|
From: | Raphael Sofaer |
Subject: | Re: [Social-discuss] Diaspora? |
Date: | Tue, 27 Apr 2010 01:01:43 -0400 |
User-agent: | Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686 (x86_64); en-US; rv:1.9.1.8) Gecko/20100227 Thunderbird/3.0.3 |
Hello! I too have been lurking for a while, and this is what I think. We obviously are confronting the same problems as projects. How completely can we move all decrypted data to the owner? How can we have data models that are minimally restrictive but support arbitrary content? How much can we maximize compatibility with external services and current standards like ostatus, activitystreams, and therefore minimize barriers to entry, without compromising our goals? Right now we have a Ruby on Rails prototype that communicates with HTTP GET calls that get encrypted JSON blocks, and friend requests with PUT calls. For the real thing, we're talking about XMPP as our first between-node interface, but running an XMPP server might be a little heavy. We definitely think that defining http routes is a lightweight way provide pull access to data. Some things we plan to do, but which we consider to be second version items are multi-user support (though we plan to design with that as a later goal), bit-torrent like transfer of larger files with the seed acting as tracker, OpenID provision (we might do this earlier as I really want it), possibly a TahoeFS implementation to make redundancy inherent, and the ability to quickly implement pull from arbitrary services to make moving to a decentralized system easier. I'd like to have that standards and protocol discussion here, despite the differences in our current approaches. I think Ted Smith's separation between UI and Core controller parts is a good way to be sure the right components of the message are encrypted at every step. I look forward to discussion and look forward much more to coding! -- Raphael Sofaer On 04/26/2010 05:46 PM, Max Salzberg wrote: Hello, yes! |
[Prev in Thread] | Current Thread | [Next in Thread] |