4 ms·
I love IPFS for some things. It's sort of not anonymous and it's nondeterministically slow in starting and keeping itself going. When it works, it's fantastic.
by 1letterunixname 4y ago
I love IPFS for some things. It's sort of not anonymous and it's nondeterministically slow in starting and keeping itself going. When it works, it's fantastic. I think an overlay fs on top of bittorrent (and adopting existing torrents) would've been more useful than reinventing the wheel and fragmenting. Torrents already have CBA and work.
It also has the problem of not enough people use it.
- rklaehn 4y agoIt has some performance and reliability problems. Some of them are just a matter of writing a better implementation, some are more conceptual. But the basic principle of a content-addressed, distributed file system is desperately needed, and there is a lot of work going on behind the scenes from both protocol labs and others to fix these problems... Stay tuned :-)
- cowtools 4y agoI like the IPNS idea. That would be useful even if it was just back-ported to bittorrent
- claudedopplr 4y agoI like the "immutability" of IPFS. Back in 2017 I tried it out and [Dat](https://www.datprotocol.com/ https://www.datprotocol.com/). Both IPNS and Dat seemed to break often (not finding the correct peer, which then lead to broken downloads). With IPFS, you know "it's just a hash of the content". That idea of content addressing is pretty powerful, and I'm starting to see it a lot more, particularly in the NixOS ecosystem. IPNS, on the other hand, seldom worked. The 24hr timeout made it unusable without an abstraction on top that kept it up to date. Dat had a similar problem, one of storing way too much historical data, and I could never be sure if the peers had the same version I las published. I think these are "theoretical problems". Content addressing is a great idea and it's reliable. Distributed hash tables are on the weaker technology spectrum. I'm rooting for IPFS to replace bittorrent, not IPNS/Hypercore, which I think will have serious scalability/security /privacy problems.
- easrng 4y agoIPNS sucks. It's very slow. BitTorrent already has an alternative[1] and it works somewhat better but doesn't have much client support yet. [1]: https://www.bittorrent.org/beps/bep_0046.html https://www.bittorrent.org/beps/bep_0046.html
- tux2bsd 4y agoThe problem with torrents is a lack of expanding/versioning of a torrent e.g. I'm Joe Rogan and I release all my podcasts into a single torrent, add one each podcast. JoeRoganPodcastArchive.torrent . Each addition should propagate if the torrent client accepts it (i.e. Joe can't sneak in a episode of Oprah as the user would catch that). Debian_amd64_ISO_Archive.torrent , each release Debian chuck it in there. Up to the user to accept the new addition (likewise download selectively, as can be done already). By now you should get the drift of what I'm on about. The key is you don't have to get another torrent file to "follow" (what would be) the expanding torrent. It also serves to propagate new content faster, the change comes to the user rather than the user having to seek it out.
- e3bc54b2 4y agoRSS feeds currently fill this role and honestly I don't feel the need for base torrent protocol to support it. It does its job and it does it well, same as RSS.
- tux2bsd 4y agoYou have a system that works for you but you're confused if you think that is complete enough to be a stand in for what I have described.
- detaro 4y agoAFAIK there are mutable torrents now, although not as widely supported