IRC channel logs
2023-05-11.log
back to list of logs
<curious_reader>I asked in the HoloChain Discord about what they think of spritely and here is what they think: "Spritely is a more fully feature distributed development environment, great for developing distributed applications where different hosts can make a wide variety of claims about each other, but doesn't have fully censorship-proof, transparent execution. <curious_reader>Hosts can't make unbreakable promises about what will happen when you send their actors messages, they can't promise that they'll stay responsive and available, as a smart contract system like holochain could. <curious_reader>It's also currently very Racket-focused, where holochain is more wasm-oriented. Spritely are making a racket to wasm compiler, but from what I've been able to tell, it's for web browser support. <curious_reader>I think it's possible that these technologies will converge, eventually... yeah, I guess you could probably make a special kind of spritely vat that runs as a holochain app and does provide those guarantees. Gosh." <curious_reader>I would be interested in how you (as in people/developers of spritely) perceive holochain and its technological approach. <curious_reader>But further down I also would be interested where do you see differences and commonalities between design goals or philosophies between the two projects. Like for example Holochain seems to talk a lot about hApp so leaning onto the App concept but with some ability to share and mix between these. How does Spritely envision user collaboration on <curious_reader>creating and mainting their own software? Is it also Apps`( sapps?) or is it a different model? <RandyFarmer[m]>We're not yet at the point where we are comparing the vision and tech of our project to others. Frankly because that requires understanding each stack in detail, which we just don't have time to do. We are a nonprofit with very constrained resources. <RandyFarmer[m]>But, we are actively seeking partners and finding to work with folks who have (or want to have) compatible infrastructure and applications. OCAPN is hopefully evidence of that. <RandyFarmer[m]>Also, in some areas, higher up our projected stack, many things are still being defined and existing technologies and designs that meet out core requirements are candidates for adoption and codevelopment. <RandyFarmer[m]>For example, various decentralized storage systems and networking layers and identity standards. <sneek>Welcome back Zarutian_iPad!!