Ciao Mat & RichardWS One thing that seems to unite you is understanding that we could communicate better without needing any of the current server defined systems.
The very fact TW is not server dependent I absolutely believe is its strength. The strong adherence to that model pushes the edge. The challenge being HOW to allow better communication without falling into all the old issues. TW is currently natively week on communication. I don't think it inherently has to stay that way. But the task is difficult in that there are not that many models of what to do and the resource base for sorting through that is limited. IPFS I took look at. I am not a techie, but I got the general idea. Its looks like it has promise, though no instantiation I could find. In trying to find my way about in the TW world of how to connect up & network I seen a lot of things that look like kludges, mainly embedded Google bits. I'm sure YOU are thinking on the right edges. Josiah On Friday, 24 June 2016 05:27:02 UTC+2, RichardWilliamSmith wrote: > > Hi Mat, > > I'm sort of torn on this issue. On the one hand, I want to support the > development efforts of other members of the community and I enjoy thinking > about technical/design issues too. I can fully understand why you would > want to do this. > > On the other hand, I think there is probably a better path to pursue > towards these goals, but it's currently much (much, much?) more technically > abstract. I'm talking about ipfs, which has been recently mentioned by > Jeremy also. > > I might be totally wrong about this, but my reason for thinking it is that > what you're attempting to do is fundamentally hard. Even if you get it to > work, I don't think it will ever be secure or scalable. I'm happy to > discuss why this might be wrong, though. > > I think what ipfs gives us, amongst much else, is the notion of serverless > publishing because everything is essentially published out onto one big > filing system, distributed across the network. My conjecture is that this > basically solves the hard problems of federation. > > It is also my belief that TW may prove to be a uniquely interesting tool > in the context of ipfs in general - it may well turn out that we are > sitting on a 'killer app' for a platform that is yet to be fully built. > > I hope this doesn't sound negative. It may well be that you will learn > valuable lessons by trying to get 'twederation' to work over http or I > might be altogether wrong and it might be a roaring success, but I hope > you'll take the time to look at ipfs if you haven't already. In my opinion, > this technology or something similar will be the next evolution of the web. > > Regards, > Richard > -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "TiddlyWiki" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/tiddlywiki. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/tiddlywiki/31b8b432-3384-4118-aac7-368ba518f19c%40googlegroups.com. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
