8 ms·
The IPFS network is ideal for this kind of situation. I should say I'm bias as I run ipfsstore.it but to host all 26gb there would not be expensive.
by nannal 9y ago
The IPFS network is ideal for this kind of situation.
I should say I'm bias as I run ipfsstore.it but to host all 26gb there would not be expensive.
- 0x006A 9y agoipfs overhad is still way to big. also 26TB not 25gb.
- aw3c2 9y agoOverhead in what aspect?
- imtringued 9y agoAdding files to IPFS creates a copy of the file in their blockstore implementation. The new filestore should have solved this problem but I haven't used it yet.
- 0x006A 9y agobesides the mentioned duplication of all files, the dht network chatter to announce a large repository by default produces many TB of traffic a month.
- wongarsu 9y agoIn which way is IPFS ideal?
- dmix 9y agoWouldn't IPFS make it easier to access individual files compared to a Torrent file? 26TB is a massive amount of data. Having downloaded (very) large dumps in the past with torrents, I've found it always a bit annoying especially when attempting to access a subset, torrent client interfaces are less than ideal here. Not that someone can't build a good document browser on top of torrents - ala those movie torrent streaming apps. I'm not familiar with how IPFS works in detail but being able to access it via a file system sounds much better UX wise. Hopefully it can support that scale. But to your point the primary end-goal of "censorship-free" persistent access is largely the same AFAIK.
- roblabla 9y agoYou don't have to download an entire torrent to access a single file. Most torrent client can prioritize files so they get downloaded first, or avoid downloading everything in favor of just one or two. That is, unless the torrent is just a single zip or something.
- posterboy 9y agoand if everyone does that, noone will offer the particular file except hosts, so the availabilty can be spotty - and the torrent interfaces have no way to tell upfront.
- dmix 9y agoYes I mentioned that in my comment but it's not an ideal (or even practical) interface when you have 26TB of files. You'd have to build a special torrent interface to deal with that in a useful way. Existing torrent clients are far from capable of handling this meaningfully.
- dmix 9y agoSo for your service 26TB * 0.044 USD/Gigabyte = $1144/month to host all the Scihub data Quite a big fee :p
- kobeya 9y agoThat seems rediculously cheap and easy to come up with funds for. Storing the entire progress of science for $1k/mo? That's a good deal.
- dmix 9y agoTrue, a low grade ICO for SciHub, backing an multi-country IPFS store with a decent web interface on top could raise that money easily. You could create a mini forum/social network around it for commenting on papers. Buying a coin to make an account or freemium buying a 'VIP' accounts ala Dribbble...maybe even a DocumentCloud style annotation system, so it has some self-sustaining business model other than raising initial capital. Although I don't know much about creating 'DApps' or how Ethereum or IPFS works or what SciHub contains beyond a primitive grasp [1], just sayin :p [1] I watched a video of a talk "Distributed Apps with IPFS (Juan Benet) - Full Stack Fest 2016" https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jONZtXMu03w https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jONZtXMu03w
- kobeya 9y agoWhy does everything have to be an ICO? What's the point of a token here? Just give the appropriate organization some charitable funds.
- mythrwy 9y agoThat's one way to look at it. Another is 13 2TB drives at $70 a pop. May run into some network congestion sharing however :)
- viraptor 9y ago> The IPFS network is ideal for this kind of situation. I like ipfs, but in this situation specifically it's got problems. It's not private and it's not secret. It means that, by hosting a mirror of the data you're announcing: I'm publicly offering these documents, likely illegally as far as copyright is involved. (And without a country/region limitation, which may be another issue)