Doesn’t a farmer serve data?
It retrieves data. Your ipod retrieves songs and plays them. A disk drive retrieves data and serves it.
A farmer is like your disk drive and you do not classify the hard drive as a server, yet in english it is serving data to the cpu and memory
A farmer does not serve up a file.
A farmer is not a server in the current usage of the term Internet Server
If anything SAFE is a huge multi-platform/hardware interconnected (singular) server and the farmer is just a cog in the mechanism that eventually serves the data to the user
Semantics. To my mind they (farmers) are still servers, just not in the traditional sense.
No and NO again. Its the heart of a server to be doing a LOT more than retrieve a block of data. Or pass through a packet of data. Your hard drive does the same as a farmer and do you call it a server? No and for good reason
If we do not hold to traditional defitions and understanding then why not call your monitor a server. It does display images. Of course not and so too a disk drive (or farmer) is not a server either by any definition of a server.
To try and call a disk drive (or farmer) a server is to twist definitions to make up a false definition
A waiter serves food also called a server.
A checkout operator supplies products to a person, also a server.
You don’t have to agree.
But my mind is my own, and its just how I see it.
A hard drive serves data, so is a server, albeit a different type.
So to me a farmer will always be a server as it serves data.
Of course opinions will differ.
A power supply serves electrons
A disk drive serves electrons
A CRT serves electrons aimed at a mask
A ethernet card serves up electrons in particular way you read as data
A USB stick serves up blocks
Yea I can play the semantic game too.
But you are wrong when talking computers. We set aside the serving up electrons, bytes, images and describe a server as something serving up files or processing your requests in a whole function.
EG send request to server, it retrieves the files from its various disk drives (eg RAID) processes the data and sends you the results which maybe a file, a web page or whatever.
The SAFE network does teh same as any server on the Internet.
SAFE is the server. The farmer does not directly give you the data, but like a disk drive it gives the data to a component in the SAFE server distributed hardware and then to the next. Also no one farmer retrieves the whole file, so the farmer (singular) is NOT serving you anything (even in the waiter terms). It is the SAFE network as a server collecting the blocks together and the SAFE network serves you the data.
SAFE is a singular server for everyone And that is even using your waiter is a server definitions/understanding
In waiter/server terms the farmer is the produce supplier that supplies raw produce to the restaurant and the cooks prepare the meal (collect the data together into a meal) and them the file (meal) is supplied to you via routing. The whole is required to server you your file. SAFE is THE server
Yes, I get your opinion, I still have a differing one, let’s not waste time debating it, you’ll not change my mind.
The issue for me is that it sends the wrong message to those who know the correct usage of these terms and they see the advertisements of no servers as fake and lying because others who use SAFE say and promote farmers as servers when clearly they are not to those who use servers out there. And many a office worker (not technical) know what their office servers are and that they serve files.
Opinions are fine but its good to back the creators of the software and the advertisements by educating opinions and not cause potential issues of claims of fakery when someone takes incorrect opinion as fact
Anyhow you are more than entitled to hold an opinion, Its not my place to change that and if you want to keep it then I will not force anything or think less of anyone who holds contrary opinion. I was just attempting education.
Referring to SAFE, the whole network, as one giant ‘virtual server’ might assist with the terminology. Easier to see the farmers as cogs in the machine. The term ‘serverless’ is awkward and confusing imo.
Edit: @neo didn’t see your comment above in bold. Guess we’re on the same page.
Can we move this discussion… It is offtopic
OK, makes sense was wondering why you were pushing your opinion.
To be honest i have never set up a server, or really know what they do ( I guess I understand a little better now ).
I would also have no problem with a monitor being called a graphic server, or a psu being called a power server, even though those terms may be incorrect it would not bother me.
Perhaps my Trinidadian side showing through, their use if English is very flexible.
Harsh but fair
This discussion again?
In my view, farmers are not like servers because they are decentralised. They serve chunks, not whole files.
So no, farmers are not servers. Servers are centralised.
Servers! Servers everywhere, serving self encrypted goodness.
I expected this to rhyme. Just saying…
Servers! Servers everywhere,
But not for long I think,
For when SAFE Fleming ventures forth,
They may become extinct.
(I’m not a poet, and yes I know it)
But yet you rhyme, all the time.
A moderate edit:
Servers! Servers everywhere,
Serving self encrypted goodness,
Which ought be common fare!
To be a server, or not to be a server, that is the question…
Is a disk drive a server? If not why not, because it is very like a vault so if you think vaults are servers, then why aren’t disks servers? What’s the dividing line?
Whatever ‘you’ call a server or not, for me the reason I like to say SAFE is going to get rid of servers is because it will solve the many fundamental problems which are caused by server based interwebs.
I think this is a good dividing line to draw, so I’m going to continue drawing it, and if you don’t like it, tough.
Like a water scoosher serves water.