The decentralized WeTransfer

The user experience here, is essentially the same as WeTransfer. The only difference is the underlying technologies.

Now, one would have to either blindly trust that the infrastructure is truly decentralized, or have the time and necessary skills to audit the code.

And then they'd have to trust that web server is actually hooking up to the code that was just audited!

What this means is, "decentralized" projects still require a level of trust, even on the behalf of people who understand what decentralization means.

Next is the problem of the "masses". They already are using WeTransfer, or Dropbox for that matter. Why should they switch to this? Because it's decentralized? Now you have to explain to them what that means and why that's beneficial to them, and if you're successful there, they still have to: trust the code (and they only can do that by understanding it) and trust that you're actually deploying that code on your live interface.

Thus, the decentralization community has got a marketing problem. Fortunately for Bitcoin they've got and continue to have massive amounts of free press, press which does not even actually highlight the decentralized aspect of Bitcoin, just the price action. There is no press movement to help catapult "decentralized infrastructure."

I'm just saying, decentralized projects currently only seem to appeal to people who are interested in decentralization. There needs to be a way to move pass this hurdle if there's going to be the much sought after "mass adoption."

The average person doesn't care how something works, they just care that it does work. And plenty solutions already work for them.

I just hope in the end, we aren't just tinkering for the sake of tinkering.

I don't think we are. IPFS is one of the few projects that gives me hope that within 10 years the internet won't be completely carved-up and censored by the big tech companies and governments.