https://github.com/ipfs/faq/issues/28 https://github.com/ipfs/faq/issues/28 may help out in understanding where they are going as far as dynamic content, author

https://github.com/ipfs/faq/issues/28 https://github.com/ipfs/faq/issues/28 may help out in understanding where they are going as far as dynamic content, authorization, etc. From just a quick look (I'm not IPFS expert): IPNS is used as the mutable state driving 'dynamic' content. The dynamic content is still published as a normal immutable reference, but is referenced by an IPNS name/path/hash. To me this appears to be like a CNAME in dns. IPNS provides the pointer to the immutible hash, and for dynamic content you would only ever use the IPNS. For authorization, this could be done via PKI. Take some data, encrypt it with one or more user's public keys, then post it to IPFS. Then the recipient, and only the recipient, would be able to access the content. I can't really take it seriously until I see technical arguments. Well, to be fair, the technical arguments appear to exist (after all there is a IPFS draft document which covers the stuff I mention above), and while something like replacing HTTP is obviously extreme, those arguments appear (on their face) to not be completely crazy. So maybe if there are specific technical issues that aren't covered by the draft documents and other documentation on the IPFS site, github faq page, etc, then maybe bring them up and people can help you answer those questions.