21–30 of 72 posts
Interesting. Can someone explain how IPFS works? Is it like Tor? I don't have any interest in running some sort of distributed content farm that might place CP on my computer. Even if the chance of that happening is 0.00001%.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Currently, you don't serve files etc unless you manually pin them yourself.
Not true. You share: 1. Files you Pinned (think of as torrent seeding) 2. Files you have in your IPFS cache a. Cache files are added to when you request IPFS content b. The garbage collection triggers and removes non-pinned content at regular intervals 3. The default files that are added to a new IPFS repo (unless you removed them or init'ed using the appropriate option to not include them) To answer the GP's questio…
a. Cache files are added to when _something causes a request for_ IPFS content
If content on IPFS (ie a web page?) can reference and load content from other addresses (assumption) then could someone end up in the situation where they are "hosting" (from the cache) something they would not expect to be? (until the garbage collection clears it).
If this seems far fetched, A submission to HN the other day seemed to surprise a few people[1] as it made a http request to a adult website to check if they had an active session (but did not display any content).
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Not true. You share: 1. Files you Pinned (think of as torrent seeding) 2. Files you have in your IPFS cache a. Cache files are added to when you request IPFS content b. The garbage collection triggers and removes non-pinned content at regular intervals 3. The default files that are added to a new IPFS repo (unless you removed them or init'ed using the appropriate option to not include them) To answer the GP's questio…
Would (a) not be a. Cache files are added to when _something causes a request for_ IPFS content The distinction being that "something" is not always a direct action from the user. If content on IPFS (ie a web page?) can reference and load content from other addresses (assumption) then could someone end up in the situation where they are "hosting" (from the cache) something they would not expect to be? (until the garb…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
IPFS is not an anonymity network.
Indeed not. In fact, IPFS via the DHT, tells the network of your whole network topology, including internal address you may have, and VPN endpoints too. There's still talks in how to handle Tor connections. Because right now, if you were to use a Tor connection with IPFS, it will tell the whole network your public, private, and .onion addresses all.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Indeed not. In fact, IPFS via the DHT, tells the network of your whole network topology, including internal address you may have, and VPN endpoints too. There's still talks in how to handle Tor connections. Because right now, if you were to use a Tor connection with IPFS, it will tell the whole network your public, private, and .onion addresses all.
Why would it do that though? I don't really care for Tor, but private network? That's a bit strange to me. Can you or someone explain? Seems like it has no regard for privacy by the sound of it.
What IPFS does, is looks at network topology to determine 'closeness' of nearby IPFS nodes. It then prefers 'closer' nodes, to speed up transactions and requests.
For example, if we take Gangnam Style video, it spread to something like 100M views rapidly. With Youtube, that's 100M individual downloads. With IPFS, it would be 1 or 2 downloads per local network. And then those machines would provide the local network with the content, rather than hitting the 'net at large.
The only good way to do this, is to include all the adapters in the DHT to where all machines are. It also allows IPFS to seamlessly work across NATs and other junky applications of IPv4 (and egads, already seeing ipv6 nat).
The browser demo does seem to be working, however it seems very slow? Beautiful interface though! One of the best I've seen yet. What is going on underneath? Are you guys using WebSocket or WebRTC? The reason I ask is because I wrote an interactive coding tutorial for building a distributed chat app ( http://gun.js.org/converse.html ), and it uses WebSockets to communicate with a federated relay peer server. I'm hopi…
[1] - https://github.com/haadcode/ipfs-daemon/blob/master/ipfs-dae...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Indeed not. In fact, IPFS via the DHT, tells the network of your whole network topology, including internal address you may have, and VPN endpoints too. There's still talks in how to handle Tor connections. Because right now, if you were to use a Tor connection with IPFS, it will tell the whole network your public, private, and .onion addresses all.
Why would it do that though? I don't really care for Tor, but private network? That's a bit strange to me. Can you or someone explain? Seems like it has no regard for privacy by the sound of it.
You can of course already encrypt the data yourself before adding it to ipfs.
This is a perfect non-use-case for IPFS: ephemeral messages in a chat application.