We have temporarily locked posting on AskLemmy until the CSAM posting stops.

  • Phil K
    link
    410 months ago

    Putting aside that this use case doesn’t meet the five requisites for block chain use, the fediverse in general and Lemmy is already struggling with too much data being stored and moved.

    • FaceDeer
      link
      fedilink
      410 months ago

      Searching for “the five requisites for blockchain use” isn’t finding anything relevant, what requisites do you mean?

      This wouldn’t be storing more data, it would be storing existing data. It would just be putting it somewhere that can be globally read and verified.

      • my_hat_stinks
        link
        fedilink
        110 months ago

        How do you store data in a decentralised way without have many redundant copies? The decentralisation of Blockchain is from many machines maintaining their own copy of the entire history. The entire xo dept I herebtly stores more data. Your suggestion is to literally store more data, claiming it won’t store more data only suggests you don’t know how blockchain works.

        And that’s not even including any overhead of implementing a Blockchain in the first place. Or the fact you’ll be storing data on literally every user even if they never interact with your instance, pr even if their instance is entirely blocked from yours. And there’s no way around that, if you do manage to selectively store some subset of users then when you do need to include that data you’re trusting the subset of maintainers who do have that user’s data which, initially, is only the user’s home instance so we’re back to square one.

        • FaceDeer
          link
          fedilink
          -110 months ago

          Yes, my point is that that sort of thing is exactly what blockchains are for. They handle all of that already. So there’s no need for Fediverse servers to reinvent all of that, they can just use existing blockchains for it.