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

Libgen Storage Decentralization on IPFS

freeread.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

91–100 of 115 posts

Re: Libgen Storage Decentralization on IPFS

#91

Post by _a1xx »

generationP wrote: post #37
MichaelMoser123 wrote: post #8

does anyone know why libgen is still running over http? (But sincerely thanks for the site! it saved me on several occasions!)

They don't want the extra weak spot of certificate revocation being abused against them? Though I'm not sure how big of an issue this is; sci-hub is using https.

Unless they activate HSTS, it shouldn't be a problem. They can always go back to HTTP if they want.

Also, Let's Encrypt doesn't even revoke certificates for malware and phishing sites. [1]

Maybe they're doing this for better caching performance? It makes SSL flood attacks impossible, but is that really worth it?

[1] https://community.letsencrypt.org/t/how-to-report-abuse/4110...

Re: Libgen Storage Decentralization on IPFS

#93

Post by djeiasbsbo »

andrius4669 wrote: post #65
djeiasbsbo wrote: post #31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Check out https://gnunet.org/ It works well for file sharing as well. Don't know about copyrighted material though, have only shared my own files.

Does it actually work well? I tried to play with it a while back and while sharing files appeared to work, actually downloading them from other node didn't go that well..

The thing that doesn't work well yet in my experience is the NAT traversal and finding peers in general. But I tested the same thing with two peers and I could download with no problems. It also seems to get updated quite often, I tested very recently.

Re: Libgen Storage Decentralization on IPFS

#94

Post by swills »

traverseda wrote: post #11
segfaultbuserr wrote: post #4

The IPFS mirror really gives a substantial performance boost. In the past, the files had to be fetched from a tired server far away in Russia, the speed can be as low as 0.5 Mbps in my experience (depends on your ISP and connectivity), now it can be lightning fast thanks to P2P, 2 Mbps+, more than adequate to download a 100 MiB+ file. You don't even have to install IPFS (but you probably should, to maintain decentral…

In my experience IPFS is only fast when you're using it through something like Cloudflare's IPFS proxy (which is basically a caching proxy). I haven't found IPFS to be actually usable any time I've tried running a node myself. Is that unusual?

Are you opening the required ports (4001, 8080)? I found it was like that too until I did opened the ports.

Re: Libgen Storage Decentralization on IPFS

#95

Post by ALittleLight »

jakobdabo wrote: post #46
segfaultbuserr wrote: post #4

The IPFS mirror really gives a substantial performance boost. In the past, the files had to be fetched from a tired server far away in Russia, the speed can be as low as 0.5 Mbps in my experience (depends on your ISP and connectivity), now it can be lightning fast thanks to P2P, 2 Mbps+, more than adequate to download a 100 MiB+ file. You don't even have to install IPFS (but you probably should, to maintain decentral…

Am I understanding it right that DMCA takedown requests apply to a URL? Maybe IPFS can introduce a feature to generate one-time URLs, e.g. `oneTimeURL = f(realURL);`. Websites then can generate new URLs for example every hour or even for each client request. Copyright bots will file a DMCA request to a URL which only they have.

I believe this is similar logic to what MegaUpload used. i.e. They would allow users to easily create links to content, and if DMCA'd would invalidate the links but leave the content alone (and the users free to generate arbitrarily many more links to keep sharing copyrighted content).

It kind of worked for MegaUpload. Their founder got rich and a version of the company still exists. However, the founder is also gradually losing a long court battle and may find himself extradited to the US where he will face significant jail time.

Re: Libgen Storage Decentralization on IPFS

#96

Post by a1369209993 »

mathnmusic wrote: post #14
segfaultbuserr wrote: post #4

The IPFS mirror really gives a substantial performance boost. In the past, the files had to be fetched from a tired server far away in Russia, the speed can be as low as 0.5 Mbps in my experience (depends on your ISP and connectivity), now it can be lightning fast thanks to P2P, 2 Mbps+, more than adequate to download a 100 MiB+ file. You don't even have to install IPFS (but you probably should, to maintain decentral…

And what about when browsers (like Brave) start supporting IPFS natively, and gateways are not needed any more?

Browsers still don't support (better-established, though I'm not sure older offhand) TOR or bittorent yet, so I'm not terribly optimistic.

Re: Libgen Storage Decentralization on IPFS

#97

Post by perlwle »

nwah1 wrote: post #63
derefr wrote: post #43

Earlier quoted context omitted.

IPFS is the engine of Filecoin, though. Filecoin just incentivizes IPFS nodes to store things. So further IPFS development should still be necessary from the perspective of making Filecoin development/adoption happen. (I say this, and yet I know it isn't true in practice. But why isn't it true?)

Pump up Filecoin price. Sell Filecoin. Move to Fiji. Don't do any coding while in Fiji

Ha. I was super surprised that my dad(almost 70) mentioned IPFS to me the other day. It turns out the people he know are running or thinking of running IPFS nodes because of filecoin incentive. Apparently, the people don't want to miss another bitcoin opportunity.

filecoin is also promoting in China. https://mp.weixin.qq.com/s/T0Qt2CEP7QsA6Zy9Vzvdkw

Re: Libgen Storage Decentralization on IPFS

#100

Post by lucb1e »

justarandomq wrote: post #75
mpfundstein wrote: post #60

Earlier quoted context omitted.

what red flags did you see?

It was some book, and when submitting the download link, 3 of the antivirus results were red. Perhaps they were false positives.

Anti-Virus tools have been flagging keygens and cracks for ages, and also hacking tools that grab passwords from (system) stores even if the tools have absolutely nothing in their code that talks to a server (I only ever used those for legal purposes, but can't tell you how often I had to disable an annoying AV...). Just because the AV says something is malware doesn't mean you can trust its claim. From my perspective, they've undermined their trustworthiness in the area where you are indeed most likely to rely on an AV.

I'm not surprised they're now flagging what is basically text and images as malware.

Post reply on HN