3 ms·

For most storage, one needs it to be local to compute or easy to put behind a CDN - e.i. in a datacenter or on a very fast network that is connected to the data

For most storage, one needs it to be local to compute or easy to put behind a CDN - e.i. in a datacenter or on a very fast network that is connected to the datacenters. If not, you are cut out from the main commercial storage market. What is left is: - People who want to store stuff that is can not be legally stored on existing networks, such as illegal drug or porn stuff. - People who need secure stuff stored in a distributed fashion. - People who want to have a way of backing up their PC? But will this be faster and cheaper than using Backblaze-like solutions that buy storage in bulk and optimize for costs? Is there enough redundancy to ensure that no data is ever lost? Could someone actually attack the network to cause data loss? What are the costs? - Inbound, new storage per GB. - Outbound, access per GB. - Deleting storage. - Static storage on a per GB/hour. What is the performance of this? Can Backblaze make more money being a provider to Filcoin or should Backblaze use Filecoin for it storage? Just like Bitcoin mining Filecoin should, if successful, be dominanted by people like Backblaze.

simias 9y ago
That's pretty much my take as well. I really like the concepts behind IPFS and FileCoin and I think they're really fine piece of software engineering (well, IPFS is, can't say much about FileCoin yet) but as an other comment pointed out it's a solution in search of a problem. I tried hard to find a use for IPFS but I failed. I could use it to share files with other people but simply having a publicly reachable web server is simpler and more convenient. People don't have to install IPFS or use a public gateway to get my content. The cool feature is being able to rehost any content if you want to "cache" it but that's only possible if the original provider decided to host it through IPFS, so there's kind of a chicken-and-egg issue. I can't really use it for backup either unless I pay a third party to always cache my data, but in this case I might as well use tarnsap, dropbox or something similar and it'll probably be even more straightforward. So it's a pretty cool piece of tech but sadly I simply have zero practical use for it.
Zarath 9y ago
Say my desktop is always running and always connected to the network. Now I can rent out my extra storage space. Considering I am incurring almost no additional cost to rent out this space, the price is extremely elastic and will therefore be lower than the cost of a service like S3.

simias 9y ago

That's pretty much my take as well. I really like the concepts behind IPFS and FileCoin and I think they're really fine piece of software engineering (well, IPFS is, can't say much about FileCoin yet) but as an other comment pointed out it's a solution in search of a problem. I tried hard to find a use for IPFS but I failed. I could use it to share files with other people but simply having a publicly reachable web server is simpler and more convenient. People don't have to install IPFS or use a public gateway to get my content. The cool feature is being able to rehost any content if you want to "cache" it but that's only possible if the original provider decided to host it through IPFS, so there's kind of a chicken-and-egg issue. I can't really use it for backup either unless I pay a third party to always cache my data, but in this case I might as well use tarnsap, dropbox or something similar and it'll probably be even more straightforward. So it's a pretty cool piece of tech but sadly I simply have zero practical use for it.

Zarath 9y ago

Say my desktop is always running and always connected to the network. Now I can rent out my extra storage space. Considering I am incurring almost no additional cost to rent out this space, the price is extremely elastic and will therefore be lower than the cost of a service like S3.