Decentralize Bitcointalk

[Learn Bitcoin]

It is extremely ironic. I find it surprising (and not) that no one came to put him in line, especially since so many other members have been quick to do that to others in sometimes unnecessary circumstances in the past.

Nature will teach him the lessons that he needs to learn anyway. At least the true colors have been shown by that user

Look, we are in an internet forum and don't know each other personally. Our texts represent who we are. Someone could be a very good person in real life, but due to some misunderstanding, the community may think he is a terrible person. So, we should be careful with our screen and think about what we writing. Someone might have a different point of view. But, they should not insult others until their opinion is very unpopular or harms others.

I was surprised how he reacted to OP's post even though there was nothing offensive in the OP. He just called out OP as Joker, and then he also reacted to your post when you said "Shame on you". If you cannot take criticism, you are unlikely to learn. I would suggest he should recognize that he is a human being and he might make some mistakes, too.

[LoyceV]

I am not even sure most of the people would enjoy non-censored bitcointalk forum, and they wouldn't like to live in world without any censorship, it's just a pipe dream.

I think it doesn't scale well. Spammers will be unlimited, and even if there's a system in place to vote out spammers, new users will never get through if spammers create millions of new accounts per day. If you accept users on invite-only basis, new users have the same problem.

And I'm not even going to talk about hosting... because in the end there always has to be someone behind the scenes managing the server.

A truely decentralized forum won't have any centralized hosting. There could be nodes, but each user would keep their own copy, and broadcast it to other users like bittorrent.

- There has never been a truly decentralized protocol where each user can have equal voting power.

Bitcoin tried, by basing voting power on CPU power. That didn't last very long. And even if there would be a magical protocol that gives one human one vote, votes would simply get sold.

I'm afraid you don't understand the fact that a forum has WAY MORE traffic compared to a decentralized payment system exchanging a few numbers here and there.

So no, it's not going to be more lightweight, quite the contrary!

After the IFD (Initial Forum Download), all each user needs to do is download all new posts. That's currently only 4 posts per minute. And each user (on average) will have to upload each post to another user (in a decentralized way, like bittorrent). That's actually the beauty of a decentralized system: bandwidth scales very well. If one person shares 1 GB on a server, each download consumes 1 GB bandwidth. But if he shares the same file through bittorrent, he doesn't have to spend much bandwidth anymore because every downloader starts uploading too.

[BenCodie]

I am not even sure most of the people would enjoy non-censored bitcointalk forum, and they wouldn't like to live in world without any censorship, it's just a pipe dream.

I think it doesn't scale well. Spammers will be unlimited, and even if there's a system in place to vote out spammers, new users will never get through if spammers create millions of new accounts per day. If you accept users on invite-only basis, new users have the same problem.

I disbelieve in this. As I said in my post, moderation in line with rules that are governed in a decentralized way will enable a clean, compliant and censorship-free forum. There is a difference between following rules and censoring the right to freedom of speech. If there was no difference, then we are censoring all discussion not related to the boards that are within this forum. I believe mixing censorship, spam prevention and rule compliance is not the way to look at things if decentralizing bitcointalk becomes a goal.

And I'm not even going to talk about hosting... because in the end there always has to be someone behind the scenes managing the server.

A truely decentralized forum won't have any centralized hosting. There could be nodes, but each user would keep their own copy, and broadcast it to other users like bittorrent.

The method you're talking about reminds me of zeronet, an outdated solution. Bittorrent also dated and not a viable way to run a forum in a decentralized way. There are modern solutions out there in web3, and while using those technologies might not be in line with Bitcoin, one could argue that a centralized forum isn't either (if anything, it's worse than employing non-bitcoin technologies).

- There has never been a truly decentralized protocol where each user can have equal voting power.

Bitcoin tried, by basing voting power on CPU power. That didn't last very long. And even if there would be a magical protocol that gives one human one vote, votes would simply get sold.

Votes or governance being sold is unfortunately, a part of life. If people care about the forum, they will not sell their voting power. If people were incentivized to keep their power, they will. There are solutions to prevent power being sold. In addition, if forum governance is value (which it inevitably would be since we're talking about bitcointalk here, the biggest bitcoin forum there is) then the appreciation of that value is an incentive in itself to keep governance power.

I don't think many would sell all of their governance power, especially since it represents the forum which Satoshi himself resided on.

I'm afraid you don't understand the fact that a forum has WAY MORE traffic compared to a decentralized payment system exchanging a few numbers here and there.

So no, it's not going to be more lightweight, quite the contrary!

After the IFD (Initial Forum Download), all each user needs to do is download all new posts. That's currently only 4 posts per minute. And each user (on average) will have to upload each post to another user (in a decentralized way, like bittorrent). That's actually the beauty of a decentralized system: bandwidth scales very well. If one person shares 1 GB on a server, each download consumes 1 GB bandwidth. But if he shares the same file through bittorrent, he doesn't have to spend much bandwidth anymore because every downloader starts uploading too.

I think you're analyzing too hard. At least in my view, beating the current centralized SMF forum and adding decentralized components that removes liability from administration, enables accessibility for all, creates decentralized governance, while delivering content efficiently, are some of the goals that would prove more viable than "complete decentralization that is even better than Bitcoin". We don't need to beat Bitcoin's decentralization to do better than the current structure, in fact it's probably best not to look at it this way for the sake of keeping the forum as usable as it currently is.

[freedomno1]

Ya at this point, its more less dead may as well just call it vaporware, I did notice the donate button is gone but its likely been gone for an epoch and I just noticed haha, and the green coin members

Well there is a hidden page rofl Tradefortress and a few others saved in there for memories sake the forum has self sustaining money so it could have executed the upgrade.
https://bitcointalk.org/donate.html

The situation with the new forum became untenable (notably the endless waiting) therefore I unwatched the thread and gave up reading about expect for very rare forays in that thread. Looking back, it really is strange that with all the donations that were given and what the value of those donations is today the new forum was never completed.

I have not checked but I have noted other members to my knowledge have not mentioned the beta website, it is probably safe to presume it is at a standstill.

To quote a classic joke
When Epochtalk?

[JollyGood]

As mentioned before, it is a question that keeps being thought of but has not yet (to my knowledge) been definitely answered: Will we ever see it get off the ground? The amount of funds that were donated for the forum and probably still sit unused/unspent should have funded one of the best innovative forums but for reasons not explained it was never completed.

Ya at this point, its more less dead may as well just call it vaporware, I did notice the donate button is gone but its likely been gone for an epoch and I just noticed haha, and the green coin members

[cryptosize]

Generally, decentralized applications are lighter in weight

Do you honestly believe that BTC is lighter compared to ECB SEPA payments (Target2 ledger)?

BTC has to broadcast the transaction to every node, while ECB uses a single centralized computer to process the transaction.

We don't use BTC because it's lighter or cheaper. Revolut offers SEPA instant payments for €0, while BTC is way more expensive and slower: https://mempool.space/

[PrivacyG]

Here is a quick shower thought.  Maybe this has been asked before however.

Is there a possibility to build a simplistic Decentralized Forum on top of the Bitcoin Network?  Or something that can be included in Bitcoin Core / Electrum and work in conjunction with Bitcoin?

[BenCodie]

Generally, decentralized applications are lighter in weight

Do you honestly believe that BTC is lighter compared to ECB SEPA payments (Target2 ledger)?

BTC has to broadcast the transaction to every node, while ECB uses a single centralized computer to process the transaction.

We don't use BTC because it's lighter or cheaper. Revolut offers SEPA instant payments for €0, while BTC is way more expensive and slower: https://mempool.space/

I am not talking about BTC, which was a decentralized protocol that had its initial infrastructure built in 2008-2009. There's no point talking about Bitcoin as a modern decentralized application and at that, it is not even a decentralized application, it is an entire blockchain, built on an infrastructure that is not relevant to what we are talking about, being a forum application with more decentralization than what is current.

So to answer your question, no, I do not believe that BTC is lighter than other solutions because I am already aware that there are many more solutions that are much more efficient.

Payments was never a topic here. Using technology similar to that of Bitcoin to decentralize Bitcointalk was never a discussion here until you introduced it. Why people are thinking that we need to use technology similar to Bitcoin to power a decentralized version of this forum is beyond me, as the two are not even closely similar in their core use cases.

[cryptosize]

Generally, decentralized applications are lighter in weight

Do you honestly believe that BTC is lighter compared to ECB SEPA payments (Target2 ledger)?

BTC has to broadcast the transaction to every node, while ECB uses a single centralized computer to process the transaction.

We don't use BTC because it's lighter or cheaper. Revolut offers SEPA instant payments for €0, while BTC is way more expensive and slower: https://mempool.space/

I am not talking about BTC, which was a decentralized protocol that had its initial infrastructure built in 2008-2009. There's no point talking about Bitcoin as a modern decentralized application and at that, it is not even a decentralized application, it is an entire blockchain, built on an infrastructure that is not relevant to what we are talking about, being a forum application with more decentralization than what is current.

So to answer your question, no, I do not believe that BTC is lighter than other solutions because I am already aware that there are many more solutions that are much more efficient.

Payments was never a topic here. Using technology similar to that of Bitcoin to decentralize Bitcointalk was never a discussion here until you introduced it. Why people are thinking that we need to use technology similar to Bitcoin to power a decentralized version of this forum is beyond me, as the two are not even closely similar in their core use cases.

A centralized forum will always be more lightweight, just like centralized payment systems (ECB, PayPal etc.)

[BenCodie]

Generally, decentralized applications are lighter in weight

Do you honestly believe that BTC is lighter compared to ECB SEPA payments (Target2 ledger)?

BTC has to broadcast the transaction to every node, while ECB uses a single centralized computer to process the transaction.

We don't use BTC because it's lighter or cheaper. Revolut offers SEPA instant payments for €0, while BTC is way more expensive and slower: https://mempool.space/

I am not talking about BTC, which was a decentralized protocol that had its initial infrastructure built in 2008-2009. There's no point talking about Bitcoin as a modern decentralized application and at that, it is not even a decentralized application, it is an entire blockchain, built on an infrastructure that is not relevant to what we are talking about, being a forum application with more decentralization than what is current.

So to answer your question, no, I do not believe that BTC is lighter than other solutions because I am already aware that there are many more solutions that are much more efficient.

Payments was never a topic here. Using technology similar to that of Bitcoin to decentralize Bitcointalk was never a discussion here until you introduced it. Why people are thinking that we need to use technology similar to Bitcoin to power a decentralized version of this forum is beyond me, as the two are not even closely similar in their core use cases.

A centralized forum will always be more lightweight, just like centralized payment systems (ECB, PayPal etc.)

Feel free to add reason referring to modern technologies if you really want to add weight to your opinion and if you want to continue this discussion, I will then use my knowledge to elaborate on my opinion. Otherwise, all you have done with that post is provide a biased "final say".

[Stalker22]

Generally, decentralized applications are lighter in weight

Do you honestly believe that BTC is lighter compared to ECB SEPA payments (Target2 ledger)?

BTC has to broadcast the transaction to every node, while ECB uses a single centralized computer to process the transaction.

We don't use BTC because it's lighter or cheaper. Revolut offers SEPA instant payments for €0, while BTC is way more expensive and slower: https://mempool.space/

I am not talking about BTC, which was a decentralized protocol that had its initial infrastructure built in 2008-2009. There's no point talking about Bitcoin as a modern decentralized application and at that, it is not even a decentralized application, it is an entire blockchain, built on an infrastructure that is not relevant to what we are talking about, being a forum application with more decentralization than what is current.

So to answer your question, no, I do not believe that BTC is lighter than other solutions because I am already aware that there are many more solutions that are much more efficient.

Payments was never a topic here. Using technology similar to that of Bitcoin to decentralize Bitcointalk was never a discussion here until you introduced it. Why people are thinking that we need to use technology similar to Bitcoin to power a decentralized version of this forum is beyond me, as the two are not even closely similar in their core use cases.

I think you may be misunderstanding the point. He mentioned Bitcoin as an example of a sufficiently decentralized network compared to other payment networks. He is correct, though. A decentralized network can never be "lighter" than a centralized infrastructure. Why else do you think the entire internet is built on a simple client-server basis? The concept of decentralized networks wasnt invented yesterday, you know?  And you are probably confusing the concepts of a decentralized network with a distributed network, which can be "lighter" with proper load balancing.


[https://blockchainengineer.com/centralized-vs-decentralized-vs-distributed-network/]

[SamReomo]

I think you may be misunderstanding the point. He mentioned Bitcoin as an example of a sufficiently decentralized network compared to other payment networks. He is correct, though. A decentralized network can never be "lighter" than a centralized infrastructure. Why else do you think the entire internet is built on a simple client-server basis? The concept of decentralized networks wasnt invented yesterday, you know?  And you are probably confusing the concepts of a decentralized network with a distributed network, which can be "lighter" with proper load balancing.

Yeah, a decentralized network has to have many working nodes that can be anywhere in the world in order to perform the functions that they are designed to perform but in a distributed network there's a central node that controls the rest of the nodes and that's why it's way energy efficient than a decentralized network.

The main benefit of decentralized network is that if one node somehow fails working then others will do the job without any issues but the problem with such system is the energy consumption as it mainly consumes way more energy than a distributed network. If I'm not wrong then in a distributed network if main node stops working then other notes may not be able to perform its job.

[BenCodie]

Generally, decentralized applications are lighter in weight

Do you honestly believe that BTC is lighter compared to ECB SEPA payments (Target2 ledger)?

BTC has to broadcast the transaction to every node, while ECB uses a single centralized computer to process the transaction.

We don't use BTC because it's lighter or cheaper. Revolut offers SEPA instant payments for €0, while BTC is way more expensive and slower: https://mempool.space/

I am not talking about BTC, which was a decentralized protocol that had its initial infrastructure built in 2008-2009. There's no point talking about Bitcoin as a modern decentralized application and at that, it is not even a decentralized application, it is an entire blockchain, built on an infrastructure that is not relevant to what we are talking about, being a forum application with more decentralization than what is current.

So to answer your question, no, I do not believe that BTC is lighter than other solutions because I am already aware that there are many more solutions that are much more efficient.

Payments was never a topic here. Using technology similar to that of Bitcoin to decentralize Bitcointalk was never a discussion here until you introduced it. Why people are thinking that we need to use technology similar to Bitcoin to power a decentralized version of this forum is beyond me, as the two are not even closely similar in their core use cases.

I think you may be misunderstanding the point. He mentioned Bitcoin as an example of a sufficiently decentralized network compared to other payment networks. He is correct, though. A decentralized network can never be "lighter" than a centralized infrastructure. Why else do you think the entire internet is built on a simple client-server basis? The concept of decentralized networks wasnt invented yesterday, you know?  And you are probably confusing the concepts of a decentralized network with a distributed network, which can be "lighter" with proper load balancing.


[https://blockchainengineer.com/centralized-vs-decentralized-vs-distributed-network/]

Actually, I'm not misunderstanding anything, I am the only one who is trying to stay on-topic by relating the conversation back to what is meant to be discussed:
Should Bitcointalk be decentralized.

I did not introduce payment systems into the conversation, cryptosize did, and the relevance to building a decentralized forum application vs. a decentralized payment protocol are two completely different conversations.

If you actually look at the root of the conversation, I was not the first to draw comparisons to Bitcoin, and it was wrong to do so in the first place. Decentralizing Bitcointalk is not the same as building a decentralized payment protocol. Payment protocols have no relevance to forum software, period.

I maintain that it is possible to build a lightweight forum software that is decentralized. I maintain that decentralizing the forum's software and governance has not enough correlation to building a similar architecture to that of Bitcoin, due to both serving completely different purposes, and therefore is off-topic conversation.

I also disagree that a decentralized network can not be lighter than that of a centralized one for the end user. We are in a new world of new possibilities as of 2023 and onward, as we are every year, and stating that decentralized networks can definitely not be lighter than that of a centralized network is an outdated opinion. No one is saying it's an easy feet, however if we take into account the amount of resources that Bitcointalk (should) have to achieve this feet, then it is definitely a possibility rather than it definitely not being possible.

[JollyGood]

This seems a very interesting idea but can you be more specific? How would the posting and decrypting to read part of the forum work?

Here is a quick shower thought.  Maybe this has been asked before however.

Is there a possibility to build a simplistic Decentralized Forum on top of the Bitcoin Network?  Or something that can be included in Bitcoin Core / Electrum and work in conjunction with Bitcoin?

[cryptosize]

Generally, decentralized applications are lighter in weight

Do you honestly believe that BTC is lighter compared to ECB SEPA payments (Target2 ledger)?

BTC has to broadcast the transaction to every node, while ECB uses a single centralized computer to process the transaction.

We don't use BTC because it's lighter or cheaper. Revolut offers SEPA instant payments for €0, while BTC is way more expensive and slower: https://mempool.space/

I am not talking about BTC, which was a decentralized protocol that had its initial infrastructure built in 2008-2009. There's no point talking about Bitcoin as a modern decentralized application and at that, it is not even a decentralized application, it is an entire blockchain, built on an infrastructure that is not relevant to what we are talking about, being a forum application with more decentralization than what is current.

So to answer your question, no, I do not believe that BTC is lighter than other solutions because I am already aware that there are many more solutions that are much more efficient.

Payments was never a topic here. Using technology similar to that of Bitcoin to decentralize Bitcointalk was never a discussion here until you introduced it. Why people are thinking that we need to use technology similar to Bitcoin to power a decentralized version of this forum is beyond me, as the two are not even closely similar in their core use cases.

I think you may be misunderstanding the point. He mentioned Bitcoin as an example of a sufficiently decentralized network compared to other payment networks. He is correct, though. A decentralized network can never be "lighter" than a centralized infrastructure. Why else do you think the entire internet is built on a simple client-server basis? The concept of decentralized networks wasnt invented yesterday, you know?  And you are probably confusing the concepts of a decentralized network with a distributed network, which can be "lighter" with proper load balancing.


[https://blockchainengineer.com/centralized-vs-decentralized-vs-distributed-network/]

Actually, I'm not misunderstanding anything, I am the only one who is trying to stay on-topic by relating the conversation back to what is meant to be discussed:
Should Bitcointalk be decentralized.

I did not introduce payment systems into the conversation, cryptosize did, and the relevance to building a decentralized forum application vs. a decentralized payment protocol are two completely different conversations.

If you actually look at the root of the conversation, I was not the first to draw comparisons to Bitcoin, and it was wrong to do so in the first place. Decentralizing Bitcointalk is not the same as building a decentralized payment protocol. Payment protocols have no relevance to forum software, period.

I maintain that it is possible to build a lightweight forum software that is decentralized. I maintain that decentralizing the forum's software and governance has not enough correlation to building a similar architecture to that of Bitcoin, due to both serving completely different purposes, and therefore is off-topic conversation.

I also disagree that a decentralized network can not be lighter than that of a centralized one for the end user. We are in a new world of new possibilities as of 2023 and onward, as we are every year, and stating that decentralized networks can definitely not be lighter than that of a centralized network is an outdated opinion. No one is saying it's an easy feet, however if we take into account the amount of resources that Bitcointalk (should) have to achieve this feet, then it is definitely a possibility rather than it definitely not being possible.

I want a decentralized forum more than you, but I'm not going to claim that a decentralized solution (whether it's for a forum or payments) is going to be lighter compared to centralized solutions. I'm afraid you don't understand the technicalities involved.

The burden of proof lies on you...

[Stalker22]

I want a decentralized forum more than you, but I'm not going to claim that a decentralized solution (whether it's for a forum or payments) is going to be lighter compared to centralized solutions. I'm afraid you don't understand the technicalities involved.

The burden of proof lies on you...

Decentralized systems undoubtedly carry more "weight" than centralized ones.  Replicating data across nodes, running consensus algorithms, coordinating distributed components - it all adds complexity. Perhaps we could develop nimbler decentralized protocols but we should not expect a decentralized system to ever match centralized efficiency. 

Ultimately, it is misleading to claim that decentralized systems can be "lighter," or even as lightweight as centralized, and the two approaches feature fundamentally different trade-offs.  We choose between them according to the requirements of each application.  For some, decentralization provides indispensable security properties, despite the costs and complexities.  For others, centralization's simplicity and speed take priority.  Blanket comparisons seldom account for those nuances, and BenCodie clearly does not know much about the technical aspects of decentralized networks, or it is possible that he is simply misinformed.

[BenCodie]

I want a decentralized forum more than you, but I'm not going to claim that a decentralized solution (whether it's for a forum or payments) is going to be lighter compared to centralized solutions. I'm afraid you don't understand the technicalities involved.

The burden of proof lies on you...

Decentralized systems undoubtedly carry more "weight" than centralized ones.  Replicating data across nodes, running consensus algorithms, coordinating distributed components - it all adds complexity. Perhaps we could develop nimbler decentralized protocols but we should not expect a decentralized system to ever match centralized efficiency. 

Ultimately, it is misleading to claim that decentralized systems can be "lighter," or even as lightweight as centralized, and the two approaches feature fundamentally different trade-offs.  We choose between them according to the requirements of each application.  For some, decentralization provides indispensable security properties, despite the costs and complexities.  For others, centralization's simplicity and speed take priority.  Blanket comparisons seldom account for those nuances, and BenCodie clearly does not know much about the technical aspects of decentralized networks, or it is possible that he is simply misinformed.

What are we measuring when we talk about weight? When we say "light" I am speaking about the end-user's experience. It will take more resources to power a decentralized network, however that burden does not have to be on the end user, nor does it need to be on the codebase that powers the discussed decentralized forum. In addition to that, if we strictly stay on the topic of Bitcointalk, then there should technically be resources available to cater for costs and to build solutions around complexities, that's what the new forum fund was for. Though, this is another topic.

I wouldn't be so quick to assume my knowledge on decentralized networks Stalker22...as cryptosize said...

The burden of proof lies on you...

...which I had presumed before my last post. I will be back with viable solutions as of the current period, once I have enough time to make my own case study which I will post in the new forum software forum, and reference here for you both. What it will prove is that a forum software that is scalable, light in codebase and light for the end-user to use, is possible.

This will not be an overnight writeup, I also have little free time to allocate to new things generally, so allow the natural time it will take for me to complete this and bear in mind that I'm doing it for not much more than to prove a point, and because Stalker22 has just insulted my intelligence in a way that requires an effort like this to disprove.

If feedback was listened to in the forum by administration and there was a chance that it was heard, listened to and potentially used to build upon the new forum software idea, I'd be much more motivated, though I am sure we can all agree that would be ignorant to assume.

I'll be back when it's done.

[joker_josue]

If feedback was listened to in the forum by administration and there was a chance that it was heard, listened to and potentially used to build upon the new forum software idea, I'd be much more motivated, though I am sure we can all agree that would be ignorant to assume.

Then, set up the demo forum, decentralized and with access to the general public, via the .com/.org domain. And present it to the public.

I believe that, if Bitcointalk does not migrate to this service, you will be able to sell it with some ease and make good money.

[BenCodie]

If feedback was listened to in the forum by administration and there was a chance that it was heard, listened to and potentially used to build upon the new forum software idea, I'd be much more motivated, though I am sure we can all agree that would be ignorant to assume.

Then, set up the demo forum, decentralized and with access to the general public, via the .com/.org domain. And present it to the public.

I believe that, if Bitcointalk does not migrate to this service, you will be able to sell it with some ease and make good money.

There is a big difference between knowing the technical intricacies of a technology (thus knowing whether something is possible or not) and actually developing it. For example, one might know how a Bitcoin node works and what it is capable of down to each of its functions, but that doesn't mean that they can build each of these functions into an application if they were to try. However, you are right, once I do go ahead and build the case study then the next step may as well be to push for the development of the software itself. Unfortunately, unlike Bitcointalk, I do not have an ample amount of bitcoins to fund this. Nor do I have enough time at my disposal to allocate to the project part time.

Also, since the project is likely to be open source, I would doubt that there'd be "good money" involved, unless a business model was built in as well...though that is another element on top of the goal to build a more decentralized forum application. Nonetheless we'll see what happens when the case study is done down the line.

[Stalker22]

~
Nonetheless we'll see what happens when the case study is done down the line.

I am genuinely interested to see how that case study turns out and find out more.  (Im not being sarcastic)

Just wanted to mention too that some truly decentralized forums already exist - Freenet's been around for over a decade or so, for example.  But it is still sucks big time to actually use.  and hardly anyone actually bothers with it anyway.  People just dont want taking responsibility for moderating stuff themselves.  And you need a ton more bandwidth and drive space compared to regular old client-server setups.  So Id definitely be curious to check out your ideas for a more user-friendly, lightweight version that doesnt dump so much on the end user.