Hacker News Reader

From your link, I found this a bit odd:

> As video games get more photo realistic (...) the demand for rendering is going to grow immensely.

I don't see what a decentralized render farm has to do with video games, it's never going to render at real-time rates.

Agreed that is one of the hairier challenges a concept like this faces. I do think that argument is worth unpacking though. Would a render node in your neighborhood have acceptable latency? IIRC they have demoed "real-time" NFT's based on an Unreal Engine node streaming frames at acceptable e2e latency.

Personally I'd think a bit broader than frame-streaming for achieving "console in the room" levels of video game fidelity.

The primary issue wouldn't be latency. It'd be access to assets (which can easily be tens to hundreds of gigabytes for a modern game) and upstream bandwidth (which is often as little as 5 Mbps for residential users).

These aren't problems that a blockchain can solve. In fact, I'll go a step further and say: distributed graphics rendering, or other computation, isn't a problem which is made any easier at all by the application of a blockchain. It's yet another case of cryptocurrency enthusiasts taking a problem that people seem interested in and claiming, without justification, that The Blockchain Solves This.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com