3 ms·

1) The plan is to incentivise people with schemes like http://filecoin.io/ http://filecoin.io/ 2) Yeah, I'll admit the asymmetric nature of home internet is a

1) The plan is to incentivise people with schemes like http://filecoin.io/ http://filecoin.io/ 2) Yeah, I'll admit the asymmetric nature of home internet is a bit of a hassle. I suspect you'll still require machines on the backbone seeding content, with domestic machines focussed more on providing content to local peers and/or seeding rarely accessed content. In the long-term, IPFS can help ISPs in reducing their costs (content can be grabbed from within their own network, instead of having to peer with another network for almost everything), which might help to convince them to change. 3) IPFS doesn't force you to host any content you don't want to. If you choose to host illegal content, that's your problem.

einrealist 11y ago
> 1) The plan is to incentivise people with schemes like http://filecoin.io/ http://filecoin.io/ Adding a market to this problem is interesting and may work, indeed. But you must not forget, that most internet connectivity plans for private customers prohibit commercial use, where the network is the essential part of that business. If people start to make money on IPFS, the ISPs will not just watch. Another aspect of this is taxes that people must pay if they make a profit, and all the requirements to operate a business. With this in mind, I am skeptical that this will scale to a size where you can say: And now it is really a distributed thing. > 2) Yeah, I'll admit the asymmetric nature of home internet is a bit of a hassle. I suspect you'll still require machines on the backbone seeding content, with domestic machines focussed more on providing content to local peers and/or seeding rarely accessed content. In the long-term, IPFS can help ISPs in reducing their costs (content can be grabbed from within their own network, instead of having to peer with another network for almost everything), which might help to convince them to change. Many ISPs already do that. CDNs use ISP data centers to bring content to customers. In fact, IPFS is not much different from their solutions. But IPFS can be a standard for content distribution. That would be a good thing. > 3) IPFS doesn't force you to host any content you don't want to. If you choose to host illegal content, that's your problem. It is not always obvious what content is legal. Copyright laws will test IPFS hard.
- david_ar 11y ago
  1) Whilst it can be used to make a profit, it can also be used as a system to allow you to trade storage space on your own computer in return for replicating your own content on other people's machines. The more storage you provide, the more redundantly your own content is hosted on the network, and the longer you can still serve your own content whilst your own machine is offline. IANAL though, so I can't comment on the legal implications. 2) Sure, you can view it as a CDN anyone can participate in (including machines within your LAN). 3) There are plans for handling DMCA takedowns https://github.com/ipfs/gateway-dmca-denylist https://github.com/ipfs/gateway-dmca-denylist
  - einrealist 11y ago
    Well, I am thrilled to see it succeed. To me the most interesting part is IPFS acting as a CDN standard. That could make an impact, certainly.
    - synctext 11y ago
      Their incentive idea is realistic, it will work. My research team has build very similar operational systems over the past 8 years. "Decentralized credit mining in P2P systems", IFIP Networking 2015 "Towards a Peer-to-Peer Bandwidth Marketplace", 2014 "Bandwidth as a computer currency", news.harvard.edu/gazette/story/2007/08/creating-a-computer-currency/, (PRE-Bitcoin), 2007 Their work is still early, essential thing about this type of approach is spam. You can often trick people into caching stuff. So not your typical DDoS anymore, but another resource eater. Plus there is the counterintuitive oversupply problem: <more citations to our own work> "Investment Strategies for Credit-Based P2P Communities"
- hmartiniano 11y ago
  > [...] Copyright laws will test IPFS hard. Or the other way around...

einrealist 11y ago

> 1) The plan is to incentivise people with schemes like http://filecoin.io/ http://filecoin.io/ Adding a market to this problem is interesting and may work, indeed. But you must not forget, that most internet connectivity plans for private customers prohibit commercial use, where the network is the essential part of that business. If people start to make money on IPFS, the ISPs will not just watch. Another aspect of this is taxes that people must pay if they make a profit, and all the requirements to operate a business. With this in mind, I am skeptical that this will scale to a size where you can say: And now it is really a distributed thing. > 2) Yeah, I'll admit the asymmetric nature of home internet is a bit of a hassle. I suspect you'll still require machines on the backbone seeding content, with domestic machines focussed more on providing content to local peers and/or seeding rarely accessed content. In the long-term, IPFS can help ISPs in reducing their costs (content can be grabbed from within their own network, instead of having to peer with another network for almost everything), which might help to convince them to change. Many ISPs already do that. CDNs use ISP data centers to bring content to customers. In fact, IPFS is not much different from their solutions. But IPFS can be a standard for content distribution. That would be a good thing. > 3) IPFS doesn't force you to host any content you don't want to. If you choose to host illegal content, that's your problem. It is not always obvious what content is legal. Copyright laws will test IPFS hard.

david_ar 11y ago
1) Whilst it can be used to make a profit, it can also be used as a system to allow you to trade storage space on your own computer in return for replicating your own content on other people's machines. The more storage you provide, the more redundantly your own content is hosted on the network, and the longer you can still serve your own content whilst your own machine is offline. IANAL though, so I can't comment on the legal implications. 2) Sure, you can view it as a CDN anyone can participate in (including machines within your LAN). 3) There are plans for handling DMCA takedowns https://github.com/ipfs/gateway-dmca-denylist https://github.com/ipfs/gateway-dmca-denylist
- einrealist 11y ago
  Well, I am thrilled to see it succeed. To me the most interesting part is IPFS acting as a CDN standard. That could make an impact, certainly.
  - synctext 11y ago
    Their incentive idea is realistic, it will work. My research team has build very similar operational systems over the past 8 years. "Decentralized credit mining in P2P systems", IFIP Networking 2015 "Towards a Peer-to-Peer Bandwidth Marketplace", 2014 "Bandwidth as a computer currency", news.harvard.edu/gazette/story/2007/08/creating-a-computer-currency/, (PRE-Bitcoin), 2007 Their work is still early, essential thing about this type of approach is spam. You can often trick people into caching stuff. So not your typical DDoS anymore, but another resource eater. Plus there is the counterintuitive oversupply problem: <more citations to our own work> "Investment Strategies for Credit-Based P2P Communities"
hmartiniano 11y ago
> [...] Copyright laws will test IPFS hard. Or the other way around...