←back to thread

Brazil's X ban is sending lots of people to Bluesky

(www.theverge.com)
420 points rvz | 5 comments | 31 Aug 24 13:28 UTC | HN request time: 0.293s | source
Show context
jazzyjackson ◴[31 Aug 24 23:08 UTC] No.41412727[source]▶
Is there any plan to offload hosting costs to users repos or do the relays have to bear the cost of images / videos ? It just seems very incongruous to me for a decentralized app to suffer from hugs of death like this link is right now. I actually tried to pull this up on the wayback machine but they seem to have only crawled as far as the butterfly logo ? Is this intentional ? I know that bluesky likes to give users control of where their post ends up, maybe they have asked internet archive not to crawl ? [0]

I liked how urbit did it, just paste s3 bucket credentials into the app settings. A - its pretty cheap even for a terabyte of storage, B - it removes liability from the application not having to host user content, C - it increases decentralization, with many hosts in many jurisdictions able to host content.

EDIT: I went to sign up for a new account and right away I'm given the choice to host content on my own server, neat, I think I'll give this a try [1]

[0] https://web.archive.org/web/20240831230005/https://bsky.app/...

[1] https://docs.bsky.app/blog/self-host-federation

replies(1): >>41412788 #
1. pfraze ◴[31 Aug 24 23:19 UTC] No.41412788[source]▶
The bad crawl for internet archive is because it's a giant SPA. It's a react native codebase which, while irritating for web users, allows us to target all the platforms without building multiple apps. Kind of a life-saver.

Relays actually don't process media; that's up to the applications. We intentionally keep the repo-hosting costs low (and they'll get lower soon) so that self-hosting your data and keypairs remains affordable. Think of the application model as equivalent to a search engine, with the repo-hosts (PDSes) being web servers. That's almost exactly how it works.

The only way decentralization would make a hug of death irrelevant is if the individual nodes weren't processing the full network, in which case you're not getting the global social experience, so.

replies(3): >>41412803 #>>41413785 #>>41427451 #
2. toomuchtodo ◴[31 Aug 24 23:21 UTC] No.41412803[source]▶
Please consider a formal, efficient mechanism to push archival data into the Internet Archive.

Edit: tremendous, thank you!

replies(1): >>41412811 #
3. pfraze ◴[31 Aug 24 23:22 UTC] No.41412811[source]▶
One of our team (bryan newbold) used to work at the IA and we have a good relationship with them because we used to attend their decentralized web summits/camps. Really wonderful people. We do plan to chat with them about it.
4. jazzyjackson ◴[01 Sep 24 02:38 UTC] No.41413785[source]▶
my thinking wrt hugs of death is that if one host is saturated, the content would be available at another host, such that it's not simply unavailable due to high traffic, but leaving that aside, I'm still unsure which party is delivering content to end users.

If I host gifs at bsky.jazzyjackson.xyz, and my posts are indexed by some number of relays, and finally viewed by bsky or an alternate front end app, is that app mirroring my gifs to shoulder the burden, preventing traffic from hitting my $5 VPS?

I always thought {bit,web}torrent would be a good fit for this problem of mirroring content among multiple hosts, but maybe there's a reason no one has gone down that road.

5. just_testing ◴[02 Sep 24 17:55 UTC] No.41427451[source]▶
Are you using a framework for developing with react native? I'd love to know if you have some blog posts on the UI part.

Thanks!