Another shut down post which many of its users did not support the maintainers. You are going to see a lot more shutdown posts around decentralized or federated technologies if you do not support those tools.
There are close to no users of IPFS
IPFS Maintainers Winding Down
31–40 of 226 posts
Re: IPFS Maintainers Winding Down
#32[deleted]
Re: IPFS Maintainers Winding Down
#33Earlier quoted context omitted.
Hahaha thanks for this. It's ok, the asset is the block chain entry duh
all the NFTs I launched actually were fully onchain SVGs and CSS tried to be the change I wanted to see given where the concept actually found staying power (liquidity pools, instead of collectibles) it wholly needs a new name “NFT” is distracting at this point, they should just called them 721-structs so people don’t get distracted by the fumbled poorly implemented art use case
Yeah, when we do NFT ticketing these days, we just say, "have your 1155 ready" with a link to explain what that means.
I still think it's pretty obvious that on sufficiently long time-scales that some variant of NFTs will be the winner for event tickets.
Re: IPFS Maintainers Winding Down
#34I publish all of my music in ways that are pirate-friendly, which for the moment just means Bit Torrent and IPFS.
See: https://pickipedia.xyz/wiki/Cryptograss:Delivery-kid
If IPFS is starting to wane, does anyone else have a suggestion of a replacement about which I might start to educate my fans?
Re: IPFS Maintainers Winding Down
#35I wasn't aware of the relationship between Shipyard and Protocol Labs but it looks like Protocol Labs spun out maintenance and development of a lot of core IPFS technology to a new company called Shipyard, with the idea of cordoning off what was a cost center to Protocol Labs, and the hope was that Shipyard would be able to find other sources of revenue beyond the services funding they got from Protocol Labs.
I'm personally quite disappointed because I just built an IPFS based system built on top of Kubo that I was hoping would take off. Now this throws future maintenance of Kubo into question.
Re: IPFS Maintainers Winding Down
#36Always found ipfs and the whole "web 3.0" company to be incredibly obtuse to work with especially compared to previous peer to peer networks like bit-torrent.
I could never shake the feeling there is an unnecessary layer of grift embedded in all the protocols.
Re: IPFS Maintainers Winding Down
#37All those NFT holders where the NFT resolved to a ipfs.io link in shambles
Finding out NFTs were just links, didn't even embed the asset, was such a moment for me... like either the people pushing this are complete fools or 100% conscious grifters who know it's total bullshit. I suspect it was a mix.
Insane.
I think a lot of the AI skepticism comes from the fact that the last major New Thing (tm) pushed by this industry was crypto. People are very, very burned by that.
That and how badly social media turned out, but that's a whole different discourse.
Re: IPFS Maintainers Winding Down
#38This is really unfortunate. When cloudflare dropped IPFS you could say this next step was sort of already on the way. I may be biased but I think when IPFS decided to put so much time into "IPNS" in order to support non-static webapps years ago what they came up with did not fit the need. And without webapps on IPFS things were going nowhere. A year or so ago I wrote IPFS-boot which allows serving webapps on IPFS whi…
Why do you need Tailscale?
Edit: Okay, so a couple of people have downvoted but no-one has answered.
Why would you use tailscale to secure a web app?
Re: IPFS Maintainers Winding Down
#39This is really unfortunate. When cloudflare dropped IPFS you could say this next step was sort of already on the way. I may be biased but I think when IPFS decided to put so much time into "IPNS" in order to support non-static webapps years ago what they came up with did not fit the need. And without webapps on IPFS things were going nowhere. A year or so ago I wrote IPFS-boot which allows serving webapps on IPFS whi…
I agree that IPNS has always seemed a bit naff; but alternatives naming systems can be used too (if your system's name resolver can understand them); e.g. this uses pkarr addresses for IPFS content: http://www.chriswarbo.net/blog/2026-05-08-pkdnslink.html Regarding an "update path", GNS has support for that built-in; though I've not been able to try it myself, since I can't get GNUNet to bootstrap :-(
I always thought that they should have used ENS instead of whatever coin they ended up making. GNS is cool but IIRC (years ago) it had no incentive mechanism which is I think where a lot of these solutions fall down. Even imaginary "ratio points" that p2p file sharing sites have being using for years work better than "donate your resources out of the goodness of your heart".
Re: IPFS Maintainers Winding Down
#40I hope this doesn't signal the decline of ipfs overall. I really would like to see an internet where content addressed routing is a thing.