I've glossed over the docs and said hello in the talk channel.

From what I understand it's a lot like "Turing-Complete Git", like Ethereum is for Bitcoin. There are many similarities to #ssb with regards to the content-addressed append-only logs architecture.

I don't fully understand the namespacing thing, but I think it resembles how authority is modeled in the git-verse like "this is linus' linux HEAD" or something like that. But then again I'm just waving around keywords, I have no idea what I'm talking about.

@chc4 seems to know a lot more, and has done good internet sparring in this thread with regards to how the founders' politics seep (or not) into the software and network's design.

they lost me at "identity as a commodity". I thought we were going decentralised?

To be honest, I don't really understand why you'd want a "p2p" version of the Certificant Authority system. We already have the CA system and it sucks. @chc4 what role to the parents/landlords play in routing? do they need to respond to lookup requests? or do they publish or registry or something like that?

sounds like a federated system more than a fully logically decentralised system

I think every system has an implicit social theory - you don't need to subscribe to neofeudalism, but urbit does have an explicit heirachy where people own the namespace. I just don't think scarcity is a solution. I think scarcity is a problem.
And that is why ssb avoids scarcity and heirachy and enables consent and community. You don't need to subscribe to my hippie politics to use ssb, but you still get it a bit just by using it, and likewise you can't use urbit without engaging with the social structures that Yarvin wanted to create.

What Urbit and SSB have in common is that we are both trying to create a computer society as we want the world to be.

#someoneshould write a science fiction where there are no more countries, and instead the world is divided by the different cryptographic p2p protocols they use.

@chc4 but you don't need permission to run a pub handed down to you from a more senior pub, you just do it and then you can send out invite codes. Basically, each ssb instance is it's own ~zod. Also, pubs don't tell you who any one is, because the id is the pubkey - and because of friend-of-a-friend replication, you can generally get someone's feed from multiple pubs.

I have a question though: would hoon's type system support plugging in a different peer lookup system? but otherwise allowing the rest of the commands to still work?

or may this place is Doctorow's walkaway net - https://boingboing.net/2017/04/07/bug-in-tech-for-antipreppers.html

Who knows Cory well enough to invite him in. @mikey and I talking about how it's ridiculous he's not here (unless he already is....)

maybe @matilde has something to say about it?