upvote

points

by muragekibicho3 hours ago |
comments
upvoteby gwerbin3 hours ago|
next
[-]
What's silly about it? Content-addressable decentralized storage -- not tied to a cryptocurrency -- is really valuable for censorship-resistant archiving of politically-sensitive data (such as climate change research).
reply
upvoteby jazzyjackson2 hours ago|
parent|
next
[-]
Except it wasn’t censorship resistant at all, in that your node advertised itself as a node with a-z files on it. Separately you could put it behind a vpn or run a vps you paid for with monero, but fundamentally it’s more of a way just to pin a file to an address that works no matter what domain or IP the file is behind.
reply
upvoteby fc417fc80216 minutes ago|
parent|
[-]
Censorship resistant in the same sense that bittorrent is, with no single centralized server or domain registration to target.
reply
upvoteby muragekibicho2 hours ago|
parent|
prev|
[-]
It's the crypto aspect that's silly. Tech is cool IMO. However, the crypto adjacency makes it all look scammy tbh.
reply
upvoteby Grombobulous2 hours ago|
parent|
[-]
In addition to that, this noble goal of being an insurance policy against censorship never played out.

How hard would it be for a country to block the clients and browser extensions you need to use it in the first place? Or to develop a firewall technology that’s capable of blocking the traffic?

Probably not that hard, especially since nobody uses IPFS for anything business critical since it’s not all that great at doing things that you need from file storage systems.

Most reasons you store files somewhere benefit from not being decentralized. You usually want some combination of performance, security, durability, and availability. Decentralization is not generally a demand of file storage.

The only reason it’s decentralized is because blockchain and crypto was hype 10 years ago.

reply
upvoteby lallysingh2 hours ago|
prev|
next
[-]
IIRC IPFS was the latest in a long line of Distributed Content-Addressed systems that long predate crypto. AFAICT (obviously I wasn't paying much attention) they went crypto (FileCoin) to fund a base population of storage users to bootstrap its popularity.

But that didn't pan out.

reply
upvoteby crest2 hours ago|
prev|
[-]
What people did or planned to do with IPFS is pretty silly, but the idea of content addressed storage with cryptographic (not in a crypo coin way) names makes a lot of sense. It would make for a great software distribution method e.g. your game downloads get faster the more people want to play the latest version. It's the combination of Git and BitTorrent and has uses far beyond just hosting warez and NFTs.
reply
upvoteby spockz11 minutes ago|
parent|
next
[-]
This. I also always imagined it be able to host some version of an Encarta/encyclopedia that would be so distributed it would probably survive world wide catastrophe.
reply
upvoteby JeremyNT2 hours ago|
parent|
prev|
[-]
Sure can see the use cases where it might be helpful, but "a better bittorrent" on its own doesn't warrant the hype or cash flowing into it.

I guess the user base has proven this out in the end. Torrents are good enough.

reply