3 ms·
> I guess because it's by the IPFS developers And is intended to run on an IPFS network. After reading the replies to this comment, I started looking into Sia,
by hobofan 9y ago
> I guess because it's by the IPFS developers
And is intended to run on an IPFS network. After reading the replies to this comment, I started looking into Sia, and wanted to try it out, but it seems that I first have to buy some Sia before even being able to become a host (!), which is an instant turnoff.
At the same time, I am already able to try out IPFS and have been able to develop apps using it for quite some time. I am not sure what the plans are with Filecoin, but IPFS also has a default-public (hosting) use case, while as of now Siacoin has private-only.
- XR0CSWV3h3kZWg 9y agoIf you just want enough siacoin to become a host I can probably send some over. I already have some and haven't gotten around to hosting yet.
- hobofan 9y agoThanks for the offer, but from what I've read over the last hours I'm not really too eager to try it out anymore.
- XR0CSWV3h3kZWg 9y agoFair enough, I'd like to hear what you think/read if you'd like to share.
- rightos 9y agoThe reason you need to buy some Siacoin in order to become a host is simple - you need collateral in case you fail to fulfill your hosting contracts - collateral of more than the value of those hosting contacts themselves. Turn off or not, that seems to be the only reasonable way to achieve private hosting contracts to me
- hobofan 9y agoSure, I realize that it is for collateral. Nonetheless, that is why I spend my time doing stuff with IPFS rather than Siacoin. I tried to answer your question about why people are hyped for IPFS/Filecoin (some only for one of the two) rather than the alternatives. It is not only because IPFS/Filecoin are "flashy", but because contrary to your claim developers _did_ have something working to play with from the same developers for quite some time which is also superior in some regards (public hosting).