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

IPFS, Again

macwright.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

61–70 of 227 posts

Re: IPFS, Again

#61

Post by fergie »

emmanueloga_ wrote: post #18

Just today I was looking into IPFS vs DAT, does anybody have any insights about the similarities/differences other than the ones listed here [1]? From far away, DAT looks smaller and better documented (perhaps less ambitious, too?) Apparently the best IPFS overview is the 2015 paper [2] which looks pretty daunting and does not seem to cover any practical considerations. 1: https://docs.datproject.org/docs/faq#how-is-…

DAT is run by influential hobbyists of independent means, with occasional funding from non-profit organisations.

IPFS is essentially run by a very well funded (300musd) private company.

For this reason alone I think DAT is the more likely to succeed. It seems hard to reconcile the longevity of a truly distributed protocol with the need of a private company to retain control.

Re: IPFS, Again

#62

Post by majewsky »

quickthrower2 wrote: post #6
janandonly wrote: post #3

Who is going to defend the free internet agains Azure, AWS and Google Cloud? They are the very opposite of a free and open internet where everyone can "run a website" on her own machine. It pains me to see a great idea like the Interplanetary File System still not working. I had similar experiences with IPFS and yes, we do need a project like this, only without the broken incentive structure attached to it. Why a "Fi…

The middle ground might be to use a local hosting company that has it's own servers and racks. Pay a bit more, but boycott the big clouds for personal websites. You could probably host a few dozen static blogs on a physical machine for say $100/m. If 100 people do that it's affordable.

> You could probably host a few dozen static blogs on a physical machine for say $100/m.

100 bucks!? I host a dozen unique domains with static content (and a few other services) on a 1/1 VPS for 3 euros/month. At Hetzner, not at a hyperscaler.

Re: IPFS, Again

#63

Post by jsilence »

jeremyboom8 wrote: post #12
janandonly wrote: post #3

Who is going to defend the free internet agains Azure, AWS and Google Cloud? They are the very opposite of a free and open internet where everyone can "run a website" on her own machine. It pains me to see a great idea like the Interplanetary File System still not working. I had similar experiences with IPFS and yes, we do need a project like this, only without the broken incentive structure attached to it. Why a "Fi…

> Who is going to defend the free internet agains Azure, AWS and Google Cloud? This is exactly what the http://metacurrency.org project aims to bring to life: http://holo.host/learn/ and http://ceptr.org The distributed pattern they have created combines Git local source chains with cryptographic signing and BitTorrent’s DHT to create easily evolvable apps using http://holochain.org . Peer validation enforces rules d…

Why don't we go back to simple store and forward like mechanisms like net news, just with enhanced content formatting? Store and forward static websites.

Re: IPFS, Again

#64

Post by beders »

Anyone remember the P2P craze of the early 2000s'? Or was it late 90s? What's left over from that? Freenet?

What I'm always wondering about: Someone needs to foot the server/bandwidth bills. Who? If you run a Pi on your home network and serve requests with your 5MB/s upload: That's fine. More power to you. We need more of that. (and in that case, you are paying your ISP)

But the transformation envisioned and the bandwidth and compute required doesn't come for free. Someone's gotta pay. In things like dollars. How can this work?

Re: IPFS, Again

#65

Post by clarry »

beders wrote: post #64

Anyone remember the P2P craze of the early 2000s'? Or was it late 90s? What's left over from that? Freenet? What I'm always wondering about: Someone needs to foot the server/bandwidth bills. Who? If you run a Pi on your home network and serve requests with your 5MB/s upload: That's fine. More power to you. We need more of that. (and in that case, you are paying your ISP) But the transformation envisioned and the band…

Even freenet is kind of a ghost town..

Re: IPFS, Again

#66

Post by velcro »

https://www.shiftnrg.org/ might be interesting here too - IPFS-based project targeting web hosting specifically (includes a custom DNS + working on serving dynamic content, CMS, etc).

BTW as a proof of concept their website is already hosted on their own IPFS cluster.

Re: IPFS, Again

#67

Post by SmellyGeekBoy »

rkangel wrote: post #56
yason wrote: post #46

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I wonder why? It seems to be common with native speakers. I'm not native in English but, for me, it would seem to be nearly impossible to mix these two words even in a moment of carelessness. They mark greatly differing meanings and thus they practically live in different slots in my brain. Even a blind typo won't explain it because 'a' and 'e' are not too adjacent on a qwerty.

As a native English speaker, words in the language appear to be stored against sound rather than anything else. When trying to write clear English to be read, I am reading it to myself as I write to ensure that it reads clearly, and so it's more an audio process, allowing for confusion of words that sound similar. I would guess that those who have learned the language have a more logical, grammar based structure and…

"Could of" instead of "could have" being a prime example among native speakers. Although it's shocking how many people genuinely believe the former to be correct.

Re: IPFS, Again

#68

Post by quickthrower2 »

majewsky wrote: post #62
quickthrower2 wrote: post #6

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The middle ground might be to use a local hosting company that has it's own servers and racks. Pay a bit more, but boycott the big clouds for personal websites. You could probably host a few dozen static blogs on a physical machine for say $100/m. If 100 people do that it's affordable.

> You could probably host a few dozen static blogs on a physical machine for say $100/m. 100 bucks!? I host a dozen unique domains with static content (and a few other services) on a 1/1 VPS for 3 euros/month. At Hetzner, not at a hyperscaler.

Yeah I was thinking a whole server not vm.

Re: IPFS, Again

#69

Post by jasode »

janandonly wrote: post #3

Who is going to defend the free internet agains Azure, AWS and Google Cloud? They are the very opposite of a free and open internet where everyone can "run a website" on her own machine. It pains me to see a great idea like the Interplanetary File System still not working. I had similar experiences with IPFS and yes, we do need a project like this, only without the broken incentive structure attached to it. Why a "Fi…

>Why a "Filecoin"? We already have a tested and working native internet currency: bitcoin.

Maybe the "proof" section of the FAQ will explain the difference: https://filecoin.io/faqs#what-s-the-difference-between-all-t...

If you've already read that FAQ and still disagree, are you saying you can embed the incentives to store terabytes of others' data and also the proof of that storage into existing Bitcoin blocks?

(I'm not saying IPFS "proof-of-storage" scheme will work. I'm just saying Bitcoin's proof-of-(cpu)-work doesn't seem to easily map to verification that the peers' harddrives actually has the data they claim to have stored.)

Re: IPFS, Again

#70

Post by StavrosK »

langitbiru wrote: post #51
emmanueloga_ wrote: post #18

Just today I was looking into IPFS vs DAT, does anybody have any insights about the similarities/differences other than the ones listed here [1]? From far away, DAT looks smaller and better documented (perhaps less ambitious, too?) Apparently the best IPFS overview is the 2015 paper [2] which looks pretty daunting and does not seem to cover any practical considerations. 1: https://docs.datproject.org/docs/faq#how-is-…

Don't forget Swarm. https://swarm.ethereum.org/ So Swarm vs DAT vs IPFS.

If it has a blockchain in it, it immediately crosses the "too heavy" line for me.
Post reply on HN