This is it. This is the watershed event for decentralized social media

[TECSHARE]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9AGebPsme7M

https://dlive.tv/

This is the watershed event that will bring decentralized social media to the masses. Prepare your anus Googlag.

[1715512078]

1715512078

[1715512078]

1715512078

[yesiam6]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9AGebPsme7M

https://dlive.tv/

This is the watershed event that will bring decentralized social media to the masses. Prepare your anus Googlag.

i also saw that pewdiepie video , hope this site blows up!
But how is it going to give google a run for it's money , it's "just" a livestreaming site and
How much do you think did they have to pay pewdiepie to promote the site?

[TECSHARE]

i also saw that pewdiepie video , hope this site blows up!
But how is it going to give google a run for it's money , it's "just" a livestreaming site and
How much do you think did they have to pay pewdiepie to promote the site?

Googlag is already cutting its own throat, and by that I mean specifically YouTube. He is simply taking advantage of existing trends and moving on to the next best thing. I am not sure if he is even being paid as he has a lot of incentive to move just for YouTube policy and censorship reasons, but who knows, I wouldn't be surprised either way. The reason I think this is huge is because the main drawback of these platforms as they exist is the lack of a user base, and PewDiePie is essentially the most famous man that ever lived, and he commands an army of 9 year olds. This is a big deal towards creating an environment of mass adoption of these technologies.

[KingScorpio]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9AGebPsme7M

https://dlive.tv/

This is the watershed event that will bring decentralized social media to the masses. Prepare your anus Googlag.

decentralised social media will be absolutely messy,

[theymos]

The existence of a competing centralized service is a "watershed event for decentralized social media"?

Dlive, like most of this garbage, is a centralized company which has brainlessly shoe-horned "blockchain" into what they're doing. Their infrastructure is centralized, they have rules which among other things prohibit "hate speech", and their lino coin is 100% centralized in both operation and distribution.

A proper decentralized social network or streaming site is possible, but it should either not have any blockchain stuff at all, or this should be a sort of side feature. It'd look like Freenet or I2P, not like Bitcoin.

[TECSHARE]

The existence of a competing centralized service is a "watershed event for decentralized social media"?

Dlive, like most of this garbage, is a centralized company which has brainlessly shoe-horned "blockchain" into what they're doing. Their infrastructure is centralized, they have rules which among other things prohibit "hate speech", and their lino coin is 100% centralized in both operation and distribution.

A proper decentralized social network or streaming site is possible, but it should either not have any blockchain stuff at all, or this should be a sort of side feature. It'd look like Freenet or I2P, not like Bitcoin.

You are absolutely right. However if the data itself is in fact immutable on the blockchain (I have no idea) there is nothing stopping people from retrieving it themselves. A lot of these arguments could be validly made for Steemit, but it still is much more resistant to censorship regardless, and there are alternatives to their centralized platform. Their "coin" is very much totally centralized, but seeing as they pay out directly in Bitcoin as well as Paypal, this is still a huge step in the right direction. All of these arguments aside, this is going to introduce millions of new users to blockchain based social media which is still a very big win.

[theymos]

However if the data itself is in fact immutable on the blockchain

AFAICT it's not, the public blockchain aspect is just the lino coin's ledger. It's a bog-standard centralized service, but with a (also-centralized) cryptocoin to go along with it.

A sort of halfway-reasonable design would be putting a minimal amount of content metadata in their chain and then storing the data on IPFS, but even that would be inferior in most ways to just using Freenet, which was released over a decade ago. It's annoying to see these "blockchain!!!" people poorly reinventing the wheel.

(BTW, I wrote a while ago about an idea for censorship-resistant datastore which would be suitable for this sort of thing.)

[Quickseller]

That was a paid ad for dlive.tv. He said in the beginning of the video that he is "partnering up" with dlive, which is one way to disclose an advertising relationship with an entity you are promoting that promoters must do under FTC guidelines. 

dlive also has rules that govern the content of videos, and the only way these types of rules can be enforced is via centralization.

There are also some advantages to having centralized social media platforms, as people tend to not to want to see NSFW topics unless they are specifically seeking out these topics, and people also tend to like a certain set of rules/standards, even if those enforcing these rules engage in modest censorship, such as is the case in most major social media platforms currently, IMO. I believe the below can be applied to centralization of social media (it was actually about privacy):

they provide services/benefit that exceed these privacy intrusions, they should be free to continue using these platforms. The selling point of giving up private information is doing so allows the platforms to display ads relevant to the end user, and can otherwise provide useful information to the end user. I don't think Facebook should be lying about what they are collecting from their users, but I also can't say their customers *must* be mad when this happens. I don't think anyone should be forced to have certain levels of privacy if they don't want privacy, or if they believe the benefits of of giving up certain information outweigh the value of privacy.

[BADecker]

However if the data itself is in fact immutable on the blockchain

AFAICT it's not, the public blockchain aspect is just the lino coin's ledger. It's a bog-standard centralized service, but with a (also-centralized) cryptocoin to go along with it.

A sort of halfway-reasonable design would be putting a minimal amount of content metadata in their chain and then storing the data on IPFS, but even that would be inferior in most ways to just using Freenet, which was released over a decade ago. It's annoying to see these "blockchain!!!" people poorly reinventing the wheel.

(BTW, I wrote a while ago about an idea for censorship-resistant datastore which would be suitable for this sort of thing.)

If they placed links in the coin message area, to locations where their material is located on the Net, wouldn't this work? Or am I misunderstanding the whole thing?

[TECSHARE]

However if the data itself is in fact immutable on the blockchain

AFAICT it's not, the public blockchain aspect is just the lino coin's ledger. It's a bog-standard centralized service, but with a (also-centralized) cryptocoin to go along with it.

A sort of halfway-reasonable design would be putting a minimal amount of content metadata in their chain and then storing the data on IPFS, but even that would be inferior in most ways to just using Freenet, which was released over a decade ago. It's annoying to see these "blockchain!!!" people poorly reinventing the wheel.

(BTW, I wrote a while ago about an idea for censorship-resistant datastore which would be suitable for this sort of thing.)

If they placed links in the coin message area, to locations where their material is located on the Net, wouldn't this work? Or am I misunderstanding the whole thing?

This still is an improvement by having a system outside of all of the media monopolies regardless of all of these very valid criticisms. It is a huge step in the right direction and will lead to not only a larger user base for these types of systems, but increasing competition for companies to make the next best thing that goes even further. It is only a matter of time now.

[Quickseller]

However if the data itself is in fact immutable on the blockchain

AFAICT it's not, the public blockchain aspect is just the lino coin's ledger. It's a bog-standard centralized service, but with a (also-centralized) cryptocoin to go along with it.

A sort of halfway-reasonable design would be putting a minimal amount of content metadata in their chain and then storing the data on IPFS, but even that would be inferior in most ways to just using Freenet, which was released over a decade ago. It's annoying to see these "blockchain!!!" people poorly reinventing the wheel.

(BTW, I wrote a while ago about an idea for censorship-resistant datastore which would be suitable for this sort of thing.)

If they placed links in the coin message area, to locations where their material is located on the Net, wouldn't this work? Or am I misunderstanding the whole thing?

That would only work to the extent that where ever the files are being stored are willing to keep the information up. If you encoded the following link into a transaction confirmed in the blockchain:

Code:

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5129949.msg50564563#msg50564563

then whatever content you have at the above link will need to meet the standards of bitcointalk.org, and if it doesn't then your content will be removed. If your content is taken down, then you will need to find another platform to host your content, and confirm a transaction with a link to the content.

[BADecker]

However if the data itself is in fact immutable on the blockchain

AFAICT it's not, the public blockchain aspect is just the lino coin's ledger. It's a bog-standard centralized service, but with a (also-centralized) cryptocoin to go along with it.

A sort of halfway-reasonable design would be putting a minimal amount of content metadata in their chain and then storing the data on IPFS, but even that would be inferior in most ways to just using Freenet, which was released over a decade ago. It's annoying to see these "blockchain!!!" people poorly reinventing the wheel.

(BTW, I wrote a while ago about an idea for censorship-resistant datastore which would be suitable for this sort of thing.)

If they placed links in the coin message area, to locations where their material is located on the Net, wouldn't this work? Or am I misunderstanding the whole thing?

That would only work to the extent that where ever the files are being stored are willing to keep the information up. If you encoded the following link into a transaction confirmed in the blockchain:

Code:

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5129949.msg50564563#msg50564563

then whatever content you have at the above link will need to meet the standards of bitcointalk.org, and if it doesn't then your content will be removed. If your content is taken down, then you will need to find another platform to host your content, and confirm a transaction with a link to the content.

Is this where to store? - https://ipfs.io/

Is this a good explanation of why? - https://ipfs.io/ipns/QmW6iyZ27fYAwd15CQ9nDkLhZPa5QsfbZ8EuSoncHgwA8Y/ and https://ipfs.io/ipns/QmW6iyZ27fYAwd15CQ9nDkLhZPa5QsfbZ8EuSoncHgwA8Y/videos/



EDIT: Best explanation video - https://www.freedomsphoenix.com/News/259055-2019-04-07-interview-1435-declare-your-independence-with-ipfs.htm