3 ms·
I’m a big fan of IPFS, but I’m disappointed to see it mentioned in this thread. It only serves to distract from the issue of net neutrality. As great as IPFS i
by evv 9y ago
I’m a big fan of IPFS, but I’m disappointed to see it mentioned in this thread. It only serves to distract from the issue of net neutrality.
As great as IPFS is, it won’t help if the price for general-purpose internet skyrockets. Access to YouTube, Amazon, Facebook and Twitter will continue to have competitive prices, but the rates for out-of-band networking like IPFS and VPNs may skyrocket without the average consumer even noticing.
- acobster 9y agoI agree we need to be fighting on the NN front still, but what do you mean by "out-of-band" in reference to IPFS? I take out-of-band in this context to refer to host names, essentially, but isn't IPFS (or any other content-addressed protocol) designed to not need names to begin with?
- evv 9y agoBy out-of-band in this case, I mean out of the mainstream consumption of the internet (web browsers, https, ssl certs). ISPs could block everything other than this, and most internet users wouldn’t notice or care. I think tools like IPFS will always need something like host names. Content-addressability helps you access the data once you have the address, but how can you know the latest ID of the thing you are looking for? In the IPFS world, you’d use IPNS (interplanetary name service) for this, but I’m not sure how it actually works in a distributed fashion.