Are Safe Vaults servers or not: a discussion

The method of how the network becomes distributed isn’t something you should define as a fundamental. It’s simply that it will be a distributed. Not have servers is a how, not a fundamental. You don’t even need to use confusing terms, but at least you accept that their definitions are rapidly changing.

Look how clever I am, I can outsmart you by being pedantic*

You can run 200 VMs on a single server, an archive node is just a server, so I could run a network from a single computer.

Fundamentally incorrect.

Otherwise, we could do all this functionality with a big server, fundamentally at odds with the projects fundamental goals.

If you keep changing your statements then you can prove anyone wrong.

You said ONE vault and now you say David is wrong because you could have 200 vaults.

Not the same thing.

Are you being sincere or argumentative now? Think about it.

1 Like

If you released the vaults software so people could join in, it would become distributed. Isn’t that exactly how you will bootstrap the network into existence!

1 Like

That is very sad indeed. Sorry, you feel that is a goal worth trying to achieve.

3 Likes

I asked what the minimum was, the only fact I have is it can be as small as 200. But more than 1. So 2?

Thats not what you were saying, anyhow anyone can read your post, so I need not say more.

To answer you, you need enough nodes to form a section. And no way are you going to run a global network on a single server computer. Nor even if you make every computer in any one commercial data centre into (multiple) vaults.

Your argument equates to the old argument of how many angels can you fit on the head of a pin, pure word play.

I would focus on the relevant parts of the definition of the word server like I understand it in this case. Like the p2p stuff: the fact that in my (and probably a lot of others) understanding of the definition of server: the aspect of the many clients to 1 or a couple of (load balancing etc) servers.
If that is the complete/correct definition of server to most of the people or not: I wouldn’t waste too much time to try to convince others of that.

3 Likes

I guess that depends on whose in the majority, If the consensus see it as wrong, it will be corrected :joy:

3 Likes

Attacking a minority as a group to win votes (likes) between yourselves (Davids fanboys) is also known as bullying. I’m not going to stop having a different view point because you try to alienate me as an outsider.

You’re right and we are wrong, I get that is how you view things. Doesn’t help constructive discussions though. And you do not help by belitting everyone as not having a mind of their own and only repeat what David said.

Why not stop playing the victim and discuss and consider that maybe you can also learn things rather than trying to prove others wrong. We all must be willing to learn things and find out misconceptions we’ve had for maybe years. Its not a us-them community but one of varying views and often disagreements we discuss.

2 Likes

It was a reply in context to @Traktion.

I never said you were wrong, but imo David did become pedantic in order to be definitive in his response, it wasn’t helpful.

EDIT

@Traktion posted something completely off-topic, so now i’m playing the victim. I don’t feel like a victim, I just don’t want this to continue down the road it’s heading.

Says the man arguing about fairies on a pin head. Seriously, catch yourself on. You’ve said your piece, most disagree, now time to let it lie.

Hey, I didn’t read the whole topic. Here are my two cents:

  • A client connects to a group of nodes so no matter if one in that group goes down, you are always connected to a bunch of others from that same group. This makes it quite different from say a server by Facebook in a data center. In the case of SAFE these nodes are all over the world.
  • When you download a website on SAFE the data is chunked in at least 3 parts. And these are stored all over the network. So when you visit safe://polpolrene these chunks come to you from different groups in the network over different HOPS. This also makes it completely different from server-system.
5 Likes

I see the client here the same, in both cases

  • Client asks facebook for some data, facebook returns the data.
  • Client ask safenetwork for some data, safenetwork returns the data.

How facebook and the safenetwork achieve the task of returning the data is an implementation detail. In the way I view the world they both fit in the Client ----> Server model.

Like I was trying to say: I wouldn’t waste time to get a majority/consensus of the meaning of the word ‘server’. The important part is to get a good, correct message across and the usage of the word server can help with that.
Ps: if you want to be more convincing, it would help to be more consequent and change your username. Or do you want to say you really have zero flaws :wink:

1 Like

Has anyone disagreed that the safe network itself acts like a (huge) server? It sounded like you thought people were.

I know you disagree that vaults are P2P nodes rather than servers in their own right.