Are Safe Vaults servers or not: a discussion


#124

@zeroflaw please do not ignore my curiosity :slight_smile: When I run on my home computer vault will it become a magical server?

Or it’s already a server because I have a running program Storj?


#125

In my opinion using your desktop spares resources while you are using it to provide to a network like Storj or SAFE, is what these networks are about. By leaving your machine on while you sleep for the sole purpose of providing these resources makes this a wasteful server. You really should think about the environmental impacts of what you are doing, and turn it off at night, and get a low-powered home server.


#126

I’m sorry, it’s cold in the evenings, I prefer to use the heat from my home computer instead of plugging a stove …:wink: I’m sure millions of other home computers will be used the same way…


#127

Wow. I can see this debate going on and on and on. Can’t you all just agree that it’s a server, a node, a farm. Who cares? If it’s running a tiny proportion of the safe network then it’s part of the network. Simple as that. This shouldn’t be a pissing contest boys.


#128

Yep

Home computer == P2P node == device == zeroflaw’s server. (Just don’t tell a network engineer nor a sys admin you did that :wink: )


#129

You can’t just call it a server, it is wrong and not specific enough. What kind of server, home server, web server, dedicated server? You can call it a vault server and for convenience let’s remove server from the name and ta da, there you go, VAULT, solved the problem for you, you can thank me later.


#130

Networking is the part the safe-network runs on-top

The orange bit is networking in my opinion. Everything else here is handled by the server.

Not when there is potential for a wave of ‘non safe community members’ aka the internet, to question fundamentals which are posed on the website.

Ta, da so vaults are servers and you’ve just removed a word for convenience and to spread lies.


#131

he commented on the absurdity of calling my home computer server just because I did not turn it off at night…


#132

You asked me directly for my opinion. FYI, it would also be more efficient to use a heater than your computer if your cold, also a lot quieter.


#133

I asked for your opinion because it is obvious to everyone that my home computer is not a server and your idea of what a server is far from reality…


#134

I’m part of this community and therefore part of everyone, and I disagree.


#135

Or maybe I just outsmart you!

“What goes around comes around”


#136

but even you know it’s not a server :slight_smile: What you do not know is how to admit that MaidSafe are right… people will use their home computers if the network is successful. And there are many more home computers than servers…


#137

I don’t see the point in further ”servers" debate. Both views have been explained well so unless we’ve missed something important I think it’s ok to move on and spend time on something valuable, like chilling out. :stuck_out_tongue:

By all means continue, by maybe on a separate topic so it doesn’t obscure posts about the dev update? @moderators


#138

Usage of the diagram without understanding the essence of the diagram and what was being replied to

What I said went over your head didn’t it, very obviously. Network engineers look after your routers which by your definitions are servers since they serve up data to other “servers” routers and finally to the end machines. Just like vaults do. Routers reply to requests and make requests of “servers” so they are both the client and server under your definitions. But of course everyone uses the term router to describe what routers do. So to with machines that dish up data on request use more appropriate words to describe their function. But no you go all extreme and by your definition everything is a server unless it has no energy. and why the fundamentals say in the usual sense

So network engineers very well do know what servers are since programming routers for networking into/out of servers is different to programming routers for a P2P network. And of course sys admins, which I included are intimately aware of what servers are.

Thus the reason why I can say that vaults are not servers in the usual usage of servers when talking about the internet. But you wanted to play word games and take the extreme usage of the word.

But both network engineers and sys admins work with real servers all day long in their jobs and they know the definitions. I prefer to use the usual usage of the words when talking networking (computers and protocols) devices.

What amazes me is that you proclaim to know that vaults are servers yet do not know how the basics of the safe network works. For instance you did not know that one large archive vault could not be the safe network in any shape of form. Anyone who has even a basic understanding of vaults and sections know that one vault cannot be a safe network since a vault cannot operate without being in a section which has many vaults. But I gather you do now know.

[quote=“zeroflaw, post:83, topic:25188”]
If the network slowly shutdown and only one vault was left standing, it was an enormous archive node , the network would still operate. With this single vault, it would just now be centralised. Or are you saying you would need a minimum of 8 nodes to create one group that contains all the sections?
[/quote]
In here there is expressed a few misunderstandings of how things work. The network needs at least one section. It is senseless to say 8 nodes to create one group that contains all the sections. It shows that you know the words but do not understand what they are.

Yes we know. But can I suggest that you learn a bit more about how the network is built. A little more than than you’ve shown here which really amounted to knowing a few words and that vaults store data.

Agreed and this is going to be my last post.

I am about to retire tonight, but I agree and maybe the other @moderators can split off this discussion into its own topic. What category I am not sure though.


#139

Would you go and survey 20,000 network engineers and sys admins and get back to me with the results. This claim is as unfounded as the one maidsafe is making.

Yes, I am now aware that a software limitation stops a single vault with a copy of all the chucks in the network operating.


#140

Bore category???
Trolling category???


#141

Again, this is off-topic and not helpful.


#142

Now now, I am both of them, fully qualified and on the mailing list of many thousands of them. Yes that means I communicate with them.

This is getting stupid, and I’m sorry I do not wish to sound like the old man talking to a youngster who thinks they know it all and obvious to those around they don’t.

Says the man who acts as a knowledgable one who makes claims as if they are absolutely true and yet without “proof”. And one who says SAFE is this or that but does not understand the basics of vaults and sections. Its not that you don’t know these things but that you make bold unfounded statements as if you know more than everyone else here on the subject. Its quite insulting and why you get the reaction.

Again the point went right over your head. A network implied multiple devices/instances communicating with each other. Also a vault on its own cannot be a SAFE network since you need at least one section which is made up of many vaults. I think I will retract “You now know” from my previous post.


#143

The difference is, they are my unfounded statements. I don’t generalise them to include groups of people I think would be on my side. Feel free to bring your entire mailing list over to this forum. It can only help grow a healthy community.

Making me out as young as a type of slander is not helpful.