Lbry.io – decentralized digital library
lbry.io
lbry.io
After a few minutes on this site, I still have no idea what this is. "Watch, read and play in a decentralized digital library controlled by the community." sounds intriguing, but... what does that mean? What exactly is a decentralised digital library? How can I watch, read, and play in it? How does the community control it?
> How can I watch, read, and play in it?
I haven't figured this bit out yet. I suppose something like a web browser plugin should be on their roadmap if it's not already available. I'd imagine the plugin would yield the LRBY credits to creators in order to browse the content.
The FAQ describes how LBRY is distinct from Storj and IPFS et al, but not mentioned is steemit -- it has a similar concept IIRC.
This is a brilliant project if it works, an attempt to consolidate content from private trackers and ad based pay systems into something that resembles a traditional bazaar for paid digital content.
The only problem I have with it is the name as it's not really a library.
https://lbry.io/quickstart is good practical introduction.
https://lbry.io/what is a more theoretical introduction.
We've got a WIP new homepage (more of a wireframe) at https://lbry.io/home2 if you want to share any feedback!
A plain english explanation (one to two paragraphs?) would be a huge help.
Try and explain why we should be excited about this from a technical perspective... because it seems like technical people will be your first set of users.
EDIT: The TLDR from the essay at https://lbry.io/what looks pretty nice. Why don't you use that?
This article does a good job of introducing LBRY, btw: https://bryanalexander.org/2017/03/19/what-is-lbry-and-what-... (h/t @doctornemo).
I also saw it described as "A cross between Bitcoin and Napster", which was fairly illuminating. I'm sure you wouldn't consider it accurate, but as a starting point perhaps something like this would be useful to have?
At the very least, #1 on the FAQ should really be the answer to "What is LBRY?"
Its an IPFS clone by a private entity, with a blockchain for a DNS like namespace. And its monetized, and seemingly badly.
Large chunks of the core code just aren't completes. No GUI. Low amount of users although spamming to tech sites is trying to change that.
Tl;Dr. Stay away. Stick with IPFS. Its on its way of being an IETF standard in my opinion.
Edit: I guess the 2 people from lbry.io found this comment. 2 immediate downvotes without comment. Would much prefer a dialogue if the above is factually incorrect... There seems to be a lot of people floundering in here trying to make heads or tails of this stuff.
I stand corrected on the GUI side of things.
And that's doubly-so when the video is confusingly-produced.
It's fairly slow, and isn't very information-dense, and, though it sounds like it's scripted, its grammar doesn't actually make any sense. I transcribed a pierce below:
----
"The bottom line is that LBRY, like HTTP or Bitcoin, it's a platform or protocol that, once unleashed into the world, no one will fully own or control how artists, authors, video and virtual reality producers how they'll use LBRY to discover and transmit, buy and sell content, that'll be up to them and the demanders of content, so watching this spontaneous world evolve, it's going to be very interesting, and I'm delighted to be a part of it."
They pitch it as upside for the creators but except for maybe a good feeling no reason why a consumer would want to use it.
There's an FAQ up (https://lbry.io/faq/naming) which addresses this concern, and I think the system that they have designed is fantastic. It seems fair, although I'd give a slightly longer time period for a "counter-bid" personally. I'd taking a look at the FAQ before you move away or comment because they answer a lot of different questions
This system seems like anyone who wants to make a name but not monitise it will lose. How much of the value of (picking the first things that come into my head) the names FSF, GPL, GCC and clang come from the organisations and products? I bet those names would be worth much more to someone willing to use adverts and spam.
And even if we raised enough money to keep the names out of the hands of spammers, all that's happening is that lbry gets to charge a tax to anyone who has a name that has got even slightly popular.
> Rest assured, we’re implementing permanent URLs that are always yours.
lbry://name#a
Where #a can actually be that short.
If you want a name with no identifiers or filters at all, the voting system will continue to be used.
Ah, so everything after the # is random then. And if you choose to abbreviate, you are risking whatever the collision likelihood is, in 4 bit increments, assuming the hash is hex digits.
There doesn't appear to be a throttle on claims, so choosing to abbreviate with just one character could be risky? Or does your substring match prefer earliest claim?
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=12418081
mrkgnao: These two goals -- being subject to the DMCA (and similar laws), and promising a predetermined, immutable set of rules -- are incompatible.
developer2: It's AOL keywords with a bidding system - for any site or service.
The also generated some comments here, though most were focused on the Berkely issue rather than LBRY:
20,000 UC Berkeley Lectures Made Illegal, So We Irrevocably Mirrored Them
It's sad how "good looking" demo pages have turned me into a robot, ignoring everything that doesn't satisfy my preferences and therefore result in me missing out of a huge amount of valuable information.
∙ What is it (in one sentence)?
∙ What can I do with it?
∙ Where can I learn more about what you just described using meaningless buzzwords?
Edit: This page has more information, but no tl;dr either: https://lbry.io/what
>TL;DR Digital art is one of the first goods to evolve beyond scarcity. This evolution is changing the way content is discovered, publicized, paid for and delivered. Heretofore, the lack of transparency and monetization mechanisms in peer-to-peer sharing networks has largely enabled piracy. By equipping a peer-to-peer protocol with a digital currency and transparent decentralized ledger, the LBRY protocol opens the door to a new era of digital content distribution making peer-to-peer content distribution suitable for major publishing houses, self-publishers and everyone in between.
If LBRY succeeds, we will enter a world that is even more creative, connected, and conservatory. We will waste less and we make more. We will create a world where a teenager in Kenya and a reality star in Los Angeles use the same tool to search the same network and have access to the same results -- a world where information, knowledge, and imagination know no borders.
I think the problem with paying for content is not that it doesn't have a fancy protocol based off blockchain and its own coin.
It is that access to content is not straightforward and it is easier to pirate. What guarantee does Lbry offer that someone won't post a pirate copy of copyrighted content for free?
The essay and FAQ do offer some explanation, but seem to gloss over other things. Does this require a DRM layer? Can I keep (and backup) any content I purchase?
How can I, as a layman, discern the nature of their cryptocurrency setup? In the FAQ LBRY.Inc is shown to allocate themselves 10% of the total amount of their digital currency, and another 20% is distributed by them to partners. In other places they are boasting that this is an open protocol, similar in impact to IMAP — and free from the clutches of evil content platforms like YouTube.
How do I know this isn't another pyramid scheme (the LBC cryptocurrency) or a mule with a carrot on its forehead pretending to be a unicorn looking for a buy-out?
https://github.com/lbryio/lbry.io/commit/ab6a3fe538f5c55e1f3...
If you're in our Slack, DM me a wallet address at @kauffj for a tip!
How do you deal with takedown and dcma requests? I know ipfs for example has a blacklist for dcma requests.
I'm trying to understand what keeps someone from copying a video and sharing it for less or uploading a movie or TV series.
This does not remove the blockchain entry, since this is impossible, but it would be irresponsible and illegal in most countries to continue to host content on this list.
Here's a legal memo the wonderful people at Cardozo drafted for us: https://www.dropbox.com/s/70uezh44ct0244c/LBRY-SecondaryLiab...
We've also spent an unfortunate amount of money on legal fees.
Is there privacy built into the protocol? Can everyone see what I've downloaded & published?
What if someone uploads pirated works?
[1] https://steemit.com/lbry/@hipster/stop-buying-lbry-credits
Looks like you guys created your own blockchain for the service. Any reason why Ethereum wasn't used? Any limitations?
what proof-of-work algorithm does LBRY use?
https://github.com/lbryio/lbrycrd-gpu/blob/master/algorithm/...
which shows it to be Hashcash with some mishmash of existing hash functions (SHA256,SHA512,RIPEMD) cobbled together.
Some people are like that, where if you respond to their snark, your response will be used against you to tarnish your reputation in the eyes of bystanders.
It is important to never let them get the moral high ground.
If someone says something like...
* "Your team is all white."
* "Your team is all male."
* "Your team is all American."
* "Your team is all able-bodied."
A better way to respond would be something like, "That's true. We're always looking for new talent and embrace diversity, just haven't had much luck yet. <hiring page URL here> if anyone's interested."
It addresses the problem, and contains an open invitation for people of diverse backgrounds to apply.
(All of this is assuming you're willing to work with people who aren't white, aren't male, aren't American, and/or aren't able-bodied, of course.)
Us?
I'm talking about them, in a third person sense, not a first person sense.
Them, in this case, is meant to refer to trollish individuals looking to cause trouble under the facade of caring about the plight of women, people of color, etc. but actually are just in it for their own emotions. The people who want to stir the pot, not make things better.
Rather than a script furnished in a list of demands from said subset of the populace, this is more of a suggestion to defuse conflicts in a way that doesn't let them win.
Seriously, what are they supposed to do to resolve it? Fire two partners and hire two women just to make an equality quota? Hire four new women just on the merit of being women?
I count thirteen: https://lbry.io/team
There are 9 staff, not including a few advisors. So its probably the case that they all knew each other before the comapny existed. If there were no women in their lab, theres not much they can do about that.
What would the correct response be? "Sorry we didn't know any women when we started, we shouldnt have done anything until the right quota of women showed up."
Should they fire and replace 4 staff with women or just hire 9 women even though they might not have enough revenue to do so?
Lesson learned. Subsequent attempts to engage sincerely were also met with derision, so I'm not sure anything could have ever been done that wouldn't have been met similarly.
The responses are the damaging aspect here. "Our salaries are low" and "we don't have any EAs" are just painfully bad ways to respond.
Although this is actually this account's second comment.
"Im sorry. We cannot hire yo for employment at this time because you are male."
Yeah... That would be a lawyers fieldday.