Create account

replied 2156d
IPFS is cool tech, but I feel less confident it will be here in 10 years than I do about BCH. It's a decent solution for non-text media, though still depends on someone hosting it.
John_Doe
replied 2155d
Exactly. This is an excellent use case. Just as important as money. Think about it, blockchain is giving is oor rights back. First sound money, now freedom of speech.
taowanzou
replied 2156d
BitTorrent exists for more than a decade, and there is no doubt it will for another. WebTorrent is the next step. Don’t be confused with overhyped IPFS.
replied 2155d
how come the rate of orhapaned no longer seeded torrent files is skyrocketing then?
taowanzou
replied 2154d
I have a solution: users who "like" a media content commit to store it locally and seed while online. The more likes any particular webtorrent post has, the longer it lives.
taowanzou
replied 2154d
As users engage more they can commit to not only store the content they like, but that of those whom they follow, and so on, by specifying the social depth (limit is an archival node)
En Fri Mand
replied 2155d
IPFS is better IMO because it makes sure there is no duplication and then it has a HTTP interface.
taowanzou
replied 2152d
also, you can can be a webtorrent peer from your browser right away, while ipfs-js is undercooked. I cannot stop thinking about ipfs as overhyped undercooked copycat of bittorent.
taowanzou
replied 2152d
what duplication? one hash -> one file anyway. also, ipfs is going to be integrated with filecoin, which I do not think is valuable in case of memo protocol.
En Fri Mand
replied 2152d
I guess you don't need to use Filecoin. Am I wrong?
taowanzou
replied 2152d
Right now filecoin is not ready, but afaik integration of filecoin with ipfs is the ultimate goal.
replied 2156d
Crypto torrent.