Can Bitshares Web wallets make use of SAFE Network or Storj for server storage?

[emailtooaj]

This could be a great solution to store BTS wallet passwords for password recovery. 

[jsidhu]

I like the concept of allowing people to store data on some peers, and letting the market decide the rate at which the storage costs. This is in contrast to storing on chain or in the cloud, both of which are inefficient or undesired in the later case.

Redundancy becomes a major issue so I'd like to hear about this new idea of using delegates perhaps as redundant data servers incase peers shutdown and data "shards" need to be reconstructed.

I don't see why you would want to bother when Storj will handle it all and you can just use their network. Bitshares can simply integrate with Storj.

It actually takes a lot of code to get crowd storage right and two teams are already working on it for years.

Can we use storj and use bts as a storjx replacement..? If so then yea thats pretty much a working solution ootb. Use bts as the internal currency and have delegates host some storage space to kickstart the usability... once people use it and it needs scaling up then either more delegates can be voted in or ppl can sell their storage space as a peer(if we build it into bts core)

It would put increased responsibility and risk on the delegates. It would put new political pressures on Bitshares that it currently doesn't have. It would focus Bitshares in a direction it doesn't need to focus.

Bitshares only needs decentralized storage but it doesn't have to come from the delegates. Storj will work just fine and each user of Bitshares can simply connect to a Storj account somehow.

Why would you bother trying to duplicate Storj?

storj needs a currency to work, its an api. The reference currency storjx is the coin that works ontop of storj... we would use bts instead and implement the api either in an asset through a smart contract or directly in the core. The delegates would simply be enabling storj on their nodes to kickstart available storage capacity if anyone wants to store anything, ofcourse its not required and as a first step probably not convenient, but perhaps it is an idea to get network affect in that market by creating quick demand for storing files for free.

Alternatively we can create an MPA for storjx coin and have people trade bts for storjx and that would allow people to do decentralized storage via storjx through our dex and not have to risk going to a central exchange. If we collaborate with storjx coin maybe we can turn it into a UIA and have it be the goto exchange for storjx coins to use storj.

[luckybit]

I like the concept of allowing people to store data on some peers, and letting the market decide the rate at which the storage costs. This is in contrast to storing on chain or in the cloud, both of which are inefficient or undesired in the later case.

Redundancy becomes a major issue so I'd like to hear about this new idea of using delegates perhaps as redundant data servers incase peers shutdown and data "shards" need to be reconstructed.

I don't see why you would want to bother when Storj will handle it all and you can just use their network. Bitshares can simply integrate with Storj.

It actually takes a lot of code to get crowd storage right and two teams are already working on it for years.

Can we use storj and use bts as a storjx replacement..? If so then yea thats pretty much a working solution ootb. Use bts as the internal currency and have delegates host some storage space to kickstart the usability... once people use it and it needs scaling up then either more delegates can be voted in or ppl can sell their storage space as a peer(if we build it into bts core)

It would put increased responsibility and risk on the delegates. It would put new political pressures on Bitshares that it currently doesn't have. It would focus Bitshares in a direction it doesn't need to focus.

Bitshares only needs decentralized storage but it doesn't have to come from the delegates. Storj will work just fine and each user of Bitshares can simply connect to a Storj account somehow.

Why would you bother trying to duplicate Storj?

[jsidhu]

I like the concept of allowing people to store data on some peers, and letting the market decide the rate at which the storage costs. This is in contrast to storing on chain or in the cloud, both of which are inefficient or undesired in the later case.

Redundancy becomes a major issue so I'd like to hear about this new idea of using delegates perhaps as redundant data servers incase peers shutdown and data "shards" need to be reconstructed.

I don't see why you would want to bother when Storj will handle it all and you can just use their network. Bitshares can simply integrate with Storj.

It actually takes a lot of code to get crowd storage right and two teams are already working on it for years.

Can we use storj and use bts as a storjx replacement..? If so then yea thats pretty much a working solution ootb. Use bts as the internal currency and have delegates host some storage space to kickstart the usability... once people use it and it needs scaling up then either more delegates can be voted in or ppl can sell their storage space as a peer(if we build it into bts core)

[luckybit]

I like the concept of allowing people to store data on some peers, and letting the market decide the rate at which the storage costs. This is in contrast to storing on chain or in the cloud, both of which are inefficient or undesired in the later case.

Redundancy becomes a major issue so I'd like to hear about this new idea of using delegates perhaps as redundant data servers incase peers shutdown and data "shards" need to be reconstructed.

I don't see why you would want to bother when Storj will handle it all and you can just use their network. Bitshares can simply integrate with Storj.

It actually takes a lot of code to get crowd storage right and two teams are already working on it for years.

[BunkerChainLabs-DataSecurityNode]

I like the concept of allowing people to store data on some peers, and letting the market decide the rate at which the storage costs. This is in contrast to storing on chain or in the cloud, both of which are inefficient or undesired in the later case.

Redundancy becomes a major issue so I'd like to hear about this new idea of using delegates perhaps as redundant data servers incase peers shutdown and data "shards" need to be reconstructed.

Perhaps the best first step would be to use all delegates to offer their VPS storage capacities (which they probaly arent using unless its the chain folder) to offer free storage services for something like maidsafe or storj... then people can store data via delegate "shards" and it will be limited to the storage capacity of the delegates. If market desires more data then more delegates can be voted in with bigger storage capacity.. creating a secondary market for delegates other than what we have now. Now we have free storage which delegates are paid for, funded by the blockchain and an added incentive for new delegates to stand up with bigger storage facilities, making a profit aslong as their storage costs < delegate pay. We need to leverage the server machines as much as possible and create value added services such as this. Perhaps a revenue generation model would be to buy more space than is available or add extra redundancy for X amount of bts per day or something.

These are some general ideas of what most projects are doing with a touch of DPOS.

The market certainly would have a roll as you mentioned, but all the current models that have attempted it in their current methods have been received with limited/little adoption.

There are other issues to consider in regards to privacy and encryption that I do not believe would be advantageous to the bitshares blockchain for what it is designed to do (ie, be a financial platform). Graphene however can be adapted in its own side chain (which will share drop on bts of course) to enable proper standards that make it more than just a side show curiosity in storage.

There is a fair amount of overhead, major bandwidth costs, and performance issues and security to consider. Our implementation will be with the objective of mass adoption that can serve both consumer and enterprise. So with regards to redundancy you cannot create a one size fit all system. It needs to be able to scale with both standards and costs. Joe six pack with his home movies library is fine with mirrored redundancy, while Medical Widgets Inc. requires HIPPA compliance for their storage with DR... list of scenarios goes on... as do regulatory requirements in privacy. The costs of redundancy should be dynamic.

We already had plans to create bridging tools to make some of what you suggested to interface with bitshares easier/seemless.

There is ultimately the opportunity for the bitshares blockchain to live in this new decentralized network itself eventually if delegates choose to make the move there. There will be many many very good reasons too I assure you.

[jsidhu]

I like the concept of allowing people to store data on some peers, and letting the market decide the rate at which the storage costs. This is in contrast to storing on chain or in the cloud, both of which are inefficient or undesired in the later case.

Redundancy becomes a major issue so I'd like to hear about this new idea of using delegates perhaps as redundant data servers incase peers shutdown and data "shards" need to be reconstructed.

Perhaps the best first step would be to use all delegates to offer their VPS storage capacities (which they probaly arent using unless its the chain folder) to offer free storage services for something like maidsafe or storj... then people can store data via delegate "shards" and it will be limited to the storage capacity of the delegates. If market desires more data then more delegates can be voted in with bigger storage capacity.. creating a secondary market for delegates other than what we have now. Now we have free storage which delegates are paid for, funded by the blockchain and an added incentive for new delegates to stand up with bigger storage facilities, making a profit aslong as their storage costs < delegate pay. We need to leverage the server machines as much as possible and create value added services such as this. Perhaps a revenue generation model would be to buy more space than is available or add extra redundancy for X amount of bts per day or something.

[BunkerChainLabs-DataSecurityNode]

I think we need to discuss now that Bitshares 2.0 and Storj are converging how a synergy can be formed. Storj offers decentralized storage which web wallets can use and offer as a feature.

SAFE Network also offers decentralized storage which could be a backend. An example feature could be to backup your wallet without storing it in any specific place automatically.

This could also eventually be useful for other purposes perhaps, such as storing identity information.

These solutions in themselves are ok.. but there is another solution that we are developing that incorporates DPOS.

It hasn't been announced yet as another chain because we don't have any timelines formed yet.

Some of what you are talking about scratches the surface of what it could be used for.

[luckybit]

I think we need to discuss now that Bitshares 2.0 and Storj are converging how a synergy can be formed. Storj offers decentralized storage which web wallets can use and offer as a feature.

SAFE Network also offers decentralized storage which could be a backend. An example feature could be to backup your wallet without storing it in any specific place automatically.

This could also eventually be useful for other purposes perhaps, such as storing identity information.