Idea: btsync based web sites

[Haron]

It is possible now to create distributed static web sites using btsync. Just create your site structure in local folder, add it to btsync and publish RO key. Other people could add your folder to btsync and open your site locally. Also author can update or change his/her site so other users will see those changes (pseudo dynamic site).

Even more such sites could contain dynamic elements. For example, distributed livejournal site with author's content placed in btsync and comments at real web site. Same way forum functionality could be added to the site, etc.

Other ideas:

1. btsync: URI support could be added to the btsync application so it would be possible to use links to btsync based web sites directly in web browsers (as it was done for i2p: and bitcoin: URIs).
   
2. Distributed btsync based DNS system. In a simple case it's just a btsync folder with DNS.txt file that contains list of records in following form:
   

   S my-cool-site RWC4YD3S723QRVHHHIZWJXPTQMO6GKEQK some description
   D RWC4YD3S723QRVHHHIZWJXPTQMO6GKEQK # address (btsync RO key) of another DNS source (DNS tree leaf)

   
   btsync application could keep user list of such DNS sites (btsync RO keys) so when I put btsync://my-cool-site/index.html link in a browser it shows me proper btsync based site. In case if there are several sites with the same name btsync should show html page with those links and their descriptions so user can choose one.
   

Of course such sites will be slower than real sites and will have other problems but such approach has several advantage:

1. You don't need real server.
   
2. You should not register IP address and host name and you should not care about host name registration expiration.
   
3. The Pirate Bay site could be hosted such a way .
   
4. ...
   

[GreatMarko]

It is possible now to create distributed static web sites using btsync

I'll admit, the idea of "bysync based web sites" is somewhat intriguing - you can potentially do this now, however, in reality these would be more like private "intranet" sites, and would be limited to static content only i.e. html and image files, etc. Dynamically generated content (PHP, Perl, etc), or content that relies on a database queries (i.e. MySQL) wouldn't really work!

For example, you wouldn't be able to "host" a Wordpress blog and make this distribute to be locally available to view/use on other devices via BTSync. Firstly, it would require a server, PHP, and MySQL to be installed on each device, but also, BTSync would likely have issues syncing a MySQL database (I guess you could potentially use MySQL replication instead to ensure the database is the same on each device? - assuming devices can see each other outside of BTSync)

...but practically, are end-users really going to want to install a server, PHP, MySQL, and setup MySQL replication on their device just to be able to "view" your BTSync'd website!?

1. The Pirate Bay site could be hosted such a way
   

Yeah, I think this reason alone will be why true "btsync based web sites" won't get implemented! BitTorrent Sync's purpose is not to mass share content in a similar way to .torrent sites, it's primary purpose is to keep your own data in sync between devices.

[Haron]

Dynamically generated content (PHP, Perl, etc), or content that relies on a database queries (i.e. MySQL) wouldn't really work!

As I mentioned in the first post dynamic content could be hosted at real site and injected in btsync based site pages. It will be a mix of static content hosted on the btsync website and dynamic content injected from real website.

[Jonnan001]

I don't know enough about how BTsync works to have an educated opinion yet, but . . .

Off the top of my head I can see it working *very* well in conjuction with something like TiddlyWiki (Example TiddlyWiki Here --> http://nethack.tiddlyspot.com/ ).

I'd really like to know exactly how this works. I've always liked Bittorrent just for it's elegance as a protocol, and played with trying to use a 'shared cache' in a firefox add-on (but just wasn't smart enough to make it work), but yeah, I think this is fascinating.

Jonnan

[perennate]

Then whenever you want to visit a website, you'd have to wait a painful amount of time to find peers and connect to them.

[Automatic Coding]

Then whenever you want to visit a website, you'd have to wait a painful amount of time to find peers and connect to them.

I would assume that the peers would automatically be found & propagated via the DNS records, so, the only 'painful' time you'd have to wait is to connect to a home based network.

[delafield]

I think Haron has a great idea.

Any server requirements (MySQL, Apache, etc.) could be bundled with the browser. But only minimal server requirements would be needed (i.e., no MySQL) at first. Yes, the web sites would look like they did in 1993, but the advantages to such a system are incredible. No seized domain names, no seized servers, no DMCA takedown notices, no political censorship, etc. The capabilities would slowly grow over time, just as they did with the first generation of the world wide web back in 1993.

Websites, although rather static, could still be updated by anyone with the RW secret.

I understand if Bittorrent.com does not want to implement such a system, but it will come. And perhaps this is the browser that the pirate bay was talking about recently. Just a guess, don't know.

Regards, KS delafield

[Xanza]

A linux system admin could run BTSync via Docker and connect it to your www directory via shared hosting (assuming you're using shared hosting). It would be tedious, and time consuming and I doubt you would find someone willing to do it. But sure, it's totally possible. BTSync would download your entire root web hosting folder and you simply add your files to your BTSync directory on your local machine and they're synced to a web facing directory which would then be accessible (after transfer) via anyone on the open web.

[ferret86]

Hi, I'm working on something similar to your idea. But I use a simple Http-Server to provide dynamically generated content. I use btsync to sync that content across multiple users.

It works as I want it to under Linux, because I can use btsync in the background via Commands on the Command Line.

But under Windows and MAC there is no API or CMD Interface an external program could use.

So I need to wait until these features are implemented

[jon49]

Apparently Pirate Bay is working on this and should have the solution out in a few months???

The team are also working on a special BitTorrent-powered application, which lets users store and distribute The Pirate Bay and other websites on their own computers, making it impossible for third parties to block them.

This “p2p browser” should be able to keep The Pirate Bay operational, even if the site itself is pulled offline. There is currently no estimated release date set for this second project, but it will take a few more months of development at minimum.

Via http://torrentfreak.com/pirate-bays-anti-censorship-browser-clocks-1-million-downloads-131019/

The edges of society seem to come up with a lot of good innovative stuff!

[AuroraUK]

On 4/26/2013 at 4:26 AM, perennate said:

Then whenever you want to visit a website, you'd have to wait a painful amount of time to find peers and connect to them.

It's all matter of requirements. But reliability and uptime is what matters in case webhosting with respect to it's cost.

You should check it using VPN to get an access to a website (here is a liitle instruction how to to it via mac os  https://en.finevpn.org/how-to-set-up-a-free-vpn-on-mac-os/ )