51–60 of 65 posts
More mass adoption, and browser extensions to support IPFS, and to resolve ENS names, and we're completely in the "web3" world. We just need a standardized way of mapping ENS names to IPFS CIDs to serve entry point for dApps that are running completely decentrelized.
OK I'm web3 now
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> It allows a strategy of guaranteeing at least 1 pin of your data if it's important Who decides your data is important? What happens to the so-called guarantees when your data suddenly becomes unimportant?
You do, when you pin it to a service you're paying for. When/if it becomes unimportant, you unpin. But what's cool, is even if it's unpinned, it may still be in the network so long as the data is getting active use. It opens up a whole field of seed and harvest style information flows.
So. A centralized service responsible for keeping your data. How is this different from literally anything else?
> it may still be in the network so long as the data is getting active use.
"Maybe" makes this essentially useless.
> It opens up a whole field of seed and harvest style information flows.
It really doesn't. It's literally the same problem that torrents have had for ages: anything "unpopular" doesn't exist for a very very very broad definition of unpopular.
I looked into Sia since it's something I'd love to see working and I'd heard of them before. Last time I'd found that the biggest tutorial about how to practically get started had a big red warning and a huge manifesto about how Sia and its collaborators are the worst and should be dropped [0]. So now I went around just looking for old links to files on the network, on places like Reddit and old guides, to check if t…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Or you can buy it off of them, just like you do anywhere else Domain squatting is a thing, is a problem, and it surprises me not at all that web3/crypto shills pretend it isn't.
There's a difference between pretending it doesn't exist, and acknowledging that it's inevitable (especially in a system where there's nobody who can unilaterally reassign other parties' domain names). What would your solution here be?
No one is pretending it doesn't exist
> and acknowledging that it's inevitable
What you and the sibling comment are proposing is bot acknowledging it, but making it the normal, and possibly only way to do it, and to incentivize people to do it.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
There's a difference between pretending it doesn't exist, and acknowledging that it's inevitable (especially in a system where there's nobody who can unilaterally reassign other parties' domain names). What would your solution here be?
> There's a difference between pretending it doesn't exist No one is pretending it doesn't exist > and acknowledging that it's inevitable What you and the sibling comment are proposing is bot acknowledging it, but making it the normal, and possibly only way to do it, and to incentivize people to do it.
Would be interested in your solution to this problem if you have one (seriously, I don't know how to solve it).
Earlier quoted context omitted.
You do, when you pin it to a service you're paying for. When/if it becomes unimportant, you unpin. But what's cool, is even if it's unpinned, it may still be in the network so long as the data is getting active use. It opens up a whole field of seed and harvest style information flows.
> when you pin it to a service you're paying for. So. A centralized service responsible for keeping your data. How is this different from literally anything else? > it may still be in the network so long as the data is getting active use. "Maybe" makes this essentially useless. > It opens up a whole field of seed and harvest style information flows. It really doesn't. It's literally the same problem that torrents hav…
Ok, then don't use it!
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> There's a difference between pretending it doesn't exist No one is pretending it doesn't exist > and acknowledging that it's inevitable What you and the sibling comment are proposing is bot acknowledging it, but making it the normal, and possibly only way to do it, and to incentivize people to do it.
It is already the norm with the current domain registration system, so I'm not sure what your point is. I recently tried to purchase a domain with some version of my name. There is nothing hosted there (domain name lookup fails). I offered them a few grand for it which I thought was reasonable, no response. Would be interested in your solution to this problem if you have one (seriously, I don't know how to solve it).
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Sure - but you (or a pinning provider) need the actual file first before you can re-pin it. The data has to live somewhere.
I just find it strange that someone might decide to buy an NFT and then not keep an offline copy of the file themselves, and that people do this often enough that it's a selling point. It's not like the files are large. If the Sia network breaks down, you'd want to have done that, same as if S3 somehow exploded.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I just find it strange that someone might decide to buy an NFT and then not keep an offline copy of the file themselves, and that people do this often enough that it's a selling point. It's not like the files are large. If the Sia network breaks down, you'd want to have done that, same as if S3 somehow exploded.
What's even strange is the NFTs don't keep a checksum in the blockchain, so anyone hosting the content could change it whenever they want and the NFT is none the wiser. Moxie even wrote an example that would show different images depending who asked. See https://moxie.org/2022/01/07/web3-first-impressions.html
It's just kind of nuts to talk about "everyone stopped pinning my NFT" as being a "rugpull"- anyone can pin a piece of content in IPFS, including anyone with an interest in the NFT existing, such as the owner. So the only thing you have to do if an NFT falls off the IPFS network is just to take your copy and pay someone else to pin it. It's only a "rugpull" if you, you know, forgot to keep a copy of it anywhere.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
What's even strange is the NFTs don't keep a checksum in the blockchain, so anyone hosting the content could change it whenever they want and the NFT is none the wiser. Moxie even wrote an example that would show different images depending who asked. See https://moxie.org/2022/01/07/web3-first-impressions.html
If the NFT does actually reference an IPFS CID, that amounts to a hash of the image, so that particular issue isn't there. It's just kind of nuts to talk about "everyone stopped pinning my NFT" as being a "rugpull"- anyone can pin a piece of content in IPFS, including anyone with an interest in the NFT existing, such as the owner. So the only thing you have to do if an NFT falls off the IPFS network is just to take y…