Hey Sup Forums, what do u think of urbit (urbit.org)? Personally I have no idea what it is but it looks cool alright

Hey Sup Forums, what do u think of urbit (urbit.org)? Personally I have no idea what it is but it looks cool alright.

Other urls found in this thread:

urbit.org/blog/2017.9-eth/
news.ycombinator.com/item?id=15299442
twitter.com/SFWRedditImages

>digital ocean rebrands their droplets a la voss water
zzzz

Hey, would you rather have a few droplets or a whole planet?

I ain't clicking that shit, nigga.

I still don't understand what this is or why I need it
It just seems like some python devs hired a marketing major and went wild
as far as I can tell it's a VPS provider that scrapes your social media and has some weird blockchain address space / identity thing going on
again, why do I need it

Where did you get the social media scraping thing from?

I just read
urbit.org/blog/2017.9-eth/
but I'm still none the wiser, just a whole lot of terms (planets, galaxies, stars, ships, constitution, etc etc).
As far as I get it, it's a sort of personal cloud server that you can easily move between servers or compute yourself (like a docker container maybe), and some addressing stuff like you say.

"In an Urbit world, your data is no longer trapped in a jumble of proprietary servers. Your urbit is a permanent, versioned, typed archive the size of your digital life. Even before you move your data from a Web service to a local Urbit app, your urbit can drive your account with an API or scraper."

CTRL+Entered that post by accident, but that's what I read on their about section

Beyond the marketing crap (galaxies, stars, etc), I really can't tell why this is a revolutionary service for anyone but Apple diehards. Maybe I'll be proven wrong and am too lazy to care. Who's to say

>design from 2007
>documentation is garbage
just stop

There's literally nothing wrong with the design.

>running virtual cloud in virtual machine like jvm in virtual server using kvm or virtualbox
I want out of this ride though

Curtis Yarvin is an interesting fellow and Urbit is interesting software. I have a planet from when they were first given out, but I haven't done anything with it.

Urbit's documentation has the same problem Yarvin's other writing does though, namely his tendency to (re)invent terms and roll with those new meanings. It took me a long time to grok what Urbit was actually about. This follows through to the design too, UDP is the only existing technology it's built upon, everything else is from scratch and has its own terminology and syntax.

The idea is that a 'planet' is a piece of cyber real-estate that you own and have full control over. It's your sole representation on the Urbit-net and can run whatever services you please. A theoretical Urbit social network would be decentralised and just pull authorised information from various planets, rather than being the central repository itself.
Planets can be orbited by 'moons' which are their own entities and can serve as sub-personae for various purposes.
The planets are also themselves orbiting stars which can be thought of as clusters of users.
A star is responsible for the collective well-being of its planets who are in turn responsible for their moons and themselves.

How many layers of virtualization are you on right now, my dude?

Yeah dude, I really have no idea what any of that shit is and for some reason this Curtis guy is very prone to coincidence?
I don't understand what all these terms are about and still don't know why it's something I need

Huh. Sounds like bullshit to me.

OP here, thanks for the explanation. So a star is also just managed by a single person, who could theoretically fuck shit up for his planets? But even in that case, I suppose the planets could go somewhere else..
What are "ships" in this system?

I've seen it described as an idealised kind of cyber-feudalism. The abstract king of Urbit rules the galaxy of stars, who in turn rule their own community of planets who each have their moon serfs.
What makes this stick is the fact that quantity of planets and stars is finite and non-renewable, giving them some kind of real value.

It works, you can boot up a planet and write programmes for it to run on the network right now. The infrastructure is just not all there yet and it's ridiculously slow. There's a kind of Urbit IRC at least though.

Yes, planets are free to move to another star if they're being tyrannised (or censored, etc).
I guess you could think of ships as the connections planets make between each-other, they are abstract servers after-all. It might be stretching the metaphor though.

But, the internet exists already?

news.ycombinator.com/item?id=15299442
Here's some explanations, and a lot of skepticism.

Ah, I forgot about comets, I guess they're the ships.
A comet is a serverlet that exists outside the galactic hierarchy. There's a practically infinite number possible (2^128, I believe) and anyone can create one without buying or being given.
However, unlike the permanent structures, comets have no formal identity that can be trusted and are not part of the network at large, even if they can interact with planets on a case-by-case basis.

>the most available first-class address in the system is in a 32 bit address space. Why? Not for efficiency, but because the authors believe there aren't and never will be 4 billion human beings on the planet worthy of having a first-class address in their system.

>cyber-feudalism
based Yarvin will demolish the Cathedral and restore throne and altar to its proper place