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

Show HN: Arxiv.org on IPFS

xirva.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

51–60 of 77 posts

Re: Show HN: Arxiv.org on IPFS

#51

Post by Taek »

menmob wrote: post #48
Taek wrote: post #43

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's still very slow - retrieval times >30s for files that aren't cached on cloudflare or ipfs.io. Also, those two providers each have multiple periods of downtime every year. If the files are cached and the services are up, it's plenty fast for static data but dynamic data (IPNS) is still very slow. We've built a competitor called Skynet that is much faster (less than 200ms for files that aren't in the cache) and sc…

Are you able to “pin” files yourself like IPFS? Or are you required to pay hosts to store it?

You can always run a host yourself and pin it to your own host.

The main reason we chose a host-based architecture instead of a pin based architecture is that we saw on IPFS that having people pin their own data resulted in really poor uptimes, a lot of file rot, and it also substantially reduced scalability and increased fetch times. And after all of those tradeoffs, the vast majority of accessible content on IPFS is hosted via a pinning service anyway.

Re: Show HN: Arxiv.org on IPFS

#52

Post by westurner »

westurner wrote: post #47
eecc wrote: post #30

Ah cool… I also took a stab at something similar several years ago: https://github.com/ecausarano/heron Also at the time I was considering IPFS. But I guess the real trick is implementing a WOT to implement peer review and filter out the inevitable junk that will be published

"Help compare Comment and Annotation services: moderation, spam, notifications, configurability" executablebooks/meta#102 https://github.com/executablebooks/meta/discussions/102 : > jupyter-comment supports a number of commenting services [...]. In helping users decide which commenting and annotation services to include on their pages and commit to maintaining, could we discuss criteria for assessment and current fea…

FWIW, archiving repo2docker-compatible git repos with a DOI attached to a git tag, is possible with JupyterLite:

> JupyterLite is a JupyterLab distribution that runs entirely in the browser built from the ground-up using JupyterLab components and extensions

With JupyterLite, you can build a static archive of a repo2docker-like environment so that the ScholarlyArticle notebook or computer modern latex css, its SoftwareRelease dependencies, and possibly also the Datasets can be run in a browser tab with WASM. HTML + JS + WASM

Re: Show HN: Arxiv.org on IPFS

#53

Post by jamescampbell »

Taek wrote: post #50
onhn wrote: post #18

"You can upload your research and publish it on the open web. Members of the community will be able to vote on your research to raise its visibility." Oh dear.

How would you set it up? The decentralized world doesn't really have a great system for curation at this point (unless you can point to a counterexample!), and so I'm in favor of any sort of playing around with decentralized voting/curation until we find something that seems to be working well.

Voting (as was bore out in many examples including digg.com and elsewhere) becomes a mob rule situation and variation of tyranny of the commons without a novelty algorithm in addition to total votes. If you just go by totals, it will be easily gamified and rendered useless as a metric.

Re: Show HN: Arxiv.org on IPFS

#54

Post by pimterry »

Taek wrote: post #43
imback wrote: post #38

Slightly OT, but how is IPFS these days? Every time I've tried using it the past few years it seemed very WIP. Cool sounding protocol though.

It's still very slow - retrieval times >30s for files that aren't cached on cloudflare or ipfs.io. Also, those two providers each have multiple periods of downtime every year. If the files are cached and the services are up, it's plenty fast for static data but dynamic data (IPNS) is still very slow. We've built a competitor called Skynet that is much faster (less than 200ms for files that aren't in the cache) and sc…

Do you have any documentation that compares Skynet to IPFS anywhere? From an architectural standpoint and/or features.

Re: Show HN: Arxiv.org on IPFS

#55

Post by onhn »

Taek wrote: post #50
onhn wrote: post #18

"You can upload your research and publish it on the open web. Members of the community will be able to vote on your research to raise its visibility." Oh dear.

How would you set it up? The decentralized world doesn't really have a great system for curation at this point (unless you can point to a counterexample!), and so I'm in favor of any sort of playing around with decentralized voting/curation until we find something that seems to be working well.

The standard and most effective form of curation in science is the reference list at the end of a paper.

But usually you just read everything that is relevant to your research interests from the daily arxiv posting.

Re: Show HN: Arxiv.org on IPFS

#56

Post by menmob »

Taek wrote: post #51
menmob wrote: post #48

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Are you able to “pin” files yourself like IPFS? Or are you required to pay hosts to store it?

You can always run a host yourself and pin it to your own host. The main reason we chose a host-based architecture instead of a pin based architecture is that we saw on IPFS that having people pin their own data resulted in really poor uptimes, a lot of file rot, and it also substantially reduced scalability and increased fetch times. And after all of those tradeoffs, the vast majority of accessible content on IPFS i…

Makes sense. I’ve just been looking at creating a distributed YT archive on IPFS, but as you said, load times are absolutely terrible, especially for big files like video. I’ve been following sia since 2016-ish, and skynet looks awesome, just worried about maturity. I will try hosting my own files as you described, thanks!

Re: Show HN: Arxiv.org on IPFS

#57

Post by sebmellen »

eecc wrote: post #39
sebmellen wrote: post #20

Hey Hugo, do you have an email I could reach you at? I've been thinking/working on these problems for 3 years now and would love to find some smart people to partner with to further develop the ideas. I don't have much to show publicly right now, but https://intpub.org/ (soon to be scipub.app) is the start.

Also keep me in the loop, plz :)

For sure! Will do.

Re: Show HN: Arxiv.org on IPFS

#58

Post by bigphishy »

gambler wrote: post #40
f0e4c2f7 wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A perfect system? No, but think about how people must have felt about Wikipedia on launch. Love this idea.

Using Wikipedia as an example of a seemingly naïve idea that was ultimately proven to work is a pretty bad argument that completely ignores how Wikipedia operates at the moment. It's routinely used for propagating smears: https://odysee.com/@AlisonMorrow:6/how-wikipedia-decides-if-... Even one of its co-founders says it's failing as an accurate source of information: https://odysee.com/@TimcastIRL:8/former-founder-of…

In all my experience using wikipedia it has been successful at providing facts and accurate references.

I don't mean to attack the speaker here, but that former cofounder of wikipedia you just cited... isn't he an extremist neo-conservative? Why did he leave wikipedia in the first place? What are his proposed solutions?

Re: Show HN: Arxiv.org on IPFS

#59

Post by [deleted] »

jamescampbell wrote: post #53
Taek wrote: post #50

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How would you set it up? The decentralized world doesn't really have a great system for curation at this point (unless you can point to a counterexample!), and so I'm in favor of any sort of playing around with decentralized voting/curation until we find something that seems to be working well.

Voting (as was bore out in many examples including digg.com and elsewhere) becomes a mob rule situation and variation of tyranny of the commons without a novelty algorithm in addition to total votes. If you just go by totals, it will be easily gamified and rendered useless as a metric.

[deleted]
Post reply on HN