Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Filecoin: A Decentralized Storage Network [pdf]

filecoin.io

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

101–110 of 170 posts

Re: Filecoin: A Decentralized Storage Network [pdf]

#101

Post by hudon »

tshaddox wrote: post #99
hudon wrote: post #98

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> files could be broken up into shards and distributed across multiple nodes You can setup any old distributed database to do this... If there was a benefit to breaking down a file rather than replicating it, AWS would be using this efficiency to provide a better service. > the effect that a commoditized pricing system would have on the costs of a distributed storage solution It'll always be cheaper for someone to se…

> If there was a benefit to breaking down a file rather than replicating it, AWS would be using this efficiency to provide a better service. Are you suggesting that AWS is doing every possible thing that would increase efficiency, or in other words, that AWS' services are optimally efficient? That seems very unlikely.

Yes. This is how capitalism works. If there is an inefficiency in the market, there is an opportunity for a competitor to beat you on price or quality. If AWS is not incorporating these efficiencies into their tech, then Microsoft Azure will and beat them by providing either a cheaper or higher quality service.

If FileCoin actually worked as a better technology, Google or some big name would say they will start using it to beat AWS in the data storage game.

I'm not saying FileCoin is useless, it is useful to store 3D printed gun designs and illegal media, because it is outside the reach of the law. But to think it is a more efficient technical solution to data storage is a bit naive...

Re: Filecoin: A Decentralized Storage Network [pdf]

#102

Post by MichaelGG »

wmf wrote: post #44
calafrax wrote: post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There is another macro-economic issue here: With a decentralized trustless system you have to assume a higher failure rate for nodes than with a central trust based system. If you assume a higher failure rate you have to replicate data more extensively to achieve reliability. If you have to replicate data more extensively then decentralized will always be more expensive than centralized.

Not necessarily if the inputs are free (e.g. unused disk space). However Spotify, Skype, and Joost all found that CDNs are cheaper than borrowing free bandwidth from people so the same may apply to storage.

Did they find that out? I thought they realised it's unprofessional and unacceptable to turn your users into hosting nodes.

Re: Filecoin: A Decentralized Storage Network [pdf]

#103

Post by xtracto »

hudon wrote: post #69
Ajedi32 wrote: post #45

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Trustless, distributed, scalable, redundant, anonymous cloud storage with a market-driven pricing scheme? Why _wouldn't_ you want that? For me that's pretty much the ideal cloud storage system.

"distributed, scalable, redundant" describes AWS pretty well, and if I can pay much less for a faster more reliable service but sacrifice "trustless and anonymous", I'll stick to it.

Ooohh we thought that as well, until the latest S3 outage.

Re: Filecoin: A Decentralized Storage Network [pdf]

#104

Post by hudon »

xtracto wrote: post #103
hudon wrote: post #69

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"distributed, scalable, redundant" describes AWS pretty well, and if I can pay much less for a faster more reliable service but sacrifice "trustless and anonymous", I'll stick to it.

Ooohh we thought that as well, until the latest S3 outage.

Ask the CTO of any Fortune 100 company what they're doing to mitigate such an outage.

What do you think they will answer?

Option A: cross-region replication, regular backups, and secondary service provider failover plan

Option B: decentralize everything on people's laptops

Re: Filecoin: A Decentralized Storage Network [pdf]

#105

Post by JauntyHatAngle »

hudon wrote: post #101
tshaddox wrote: post #99

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> If there was a benefit to breaking down a file rather than replicating it, AWS would be using this efficiency to provide a better service. Are you suggesting that AWS is doing every possible thing that would increase efficiency, or in other words, that AWS' services are optimally efficient? That seems very unlikely.

Yes. This is how capitalism works. If there is an inefficiency in the market, there is an opportunity for a competitor to beat you on price or quality. If AWS is not incorporating these efficiencies into their tech, then Microsoft Azure will and beat them by providing either a cheaper or higher quality service. If FileCoin actually worked as a better technology, Google or some big name would say they will start using…

"Yes. This is how capitalism works. If there is an inefficiency in the market, there is an opportunity for a competitor to beat you on price or quality. If AWS is not incorporating these efficiencies into their tech, then Microsoft Azure will and beat them by providing either a cheaper or higher quality service."

Not that I'm saying Filecoin or a decentralised storage coin is in any way the way forward or even a competitor.. but saying that is how capitalism works is such rubbish.

In an ideal system you are right, but how often have you worked for a company that is raking in the cash by marketing well and being the "established" hand in the market?

There are so many companies kicking around that are the biggest player in their field that continue to make bank because accountants and upper management decide they are the proven, safe pick in the market and have signed up for long, entrenched software packages.

Also, if this upended the entrenched business model companies were using, they would not be able to quickly switch to it.

There are plenty of ways this could be the a better solution and AWS wouldn't switch to it, saying capitalism proves this is not a good argument.

Re: Filecoin: A Decentralized Storage Network [pdf]

#106

Post by dsacco »

Ajedi32 wrote: post #45
JohnJamesRambo wrote: post #20

I'm still confused why I would want my storage to be decentralized. No I don't want my files spread on thousands or millions of computers no matter how encrypted etc.

Trustless, distributed, scalable, redundant, anonymous cloud storage with a market-driven pricing scheme? Why _wouldn't_ you want that? For me that's pretty much the ideal cloud storage system.

The only thing I want out of that is redundancy. Why do I want those other things?

(Bear in mind I know what they are - I want you to sell me on them).

Re: Filecoin: A Decentralized Storage Network [pdf]

#107

Post by hudon »

JauntyHatAngle wrote: post #105
hudon wrote: post #101

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes. This is how capitalism works. If there is an inefficiency in the market, there is an opportunity for a competitor to beat you on price or quality. If AWS is not incorporating these efficiencies into their tech, then Microsoft Azure will and beat them by providing either a cheaper or higher quality service. If FileCoin actually worked as a better technology, Google or some big name would say they will start using…

"Yes. This is how capitalism works. If there is an inefficiency in the market, there is an opportunity for a competitor to beat you on price or quality. If AWS is not incorporating these efficiencies into their tech, then Microsoft Azure will and beat them by providing either a cheaper or higher quality service." Not that I'm saying Filecoin or a decentralised storage coin is in any way the way forward or even a comp…

It is not just AWS. The data storage market is saturated with competitors fighting hard to come out on top. Amazon, Apple, Box, Dropbox, Google, Microsoft are all in this and some of these companies have massive R&D budgets, have a history of delivering cutting edge tech and have strategies to overcome the Innovator's Dilemma (which is the problem you're describing).

It is precisely because these companies are not entrenched that my argument holds. But also consider the technical downside to FileCoin (slow connections to unreliable laptops VS fast connections to redundant data centers) and the economic downsides to FileCoin (it won't be worth hosting due to economies of scale).

Re: Filecoin: A Decentralized Storage Network [pdf]

#109

Post by darawk »

zzzcpan wrote: post #47
darawk wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think this argument fails even by its own standards. It applies equally well to Bitcoin mining, and while there is clearly some centralization there, it is still quite decentralized. At least, decentralized 'enough'. Secondly, storage is fundamentally different than other commodities. The decentralized storage market is more like AirBnB, where you're consuming the excess capacity of capital. Most people have tons o…

Why do you think decentralized storage could ever work on excess capacity? I cannot imagine any incentive for it. It's either profitable enough to do it on a dedicated capacity, kind of like a hosting company, but without all the hassle and marketing. Or it's a burden.

You could make the same argument about AirBnB. If it's profitable to rent out a room in your house, it's profitable to open a hotel. But people are still renting out AirBnB's because their homes are a sunk cost.

Re: Filecoin: A Decentralized Storage Network [pdf]

#110

Post by guy_c »

Ajedi32 wrote: post #72
hudon wrote: post #69

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"distributed, scalable, redundant" describes AWS pretty well, and if I can pay much less for a faster more reliable service but sacrifice "trustless and anonymous", I'll stick to it.

What makes you think AWS would be necessarily be faster or more reliable? If done correctly, think a decentralized system could be significantly faster and more reliable than even the best centralized storage solution. For example, with a decentralized system files could be broken up into shards and distributed across multiple nodes, so unless a significant percentage of computers on the planet all melt down at once…

I had been recently looking at Siacoin, but still a lot of work is needed before it can displace something like AWS. Took nearly a day with lots of stalls just to sync the blockchain. Also I am not sure about how price competitive it will ultimately be. Amazon has huge buying power which I am sure means they pay less per TB then consumers. Also other economies of scale. I bet the cost of labour to bring online each 1TB on S3 is very low.
Post reply on HN