this post was submitted on 08 Aug 2023
51 points (96.4% liked)
Piracy: ꜱᴀɪʟ ᴛʜᴇ ʜɪɢʜ ꜱᴇᴀꜱ
54565 readers
522 users here now
⚓ Dedicated to the discussion of digital piracy, including ethical problems and legal advancements.
Rules • Full Version
1. Posts must be related to the discussion of digital piracy
2. Don't request invites, trade, sell, or self-promote
3. Don't request or link to specific pirated titles, including DMs
4. Don't submit low-quality posts, be entitled, or harass others
Loot, Pillage, & Plunder
📜 c/Piracy Wiki (Community Edition):
💰 Please help cover server costs.
 |
 |
|---|---|
| Ko-fi | Liberapay |
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
You are right, notice the use of future when I talk about privacy. What's great with IPFS is that it's based on libp2p. Libp2p makes it easy to add support for any transport protocol you like. If your transport protocol is private (tor, i2p...), then the whole protocol on top of it (ipfs, my search engine) is private. I'm pretty sure it was a choice for them to refuse adding support for private transports, because they don't want illegal activity on ipfs, thinking it's too early. But it's inevitable in the long run
There is no need to talk about an imaginary version of IPFS. GNUnet already exists. You can add that to the list of actually superior technologies that long predates IPFS.
As I mentioned, IPFS is nothing but very basic tech that got overhyped to junior/uninformed developers, and crypto scam victims.