How does MaidSafe compare to say Tahoe-LAFS or (historically) Mojo Nation?

People,

There has been a discussion on the CaCert mailing list that I have an interest in and I mentioned MaidSafe in the context of what was being talked about and a person asked me this question - which I couldn’t really answer without a LOT of research - can anyone here answer of the top of their head? For background or interest, the discussion is here:

https://lists.cacert.org/wws/arc/cacert/2015-03/msg00007.html

Thanks,
Phil.

Hmm, the link is about using blockchain as a repo for SSL certs. But your post is about (the for-all-practical-purposes-dead) Tahoe-LAFS.

SSL certs on Blockchain: namecoin was first on this and in fact if you follow those links you’ll find that they reference http://blog.namecoin.org/post/109811339625/lightweight-resolvers.
There was an attempt to build a resolver as FF browser extension (Free.me or whatever) but that project died. There’s simply not enough demand for that stuff.
The problem is .bit domains (or whatever these guys come up with) aren’t indexed (and not searchable) by anyone, so it’s nearly pointless to have domain names.
Related to SSL certs: there are many technical problems with the approach, so it’s going to take a while to fix them.

I have Namecoin installed (and just now, running) and I’m waiting for something to happen, but it doesn’t seem like it will anytime soon.
Maybe after MaidSafe and several other projects come out there will be more demand for that kind of stuff (for related sites running on the IP part of the Internet).

@janitor,

Thanks for that. I see what you mean by .bit not being indexed and searchable but I will press on and create my own .bit web site anyway - even if it ends up being just an interesting exercise. For me it took days for all the blockchain stuff to download (not hours) but eventually I could look at some .bit sites and determine via the FF FreeSpeechMe plugin if they were “secure” or not.

I am certainly hanging out for MS to get going . .

I’m with you - I’m going to make one as well and I do believe that .bit could be a nice way to find and access Dynamic IP sites that are gateways to MaidSafe (or maybe offer apps to get one to directly access MaidSafe).
That way we could run .bit sites from home because those wouldn’t need to handle just very basic workloads, while MaidSafe could do the hard part. For example you could have a static site (a static Wiki or whatever) with MaidSafe instructional videos embedded and visible to those who have the MaidSafe browser plugin.
That kind of site could run off a very small embedded system with as little as 32 MB of RAM.

1 Like

Saw your posts on the NMC forum, hopefully you got it to work.

Just wanted to make a comment specific to OKTurtles:

  • DNS resolver isn’t the only feature it has
  • Those additional features are shown in this short demo video. One of them is shown around the 2m36s mark and I wonder if you realized how that works (I didn’t know about it, and it took me a few tries to figure it out - if I did figure it out). It seems that OKTurtles DNSchain - in conjunction with another project - can perform the routing of blocked Web sites. That’s pretty interesting. Governments would have to block popular DNSchain servers to stop it.
  • The other additional feature is a browser plugin for GPG-based encrypted messaging that can use existing Web apps (your “public” messages to the other person can be encrypted or just GPG-signed).

DNSchain relies on IP addresses (it’s secure, but it’s easy to block/deny), however I just checked - it seems Tor may add support for querying Namecoin over onion addresses (https://trac.torproject.org/projects/tor/ticket/10747).

In conclusion my opinion on DNSchain is that it’s more than Namecoin, but there’s no way to seamlessly switch to it and the lack of search engines will keep it off the radar for 99.99% of internet users.
They’ll need a lot of work to make it mainstream, but they will probably thrive in selected semi-closed communities.

@janitor,

I haven’t gotten around to setting my own .bit domain yet - people on the NC forum don’t seem to read posts very closely . .

I found another interesting comment here:

http://www.indolering.com/dnschain-is-harmful

I think your conclusions are spot on - even if one does have a few more clues technically, it is still hard to find the time to do the extra work necessary . . and I get lazy sometimes . .

1 Like

Hi Philip,

It seems you’re on a RedHat distro.
Get your RPM from http://namecoin.org/?p=download and install it.
Then run it for couple of hours to sync up.
Then buy some NMC (like 5 NMC) on Poloniex and send them to your client address.
Then use client GUI (total no brainer) to register a “d/yourdomain” (lowercase only!)

If you want I can register on your behalf and send you the private key and address, but to be safe you’d need to transfer that property to another address for which you’d need a client, so it wouldn’t really help you (and you’d also need a client to send me some NMC to pay me back :-)).
You can also install Namecoin server and use the CLI (like you would with bitcoin-core) to accomplish the same, but working with the client is much more enjoyable.

Janitor

P.S. I read that blog post… I see where the Namecoin dev is coming from, but I also understand the DNSchain dev.
Some people simply cannot and don’t want to see Namecoin. If proxying it with another s/w (open source, at that) is so bad, too fxxxing bad, maybe Namecoin guys can make a better client since “everything has already been done”…
The post reminded me a little bit of the Linux fanatics from the late 90’s and early 00’s, when it kind of mattered what Linux distro one used, who looked down upon anyone who didn’t build it from kernel.org source.
Does DNSchain lower the security of Namecoin setups? Of course it does. Not everyone can make their own shoes, that’s the beauty of the centralized model. But if they don’t run DNSchain and instead run and administer their own Namecoin, would home users they be more secure? No, because they’ll mess it up even worse (if one is incompetent to install and setup DNSchain, it is very reasonable to assume they’ll do an even worse job with stand-alone Namecoin).

@janitor,

Thanks for the help offer - I am still making slow progress through the bugs and haven’t yet been able to get the namecoin-Qt running ( see https://forum.namecoin.info/viewtopic.php?f=7&t=2260&p=14682#p14682 ). I will persist for a bit longer but you were correct about the low take up - I had a look at a LOT of the so-called .bit sites and they are mostly just placeholders . .

Yes close to 100% are placeholders.

As to the error I think you should do what that guy said or build from source with BerkeleyDB 4.8.1 (or whatever version is recommended for Bitcoin Core 0.9.x - see instructions for bitcoin 0.x on the Web) and then link Namecoin against such version of Berkeley DB like so (your paths will vary depending on where you built BerkeleyDB and whether you installed it or not; below I installed it and this was on Debian).

./configure CPPFLAGS="-I/usr/local/BerkeleyDB.4.8/include -O2" \
LDFLAGS="-L/usr/local/BerkeleyDB.4.8/lib"

In reality, though, unless you want to use it all the time or want to squat on some yet-unclaimed domains, I’d say it’s too much trouble. Better wait until they build a new release based on BItcoin Core 0.10.x underlying code.

@janitor,

Yep, that’s where I am at the moment . . to much other stuff that needs doing . .