this post was submitted on 15 Nov 2023
491 points (93.5% liked)
Piracy: ꜱᴀɪʟ ᴛʜᴇ ʜɪɢʜ ꜱᴇᴀꜱ
54565 readers
440 users here now
⚓ Dedicated to the discussion of digital piracy, including ethical problems and legal advancements.
Rules • Full Version
1. Posts must be related to the discussion of digital piracy
2. Don't request invites, trade, sell, or self-promote
3. Don't request or link to specific pirated titles, including DMs
4. Don't submit low-quality posts, be entitled, or harass others
Loot, Pillage, & Plunder
📜 c/Piracy Wiki (Community Edition):
💰 Please help cover server costs.
 |
 |
|---|---|
| Ko-fi | Liberapay |
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
That really doesn't explain how it works. So... the host mines crypto as well as sending you videos? What is the economy supposed to work like? What does the blockchain actually achieve here? Why do people host in that case? Where do they explain this?
Anyway, I'm still not interested in crypto anything. The moment I saw it was blockchain based I noped out pretty fast. I'm guessing a lot of people do and that's part of why it's such a reactionary cesspit.
Like we don't need blockchain for this; regular federation already works.
Peertube is also p2p, so the videos can be hosted apart from the host instance, and there's nothing stopping peertube instances from maintaining a distributed ledger of references to videos without the blockchain.
Everything you say blockchain does can be achieved via distributed plaintext ledgers. It is solving a problem that doesn't exist.
As for the earning money part, eventually you do have to connect your personal details in order to transfer crypto to a usable currency, so that problem isn't really solved either.
Immutability is irrelevant if the point is to maintain a record of posts to prevent censorship. The only thing that matters is that some instances keep the record. Bad actors could try to lie about the posts, but that doesn't delete the ledger from other instances.
And no, no single instance is responsible, that's what it means to have a distributed ledger. Distributed ledgers are already a proven technology that is extremely robust against censorship. You may have heard of them, they're called bittorrents.
In fact, federation is also a kind of distributed ledger since once content federates a record is kept by any instance it is distributed to. It's a solved problem and not even that hard. Synchronisation consists of, "here's my latest posts, keep a record of them please". This is such a basic concept and I don't know why you called it a "single point of failure". It is exactly the opposite of a single point of failure.
Privacy is not guaranteed even with Monero, and you're still getting paid in crypto which is inherently unstable because the only thing it is worth is what you can sell it for, so it goes through boom-bust cycles constantly, and the immutability - when forks aren't happening - only serves to enable scams. To defeat that crypto people have created banks, defeating the point of a zero-trust system.
There's no public trust in it and it takes enormous carbon footprints to run, so it's unsustainable on so many levels. I don't want to support crypto on any level on principle, so no, I don't want LBRY tokens. A lot of people feel the same way, and looking at the population of Odysee, a large number of the people who are on board are a bunch of right wing assholes.
Hard no.