Filecoin is a huge disappointment to me. IPFS is fantastic technology, but the main developers getting sidetracked with yet another scammy ICO is the last thing we need.
Hey, ipfs dev here. The amount of work being done on ipfs has been increasing continually. Work on filecoin is not detracting from ipfs development, and we are bringing on more people for ipfs, libp2p and filecoin.
Is Filecoin a $257 million Ponzi scheme? [pdf]
91–100 of 243 posts
Re: Is Filecoin a $257 million Ponzi scheme? [pdf]
#92Earlier quoted context omitted.
The bad news is that Diamond was able to correlate to status, a strong (if subjective) value that is part of humanity since always. BTC only appeal is its value as money ... Startup idea: Bitcoin wedding rings. A beautiful gold ring with a private key engraved on the inside. Give your loved one the gift of BTC! Your commitment to each other, eternalized on the global blockchain. Gentlemen may prefer blondes, but the…
I think that jewelry should have a property of showing off, so hidden private key wouldn't work that well. You need to have some mechanism how to show status. And that nicety factor was driven mostly by women decorum.
Re: Is Filecoin a $257 million Ponzi scheme? [pdf]
#93Earlier quoted context omitted.
Dropbox feels like the wrong thing to compare it to. IPFS isn't really for storing files privately. Public S3 buckets would be closer. I don't have any numbers to say if it's overvalued based on how much public cloud storage there is (I wouldn't be surprised if it were though).
Storage costs are hyper-deflationary. We have a NAS on a desk with 27 terabytes of storage and it cost under $1000 (with drives) and consumes about 40 watts of power. Ten years ago this would have cost closer to $5000-$10000 and consumed hundreds of watts of power. We bought it about a year and a half ago and already we could replace it for less than $500. The idea of distributed storage at the edge is interesting bu…
Re: Is Filecoin a $257 million Ponzi scheme? [pdf]
#94I dont know if the founders started out to make a Ponzi, but once the dollars started rolling in, I can imagine, they probably got "different ideas".
Who am I to judge, but if I was a founder of this, I would be driving my Ferrari in Thailand instead of slaving away trying to build some stupid file system. Who the hell cares about file systems :P
Re: Is Filecoin a $257 million Ponzi scheme? [pdf]
#95Earlier quoted context omitted.
Filecoin ICO was when I lost interest in IPFS because I realised its developers were not as like-minded to me as I had hoped.
Well, yeah. They saw dollar signs and got bit by the ICO bug. Truth be told, I still like the idea of Filecoin as a method to get around the problem of Tragedy of the Commons. But overvalued and overhyped indeed.
Re: Is Filecoin a $257 million Ponzi scheme? [pdf]
#96Re: Is Filecoin a $257 million Ponzi scheme? [pdf]
#97Earlier quoted context omitted.
Hey, ipfs dev here. The amount of work being done on ipfs has been increasing continually. Work on filecoin is not detracting from ipfs development, and we are bringing on more people for ipfs, libp2p and filecoin.
That doesn't discount the fact you are involved in yet another ICO. Cryptocurency integration and identity within IPFS could have been done without a new coin. I know you know this, yet you choose to do it anyway. That means we should question your intentions, across all your projects. And, just for the record, a cryptocurrency fund raise is simply selling access to given private/public key pairs which contain values…
I don't think thats a fair claim to make. There are many attacks on 'pay for distributed storage' that Filecoin addresses. Take a look at [the paper](https://filecoin.io/filecoin.pdf), in particular section 3.1 where we discuss sybil attacks, Outsourcing attacks, and generation attacks. We cover a lot of cases, and build in incentives to continually increase the amount of available storage and push down the price-per-byte. If we thought it was possible to properly incentivize data storage on ipfs without building a blockchain, we would have done so.
Re: Is Filecoin a $257 million Ponzi scheme? [pdf]
#98Earlier quoted context omitted.
Storage costs are hyper-deflationary. We have a NAS on a desk with 27 terabytes of storage and it cost under $1000 (with drives) and consumes about 40 watts of power. Ten years ago this would have cost closer to $5000-$10000 and consumed hundreds of watts of power. We bought it about a year and a half ago and already we could replace it for less than $500. The idea of distributed storage at the edge is interesting bu…
Sorry to see this downvoted, if this were reddit there'd be some reddit gold right here.
It's more then just linking hard-disks. It is really hard to build the incentives and market part. Read for instance about our operational prototype from 2014, "Towards a Peer-to-Peer Bandwidth Marketplace", https://link.springer.com/chapter/10.1007/978-3-642-45249-9_...
Re: Is Filecoin a $257 million Ponzi scheme? [pdf]
#99Heh.. Yes, probably is now. I dont know if the founders started out to make a Ponzi, but once the dollars started rolling in, I can imagine, they probably got "different ideas". Who am I to judge, but if I was a founder of this, I would be driving my Ferrari in Thailand instead of slaving away trying to build some stupid file system. Who the hell cares about file systems :P
Re: Is Filecoin a $257 million Ponzi scheme? [pdf]
#100 Filecoin gave a deal to their buddies
Bitcoin and Ethereum were premined
Both are variations on a Ponzi scheme where early 'investors' benefit from latter day victims.