It is in Facebook's best interest to keep you in their datacenters. It is in any cloud service provider's interest to keep you in their datacenters. It is in the interest of the U.S. government to have you always go to a single connection point where they can easily monitor you. While IPFS has the best of intentions, it does not solve the issue of motivation.
Před 8 lety+4
+Alex Groleau The related filecoin project deals with incentive a lot, though it probably doesn't (fully) address this particular problem. However, some people already do realize that giving their data to corporations (in plaintext!) isn't so great, but they typically just miss some comfortable alternative.
Absolutely :) And I think that any distributed storage solution that doesn't have personal privacy and privacy settings amongst your peers built in will also not motivate people to relocate their data there. :/
You would even be able to know what your neighbour is up to when retreiving files from your node ;) I guess you cold solve privacy issues by encrypting files and keep the keys to yourself or a small group of individuals.
It was also in the best interests of the established media to kill the internet (and still is; and they're losing). It was in the best interests of royalty to kill the printing press. You don't need to convince Facebook et al to get on board. You just need to kill them by providing a better solution.
everyone would like to be decentralized one time. and one day it may happen, but like moving from ipv4 to ipv6 for every since website out there, it's gonna take a long time.. Till then, de-centralization is just a 'backyard party.' Who here will still be round when its 'complete'? Anyone can start something and say "it's proof that it works", but its only limited to peer-2-peer at this time at large..and some pockets here and there. You really need it 'global' to start saying "This is proof for real" And until its global, its just a pipe dream. Just like PGP and email encryption, that works as well, and cryptocurrency, you can prove heaven and earth all we like, but it its limited to a sub-set, then ain't proof. Good video though,
It is called that because this protocol will allow for people on other planets (like Mars, when we get there in the next decade or two) to make use of the internet without having ridiculous load times by fetching EVERYTHING, ALL THE TIME, from earth data centers. I believe they have also already come up with some sort of satellite computer distribution plan to aid with this, too.
The problem is that devs don't want to code themselves out of a job. IPL needs abolishment before sweeping technical reforms like this are going to be possible to implement. Please for the love of all that is holy, prove me wrong and do it. I am a blogger. I agree with you. How do I transition to this system? Clearly it's not going to be just a wordpress plugin I install right? You're wanting to address something further up the food chain. But the further you go the more money there is being made by how things are. How many cash cow patents will this technology devalue? I just don't see it happening any time soon unless it's something that can be for lack of a better word downloaded by end users.
yep,, 20 years later, and we finally realized this when trouble starts.. Its too late.. We should of thought about was was "going to be possible" thanks to freedom, instead of saying "we'll do something, when we get there" The internet was a disaster waiting to happen.. with no regulations of anything. I know no one could see back then, but still.
Great explanation. I'm curious as to who your primary market is and how you plan to increase demand on your coin? Is this something that developers will use to save money compared to using AWS? I don't see why the average person would get benefit from this besides having a higher success rate of finding their desired content
I think we should change how we look at this.. We should stop trying to treat the internet as" critical" and "always on" because, just like a water pipe as we keep comparing too no matter how large the scale, it fails... Ya, while the scale is of the internet is much more important of mission critical applications as ("we need to do this now"), compared to electrically staying on, or water staring on, which we would have no problem if we had to wait,, i think the thing your missing on your ISP is your gateway to the rest of the world.. therefore you can keep talking about "decentralization is the key", but if no one knows how to connect all around the world themselves, you gotta rel on a failing system (such as an ISP doing down) De-centralization woulds on a theory scale only.. but when proving proof... it fails, as all i gotta do is disconnect you iSP, and it would be just like the eclectic grid "one flip, and lights out for everyone" Plus, Internet Achieve can't grab encrypted SSL pages, so how do you get around that? The 'father of the internet" (Vint Crerf) never envisioned any of this.. This was all building blocks WE users stacked on after.
why not start using distributed caches? Caching is a fundamental part of the "old school" Web (HTTP) and attacks exactly this problem and it's there for more than 20 yrs now - half of HTTP's architectural style (REST) is designed to make efficient cache proxies possible... I think it would be easier to leverage this than rebuilding the web
Dude, associating poor file/server management with "bookburning" (ie. censorship) is a stretch that sort of stuns me! Obviously IPFS is some new technology worthy of adoption. However, you should be more careful as to how you try to make this more relatable to a non-technical audience since it makes you come across as somewhat ignorant on the fairly important issue of censorship.
ipfs uses a repository in the local file system. By default, the repo is located at ~/.ipfs. To change the repo location, set the $IPFS_PATH environment variable: export IPFS_PATH=/path/to/ipfsrepo.......YOU CAN ONLY GET IN ONCE, THEN YOU LOOK AROUND AND IT KICKS YOU OUT....THIS SUCKS..WHY DON'T YOU FIX IT THIS RUN AROUND TALKING ABOUT IT...
So people will contribute like 100G of their precious disk space to store other people's files? why do they do that? or if you place all the files of the world in datacenters, you still need a centralized organization to run it. This is just hype guys, unrealistic.
welll.. website's mine visitors, you can do that in javascipt, your PC now, that's already happening, and people feel "ok" with that as long as it doesn't slow you down. As long as you have encryption, VPN, people have no problem sharing either.. So, the situation changes when you have another layer. I doubt anyone things over SSL, "gee, i wonder if i should"... the answer instead turns to "ok, i'll share as much as i can without worry." At the end of the day, thee goal is the same.. We are still trusting others.. It's just we would rather trust *more*, if encryption were there
Replicating the internet will take much more than a peer to peer network... of desktops and workstations lol. This is a terrible solution and just tacks on another layer to the internet... which is fundamentally broken from a security and privacy standpoint. Adding more layers onto something doesn't necessarily improve it. Also in regards to ISP's they can not only take down their backbones.. .they can take down your modem/router endpoints - leaving you with nothing to distribute. If you want to cache the internet you'll need a better way of doing it.
I doubt Replicating the internet or protecting against backbone loss are goals of this project. Yes, to truly have a distributed internet you would need a mesh network etc. but I don't think this is what the ipfs folks are going for. Also, ipfs solves many problems you have today with mesh networks
+Trust No One you are confusing deep web and dark web. Deep web is anything not reachable my search engines because it is never linked to, not accessable to the public internet (e.g. Intranet), or served in a protocol Google does not index (i.e. not HTTP or FTP) this is indeed 500 times larger than the normal, google-reachable web. The Darkweb i.e. any website only reachable through anonymisation software is much smaller than the normal web.
this sounds like a security disaster waiting to happen imo. The only thing this benefits is ISP's people in less developed countries (maybe) however i can see how someone can hijack and redistribute malicious content. If ISP's were more neutral with each other and more willing to peer with one another... it would avoid having to have traffic to go out from you to a backbone and back. 5 wheels on a car aren't necessarily better than 4. Is the best way I can describe this. It's upto the application provider to distribute their application in an efficient responsive matter imo. I don't want to rely on the guy next to me who can be distributing malicious javascript back into my browser. This is a TERRIBLE idea imo.
+ATschTheCube there is such a thing as a hash collision, could you find a hash collision that could be malicious in under 2 hundred quadrillion years? maybe not, maybe not.
ATschTheCube Thanks for explaining that bit. I had to do a bit more reading on this and it cleared up alot of the major concerns I have. I actually think now that this is pretty viable. Alot of the slides and videos did not explain the crypto process behind this.
Genius technology. Just an advice, you don't need to speak at fast-forward speed all the time. It's quite annoying to listen, and you don't look more intelligent by doing so, trust me.
He doesn't need to "look" intelligent. He is. His brain works fast and yours works slow. Get used to it. Don't go around telling other people how fast they can or cannot speak dumbass.
Why encrypt all the content we want to access to? Why not make it optional? Some millennials just want faster not more private. CZcams videos for example are info that is public already and a digital fingerprint of people watching cats and youtubers isn't too dangerous in anyone's hands imo. + some people just don't care about being traced online. I would personally live in a world with less secrets and have the gov tell me upfront that they track all traffic to spot terrorism or such
there is so much wrong with this comment I don't even know where to start. I'll just say that nowadays encryption slowdown is negledgably small and leave the rest of your comment alone
Před 8 lety+1
+David Lopez It's an alpha version. The ability to have safe mode is more important than the other option.
great introduction. I see future on this
Such tech. Very innovation. Much wow.
Thank you Doge Economist
It is in Facebook's best interest to keep you in their datacenters. It is in any cloud service provider's interest to keep you in their datacenters. It is in the interest of the U.S. government to have you always go to a single connection point where they can easily monitor you. While IPFS has the best of intentions, it does not solve the issue of motivation.
+Alex Groleau The related filecoin project deals with incentive a lot, though it probably doesn't (fully) address this particular problem. However, some people already do realize that giving their data to corporations (in plaintext!) isn't so great, but they typically just miss some comfortable alternative.
dont forget that once you place a file on it it cant be removed, so its not the best solution for privacy.
Absolutely :) And I think that any distributed storage solution that doesn't have personal privacy and privacy settings amongst your peers built in will also not motivate people to relocate their data there. :/
You would even be able to know what your neighbour is up to when retreiving files from your node ;) I guess you cold solve privacy issues by encrypting files and keep the keys to yourself or a small group of individuals.
It was also in the best interests of the established media to kill the internet (and still is; and they're losing).
It was in the best interests of royalty to kill the printing press.
You don't need to convince Facebook et al to get on board. You just need to kill them by providing a better solution.
I'm with you, brother.
Once there is a FreeBSD package floating around I plan to play around with it. The online vs offline part of the video was the most interesting to me.
Brilliant video describing issues of current usage of Internet...
i wouldn't just leave it as 'current'.. I'd also say future as well.. until we get decentralization that is
Internet archive has already missed tons of stuff, unfortunately. There's only so much they can catch.
The droid mothership exploding really nailed the point home
These are not the droids your looking for,,
Well Done.
Brilliant
Internet Archive is now compromised and censored. Good times.
Bravo
the single corporation like AWS gonna cry when they receive less S3 Get request ;) ...
The to the decentralized world ..... #DAO
everyone would like to be decentralized one time. and one day it may happen, but like moving from ipv4 to ipv6 for every since website out there, it's gonna take a long time..
Till then, de-centralization is just a 'backyard party.' Who here will still be round when its 'complete'? Anyone can start something and say "it's proof that it works", but its only limited to peer-2-peer at this time at large..and some pockets here and there. You really need it 'global' to start saying "This is proof for real" And until its global, its just a pipe dream. Just like PGP and email encryption, that works as well, and cryptocurrency, you can prove heaven and earth all we like, but it its limited to a sub-set, then ain't proof.
Good video though,
tho the graph @ 15:53 should be updated with USA as not being a free country for internet
This is how it begins.
"Interplanetary File System"? What other planets are involved? Wouldn't a better term be "Omniplanetary File System", or even "Pangaeaic File System"?
It is called that because this protocol will allow for people on other planets (like Mars, when we get there in the next decade or two) to make use of the internet without having ridiculous load times by fetching EVERYTHING, ALL THE TIME, from earth data centers. I believe they have also already come up with some sort of satellite computer distribution plan to aid with this, too.
"Back in my day we had DIAL-UP! You Mars kids...you've got it pretty fucking bad up here."
Tony, you are a good example of tunnel vision. Look to the future
I have no idea how to implement updates in ipfs
wow the great
The problem is that devs don't want to code themselves out of a job. IPL needs abolishment before sweeping technical reforms like this are going to be possible to implement.
Please for the love of all that is holy, prove me wrong and do it.
I am a blogger. I agree with you. How do I transition to this system? Clearly it's not going to be just a wordpress plugin I install right? You're wanting to address something further up the food chain. But the further you go the more money there is being made by how things are.
How many cash cow patents will this technology devalue?
I just don't see it happening any time soon unless it's something that can be for lack of a better word downloaded by end users.
sounds like a new web?
yep,, 20 years later, and we finally realized this when trouble starts.. Its too late..
We should of thought about was was "going to be possible" thanks to freedom, instead of saying "we'll do something, when we get there" The internet was a disaster waiting to happen.. with no regulations of anything. I know no one could see back then, but still.
Japan...forever loving the FK out of the internet and most things tech.
So someone smarter than me might be able to explain this, how can illegal activity be prevented or investigated? Things like open drug trade
Nothing uploaded can be deleted. Authorities can track down illegal activity same as with regular old IP.
Great explanation. I'm curious as to who your primary market is and how you plan to increase demand on your coin? Is this something that developers will use to save money compared to using AWS? I don't see why the average person would get benefit from this besides having a higher success rate of finding their desired content
+1 for blistering tirade against link rot! Goddam web developers and their tiny little book burnings >:(
I think we should change how we look at this.. We should stop trying to treat the internet as" critical" and "always on" because, just like a water pipe as we keep comparing too no matter how large the scale, it fails...
Ya, while the scale is of the internet is much more important of mission critical applications as ("we need to do this now"), compared to electrically staying on, or water staring on, which we would have no problem if we had to wait,, i think the thing your missing on your ISP is your gateway to the rest of the world.. therefore you can keep talking about "decentralization is the key", but if no one knows how to connect all around the world themselves, you gotta rel on a failing system (such as an ISP doing down)
De-centralization woulds on a theory scale only.. but when proving proof... it fails, as all i gotta do is disconnect you iSP, and it would be just like the eclectic grid "one flip, and lights out for everyone" Plus, Internet Achieve can't grab encrypted SSL pages, so how do you get around that? The 'father of the internet" (Vint Crerf) never envisioned any of this.. This was all building blocks WE users stacked on after.
why not start using distributed caches? Caching is a fundamental part of the "old school" Web (HTTP) and attacks exactly this problem and it's there for more than 20 yrs now - half of HTTP's architectural style (REST) is designed to make efficient cache proxies possible... I think it would be easier to leverage this than rebuilding the web
"caches" are not permant storage on hard drive forever.. what happens when a power cut happens?
Dude, associating poor file/server management with "bookburning" (ie. censorship) is a stretch that sort of stuns me! Obviously IPFS is some new technology worthy of adoption. However, you should be more careful as to how you try to make this more relatable to a non-technical audience since it makes you come across as somewhat ignorant on the fairly important issue of censorship.
ipfs uses a repository in the local file system. By default, the repo is
located at ~/.ipfs. To change the repo location, set the $IPFS_PATH
environment variable:
export IPFS_PATH=/path/to/ipfsrepo.......YOU CAN ONLY GET IN ONCE, THEN YOU LOOK AROUND AND IT KICKS YOU OUT....THIS SUCKS..WHY DON'T YOU FIX IT THIS RUN AROUND TALKING ABOUT IT...
US - green? LOL
10.20.30.40 isn't local, it's private :)
isn't that my IP? :) local IS private. as its not public,no one else knows.
wow react
So people will contribute like 100G of their precious disk space to store other people's files? why do they do that? or if you place all the files of the world in datacenters, you still need a centralized organization to run it. This is just hype guys, unrealistic.
welll.. website's mine visitors, you can do that in javascipt, your PC now, that's already happening, and people feel "ok" with that as long as it doesn't slow you down. As long as you have encryption, VPN, people have no problem sharing either..
So, the situation changes when you have another layer. I doubt anyone things over SSL, "gee, i wonder if i should"... the answer instead turns to "ok, i'll share as much as i can without worry." At the end of the day, thee goal is the same..
We are still trusting others.. It's just we would rather trust *more*, if encryption were there
Replicating the internet will take much more than a peer to peer network... of desktops and workstations lol. This is a terrible solution and just tacks on another layer to the internet... which is fundamentally broken from a security and privacy standpoint. Adding more layers onto something doesn't necessarily improve it. Also in regards to ISP's they can not only take down their backbones.. .they can take down your modem/router endpoints - leaving you with nothing to distribute. If you want to cache the internet you'll need a better way of doing it.
I doubt Replicating the internet or protecting against backbone loss are goals of this project. Yes, to truly have a distributed internet you would need a mesh network etc. but I don't think this is what the ipfs folks are going for. Also, ipfs solves many problems you have today with mesh networks
+Trust No One you are confusing deep web and dark web. Deep web is anything not reachable my search engines because it is never linked to, not accessable to the public internet (e.g. Intranet), or served in a protocol Google does not index (i.e. not HTTP or FTP) this is indeed 500 times larger than the normal, google-reachable web. The Darkweb i.e. any website only reachable through anonymisation software is much smaller than the normal web.
Not true and you're only correct on your second point if ownership of cables are left in the hands of ISPs.
this sounds like a security disaster waiting to happen imo. The only thing this benefits is ISP's people in less developed countries (maybe) however i can see how someone can hijack and redistribute malicious content. If ISP's were more neutral with each other and more willing to peer with one another... it would avoid having to have traffic to go out from you to a backbone and back. 5 wheels on a car aren't necessarily better than 4. Is the best way I can describe this. It's upto the application provider to distribute their application in an efficient responsive matter imo. I don't want to rely on the guy next to me who can be distributing malicious javascript back into my browser. This is a TERRIBLE idea imo.
content is named by the hash of itself. If you would e.g. take a programm, add a virus and upload it, it would have a different name.
+ATschTheCube there is such a thing as a hash collision, could you find a hash collision that could be malicious in under 2 hundred quadrillion years? maybe not, maybe not.
+Zach Abel I think it is safe to assume we won't be using sha-256 in 200 quadrillion years
ATschTheCube Thanks for explaining that bit. I had to do a bit more reading on this and it cleared up alot of the major concerns I have. I actually think now that this is pretty viable. Alot of the slides and videos did not explain the crypto process behind this.
@@squelchedotter plus, i can't see myself living that long either.
Genius technology. Just an advice, you don't need to speak at fast-forward speed all the time. It's quite annoying to listen, and you don't look more intelligent by doing so, trust me.
This.
I actually had to put him on 1.5x speed, because his talk is 50% water.
He doesn't need to "look" intelligent. He is. His brain works fast and yours works slow. Get used to it. Don't go around telling other people how fast they can or cannot speak dumbass.
Why encrypt all the content we want to access to? Why not make it optional? Some millennials just want faster not more private. CZcams videos for example are info that is public already and a digital fingerprint of people watching cats and youtubers isn't too dangerous in anyone's hands imo. + some people just don't care about being traced online. I would personally live in a world with less secrets and have the gov tell me upfront that they track all traffic to spot terrorism or such
there is so much wrong with this comment I don't even know where to start.
I'll just say that nowadays encryption slowdown is negledgably small and leave the rest of your comment alone
+David Lopez It's an alpha version. The ability to have safe mode is more important than the other option.