undefined

points

[-]

yes, but a few dedicated hoarders could keep many models alive, and I'm fairly certain the local LLM community has plenty of people who would.

by mitxela3 hours ago|

parent|

[-]

They don't. That's the conversation topic.

Nor do they need to. 99% of everything is crap, and not worth prescribing except for a random sample so future historians can study our crap.

by csomar5 hours ago|

prev|

[-]

How does this address the previous point? If they are not providing storage, then centralized or decentralized doesn’t make a difference.

Torrent/P2P can only add redundancy, so it’s impossible to have worse availability than a download link?

by _blk5 hours ago|

parent|

[-]

[flagged]

by Wowfunhappy4 hours ago|

parent|

[-]

Well, for a torrent to stay healthy, users have to seed after download, so it can't possibly have the same UX as a standard browser file download unless you want to either kill the ecosystem or hide from the user what is consuming upload bandwidth.

That said, for large files, I much prefer the UX of a well-designed torrent client like Transmission to my web browser. If nothing else, the downloads are reliably resumable.

by QuantumNomad_1 hours ago|

parent|

[-]

> I much prefer the UX of a well-designed torrent client like Transmission to my web browser. If nothing else, the downloads are reliably resumable.

Brave browser had BitTorrent client built in for a while. I tried it a couple of times as I already use Brave for web browsing on my laptop. It was a very confusing BitTorrent client. I struggled to use it, and wasted time waiting for a download to complete only to not be able to find where the files were and then they disappeared. Using a decent BitTorrent client like you say is much preferable to the one that they had in Brave browser.

by pell5 hours ago|

parent|

prev|

[-]

> Is there a fully in-browser torrent option that has the same UX as a regular file download in Firefox?

Opera did back in the day.