3 ms·
I generally agree with this sentiment, but IPFS and Filecoin I view as quite different than the rest. I think the F-Droid team does as well: > Since the “decen
by rpdillon 5y ago
I generally agree with this sentiment, but IPFS and Filecoin I view as quite different than the rest. I think the F-Droid team does as well:
> Since the “decentralized web” includes all sorts of things, it is important to also mention things that we will not be doing with this grant. We are not looking at NFTs, blockchain, DAOs, smart contracts or related aspects of “Web3”.
Filecoin is acceptable to me because it seems to be a currency tied to a real asset that folks need: drive space. I'm not an expert on this, but Wikipedia's entry mentions this aspect:
> It is made by Protocol Labs and builds on top of InterPlanetary File System, allowing users to rent unused hard drive space.
I don't think it's an arms race for energy usage and e-waste the way e.g. Bitcoin is, but if I'm getting this wrong, I'd be interested to hear about it from folks who have better context!
- wmf 5y agoFilecoin's deflationary "number go up" economics distract from its use for storage. It's true that Filecoin incentivizes miners to provide storage space, but the vast majority of that space is unused so it appears that the incentives are out of balance. In other words, Filecoin's "users" are just hodling Filecoin to get rich; they're not storing data. It's too soon to tell whether this situation is temporary or not. Also, Filecoin has fairly high non-storage hardware requirements so miners aren't just providing storage; they have to spend significant energy and capex to prove that they are providing storage.
- hammyhavoc 5y agoI think it's becoming clear that they're trying to find uses for that storage, but it's the old "solution in search of a problem" chestnut, IMO.
- rpdillon 5y agoThanks for this insight...your explanation is very clear!