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

111–115 of 115 posts

Re: Libgen Storage Decentralization on IPFS

#111

Post by diggan »

josu wrote: post #28
dooglius wrote: post #12

A strange choice given that distributing copyrighted materials violates the IPFS Code of Conduct [0]. Why not use BitTorrent whose attitude toward copyright is much more in sync with libgen's? [0] https://github.com/ipfs/community/blob/master/code-of-conduc...

Yeah, and the fact that they've already decided to blacklist sci-hub. https://discuss.ipfs.io/t/mirror-of-sci-hub-in-ipfs/1613

Just to clarify what josu means here:

> they've

The IPFS Forum - Run by Protocol Labs

> decided to blacklist

Banned discussions around breaking the law on a public internet property owned by a US company.

None of this concerns the protocol itself, which you are free to use for whatever you want, just like HTTP.

Re: Libgen Storage Decentralization on IPFS

#112

Post by StavrosK »

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?

I have to agree. I've had cases where I had to pin data that was on the node already and IPFS just hung the pin for minutes, failed, and then the GC removed the data later on. This is just one of the issues I had, other things include IPFS not being able to discover content on nodes that were already connected to it, IPFS just failing all my queued pins at once for some reason, etc.

I regret ever building a pinning platform on IPFS. The worst thing is that, when I expressed my frustration on Twitter about an IPFS release completely breaking IPNS updates, the founder called me a Karen.

Re: Libgen Storage Decentralization on IPFS

#113

Post by [deleted] »

lucb1e wrote: post #100
justarandomq wrote: post #75

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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 perspectiv…

[deleted]

Re: Libgen Storage Decentralization on IPFS

#114

Post by matheusmoreira »

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…

They'll probably lobby the governments for more laws.

It's a politico-technological arms race. Governments make laws. People don't agree with them so they create technology that subverts the government. The state must then become even more tyrannical just to maintain the same level of power. We'll end up with either an uncontrollable population or a totalitarian government.

Re: Libgen Storage Decentralization on IPFS

#115

Post by dooglius »

diggan wrote: post #109
dooglius wrote: post #83

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's more that just the protocol though. TFA links directly to the IPFS Desktop Client, which certainly can have an attitude e.g. if a future update blocks this project. That risk doesn't really exist for any mainstream torrent client.

> TFA links directly to the IPFS Desktop Client I guess TFA is Teach for America? Doesn't really matter, but anything that is linking to IPFS Desktop could easily link to their own distribution of the client as it's all open source. And while IPFS Desktop could start blocking content, so could torrent clients, not sure what's different really. They both are just clients for a protocol anyone can write new clients for…

For "TFA", see e.g. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=19781756

> so could torrent clients, not sure what's different really

This is precisely why the developers' attitudes do matter. The difference is that the BitTorrent community has a well-established permissive attitude toward copyright violations. This is what gives me a high degree of trust that my next distro update won't bring in any new content blocks. I don't have that high degree of trust in the IPFS developers, given the explicit statements made in favor of upholding existing copyright law.

> anything that is linking to IPFS Desktop could easily link to their own distribution of the client as it's all open source

Sure, but getting people to migrate isn't easy. Look at how many people are still downloading OpenOffice vs LibreOffice, for instance: http://www.openoffice.org/stats/downloads.html

Post reply on HN