTube]
I don't agree. If DTube becomes associated with the far right, which by the way is totally jumping to conclusions at this early stage, and if that then becomes a profitable niche for them, then I'd argue they have a legitimate business.
Compare it all to something like MSNBC vs Fox News. Both are quite successful, running political content for people at different points on the ideological spectrum. While it's true that the viewers of one probably find the other's viewers disgusting and deplorable, I fail to see how that's a problem from a business standpoint.
That being said I browsed a bit through d.tube since my earlier comment and unlike the parent I don't see that much "controversial" content. However I don't see a lot of quality videos I'd be interested in either... Mostly vlogs and cryptocurrency-related videos.
Given what happend over the last year with the Adpocalypse, most of them realized that being at the whim of Youtube is a real risk, and are now looking to diverisfy their income streams (see growth of Patreon).
Now, if you're talking conspiracy theories, that's totally different, and still not a problem, for many who believe in free expression, regardless if they're interested or not.
Well people still advertise on Reddit next to T_D and other nutjob subreddits. Unfortunately.
Contrast that with something like https://voat.co/ for instance. At the moment I can see only one (1) post in the entire front page that's not alt-right politics. Special mention to the highly upvoted "If women have the right to terminate unwanted life because it's in their body, do we have the right to terminate unwanted illegals because they're inside our country?". I don't expect most advertisers will want to touch that with a one parsec pole.
Let them go to voat, it was specifically founded for the alt-right, same as gab.ai as a Nazi twitter clone. They're all alone out there and don't have any influence anymore... the problem with T_D specifically is that their users lesk out to other, normal subreddit and spew their stuff there. Ban the subreddit, ban all the top commenters/submissions, their admins and forward the dirty stuff to law enforcement.
Except it wasn't. It simply experienced more and more waves of users from banned subreddits (which were mainly alt-right related ones) coming in and eventually making an hard right turn on the main website culture, driving out most existing center/left users. It did serve me as a lesson on what external influences can do to existing communities tho.
Tor, Monero, etc all suffer from basically the same problem. Ultimately, if you value freedom from censorship, you shouldn't let the association with others who share that value (though perhaps for different, less noble reasons than you) bother you. Otherwise no platform that has that property will ever take off.
Is the desire for freedom from censorship even actually a problem?
That's what I use youtube for now.
By the way, you'll find that kind on Youtube and Facebook, too. I hope you avoid both of them. Best avoid Google all together, because they own Youtube and are guilty by association.
Ah I see, DTube is based upon IPFS, while peertube relies upon good ol' BitTorrent directly (though IPFS uses BitTorrent too?)
Can anything be done to prevent or deter this?
Other than maybe leaving comments on the page?
That is, if I upload a video of a cat doing some funny thing I'll get more tokens (potentially) that with a super technical video.
Meanwhile, incentivizing popular stuff doesn't take anything away from you or your content. You're not being penalised, so why complain?
Thanks for pointing that! I didn't though of it this way. To be honest, my fear is that this platform could turn possibly in some sort of niche. Right now, popular content is about X, so if I want to make quick profits, I'll create a video about X. More people will join and do the same.
I'm sure there are ways to fix that like giving people incentives for posting in unpopular topics. Potentially, each topic could be its own market!
> You're not being penalised, so why complain?
Not complaining at all for now. Just sharing my current thoughts! If I join a social media, I'd love to have diversity of content and opinion. I think in STEEM that could be hard, as it is in Reddit unless you subscribe to unpopular ones. Not a 100% bad thing though!
Again not trying to be harsh, but I feel that the UI, in this stages looks a little bit too much like youtube, giving it a cheap feel, that makes it a bit hard to sell to "normal" people.
And oh, I feel that having three decimals on the earnings looks a bit weird to me. Isn't two decimals enough? Say $116.688 is hard for my brain to parse either it's 116 dollars and 68.8 cents or maybe it's around 1 million dollars???
Edit: Please tell me why the downvotes.
It's rather old (2016-08) but at a quick glance it appears to be correct and still relevant.
And there isn't much we can do about that, it's the same case as when someone gets seeded on torrent. You can find the nodes seeding a particular content by doing ipfs dht findprovs <hash> , then you get their ips and you go after them legally.
Just one request. I love the YouTube JKL control keys. Any chance you could implement this on D-Tube?
"Big cities are like financial slave camps - Take a break at the Zenvow Meditation Resort - All crypto Meditation Resort in Portugal" (of course this is crazy, but harmless—at least initially)
I would also like to know what solution has been proposed for that problem.
Steem power is very illiquid and takes time to "power down" the steem power into steem. Steem is the main currency, which you trade on the markets (along with Steem dollars).
Delay aside, it’s all the author’s.
Plus, YouTube is only going to get worse for small creators, as Google tries to cater more and more to the big companies and punish the creators for "advertiser-offensive content". Meanwhile, d.tube should get better and better as both it and STEEM (the tipping mechanism) rise in popularity.
The nice part is the creators don't even have to give-up YouTube to try out d.tube. They can just upload the video to both and see for themselves what's the difference.
That really seems like an argument that is made only to hurt startups.
you're looking at this the wrong way. Yes, startups should enforce copyright. But so should facebook.
They just get away with it because they are big
This has become a big issue on the STEEM blockchain - plagirism, irrelevant junk etc.
Generally the STEEM blockchain is otherwise very fast and healthy but the content issue putting it strain from every front.
some basic info is here : https://steemit.com/hello/@thefreebird/init-1
but I haven't looked into it closely and could easily be remembering incorrectly or have misunderstood.
The pause button is broken on Android Firefox, though. :)