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

IPFS Maintainers Winding Down

ipshipyard.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

191–200 of 226 posts

Re: IPFS Maintainers Winding Down

#191

Post by inigyou »

chriswarbo wrote: post #164
noman-land wrote: post #39

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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".

My personal opinion is that any notion of "incentive mechanisms" for IPFS is bullshit: whether Filecoin, or otherwise. There is already a perfectly good incentive mechanism: if someone wants to host some data, they can; and if nobody wants to host it, it doesn't get hosted. That's worked perfectly well for HTTP, without any shitcoin needed. The advantage of IPFS is that its URLs resolve to anybody who cares enough to…

Did it actually work for HTTP though? Look at the modern web and tell me it's perfectly well.

Re: IPFS Maintainers Winding Down

#192

Post by inigyou »

fc417fc802 wrote: post #147
QuantumNomad_ wrote: post #114

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> In the end the only way to get good XP for yours users was that you provider the IPFS to http gateway for all content but then whats the point its just decentralization theater. I gave my static photo album website image files paths that consisted of /ipfs/ as directory name and ipfs hash as file name. Brave browser was able to figure out that this meant they were available on IPFS, and asked me if i wanted to load…

I wonder if (in theory) it wouldn't make more sense to address this sort of thing at the system resolver level rather than in the browser, the way tor does.

Pretty much impossible because of the incentive structures OSes have. Microsoft and Apple want to surveil you and Linux is a fragmented bazaar.

Re: IPFS Maintainers Winding Down

#193

Post by inigyou »

fc417fc802 wrote: post #151
jazzyjackson wrote: post #102

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Except it wasn’t censorship resistant at all, in that your node advertised itself as a node with a-z files on it. Separately you could put it behind a vpn or run a vps you paid for with monero, but fundamentally it’s more of a way just to pin a file to an address that works no matter what domain or IP the file is behind.

Censorship resistant in the same sense that bittorrent is, with no single centralized server or domain registration to target.

But bittorrent has been successfully censored. People are afraid to run it because they know their ISP will forward them demand letters.

Re: IPFS Maintainers Winding Down

#194

Post by inigyou »

aftbit wrote: post #74

I tried to query a lot of resources (NFT images, many of which are/were hosted on IPFS) from IPFS myself using the official Go server, running on some pretty fast/wide hardware, for a good part of 2021 and 2022. It was a dumpster fire. Here are two specific problems that I remember, though I ran into several more. First, the UDP storm that it created somehow broke my network, where all of my switches gave up and just…

Mine was that every request took 2 minutes to resolve

Re: IPFS Maintainers Winding Down

#197

Post by inigyou »

Ekaros wrote: post #89
api wrote: post #37

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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 so…

Even more so when in most cases no one could explain any real type of ownership in terms of working in most existing legal frameworks. What would I have owned exactly? What would have ownership entitled... All very reasonable question. Mostly entirely ignored or handwaved...

In the case of the bay area yacht club you would have owned the right to be a member of the yacht club

Re: IPFS Maintainers Winding Down

#198

Post by tancop »

rklaehn wrote: post #184
devttyeu wrote: post #71

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Iroh got started with IPFS-style content-addressed blob transfers as the primary way to use it, still has that functionality but its now a bit of a second tier citizen. See https://docs.iroh.computer/protocols/blobs Besides just p2p streams seem to be much more useful, those are plug-and-play into most software, e.g. I wrote https://github.com/magik6k/git-remote-iroh that just plugs the git remote proto into iroh and…

Main author of iroh-blobs here. We realised that there are many more use cases for p2p streams than for blobs, so in the last year we have focused on getting iroh to 1.0, which involved implementing our own multipath QUIC implementation based on quinn. This was a lot of work and took the full focus of the team. That being said, we plan to continue to work on blobs and get it to 1.0, which will involve some API change…

All the protocol needs at this point is a DHT and a standard representation for directories. Everything else like data storage layouts and node trust systems can be handled client side.

Re: IPFS Maintainers Winding Down

#199

Post by tancop »

haunter wrote: post #44
jMyles wrote: post #34

I 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?

See I thought if IPFS was picked up by the piracy scene (some bigger private trackers for example) then it probably would have been more successful. Alas I haven't seen it outside of libgen and even there I thought it was a backup option only.

Arweave on the other hand will be getting some traction from the GTA 6 leaker. It's not good for all use cases because you need to buy storage with crypto instead of just running your own node but for small, valuable, rarely updated and heavily targeted files (like a website with illegal links) it's perfect.

Re: IPFS Maintainers Winding Down

#200

Post by tancop »

inigyou wrote: post #195
sneak wrote: post #43

IPFS never worked right for many years. Great concept, poor implementation. Someone will one day build something that incorporates these ideas.

They did - Bittorrent

Optimized for throughput and large files. It's slow to start, downloads chunks in random order and there is no standard way to link torrents together. It's a bad fit for anything that's supposed to replace the traditional web.
Post reply on HN