i can see your point, but there are some differences. the main one is that freenet is anonymous, and unhosted is not. i think unhosted is, if anything, most similar to SMTP: a protocol with which an application, that is inherently 'hosted' (uses persistence on online servers), can be 100% decentralized (bar its dependence on DNS). Instead of centralized, as is the default these days for internet apps. All its weaknesses apart, we should thank SMTP for being an alternative to a centralized facebook-messages. ;) Unhosted wants to create a decentralization layer for web apps to run on.
Comments
So this is Freenet, only less secure?
i can see your point, but there are some differences. the main one is that freenet is anonymous, and unhosted is not. i think unhosted is, if anything, most similar to SMTP: a protocol with which an application, that is inherently 'hosted' (uses persistence on online servers), can be 100% decentralized (bar its dependence on DNS). Instead of centralized, as is the default these days for internet apps. All its weaknesses apart, we should thank SMTP for being an alternative to a centralized facebook-messages. ;) Unhosted wants to create a decentralization layer for web apps to run on.