Disclaimer: I wrote this article and made this website.

There was some talk of this issue in the recent fediverse inefficiencies thread. I’m hopeful that in the future we’ll have a decentralized solution for file hosting but for now I deeply believe that users should pay for their own file hosting.

    • sosodev@lemmy.worldOP
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      4 hours ago

      What would an IPFS solution look like here? That’s a genuine question. I don’t have much experience with IPFS. It seems like it isn’t really used outside of blockchain applications.

      • Fuck Yankies@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        8 minutes ago

        The sustainability of it is questionable. If I’m not mistaken, IPFS is based on Ethereum, which has gone over to proof of stake rather than proof of work, but it’s still a pretty cumbersome system.

        We’re talking about something that needs to compete with Quic and CloudFlare. I’m not sure that Ethereum or even crypto itself is efficient enough as a content delivery method, that IPFS - though a nice idea - is unrealistic.

        But that’s just speculation from someone who has zero knowledge behind IPFS as a technology and protocol, so take it with a grain of salt.

        EDIT: honestly, why qualify with “I’m not sure” when besserwissers and their alts roam the fediverse instead of going to therapy. Smh. Give the people a Tl;Dr at least. I’m not here for long form content.

        • Scio@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          2 hours ago

          IPFS has absolutely nothing whatsoever to do with Ethereum, or indeed any blockchain. It is a protocol for storing distributing and addressing data by hashes of the content over a peer to peer network.

          There is however an initiative to create a commercial market for “pinning*”, which is blockchain based. It still has nothing to do with Ethereum, and is a distinct project that uses IPFS rather than being part of the protocol, thankfully. It is also not a “proof of work” sort of waste, but built around proving content that was promised to be stored is actually stored.

          Pinning in IPFS is effectively “hosting” data permanently. IPFS is inherently peer to peer: content you access gets added to your local cache and gets served to any peer near you asking for it—like BitTorrent—until it that cache is cleared to make space for new content you access. If nobody keeps a copy of some data you want others to access when your machines are offline, IPFS wouldn’t be particularly useful as a CDN. So peers on the network can choose to pin some data, making them exempt from being cleared with cache. It is perfectly possible to offer pinning services that have nothing to do with Filecoin or the blockchain, and those exist already. But the organization developing IPFS wanted an independent blockchain based solution simply because they felt it would scale better and give them a potential way to sustain themselves.

          Frankly, it was a bad idea then, as crypto grift was already becoming obvious. And it didn’t really take off. But since Filecoin has always been a completely separate thing to IPFS, it doesn’t affect how IPFS works in any way, which it continues to do so.

          There are many aspects of IPFS the actual protocol that could stand to be improved. But in a lot of ways, it does do many of the things a Fediverse “CDN” should. But that’s just the storage layer. Getting even the popular AP servers to agree to implement IPFS is going to be almost as realistic an expectation as getting federated identity working on AP. A personal pessimistic view.

          • Fuck Yankies@lemmy.ml
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            edit-2
            17 minutes ago

            TL;Dr. From Wikipedia

            IPFS allows users to host and receive content in a manner similar to BitTorrent. As opposed to a centrally located server, IPFS is built around a decentralized system of user-operators who hold a portion of the overall data. Any user in the network can serve a file by its content address, and other peers in the network can find and request that content from any node who has it using a distributed hash table (DHT).

            So it’s BitTorrent in the web browser… thanks. How is that to be competitive with CloudFlare and Quic again? It has the same network issues that the blockchain has, in that it will be cumbersome and slow - for anyone else that doesn’t have millions to throw into infrastructure. Welcome to the same problem again, but in a different way.

            • Scio@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              9 minutes ago

              Ironically, because there’s no UDP in browsers, we can’t actually get proper p2p on the web. WebRTC through centralized coordination servers at best. Protocol Labs has all but given up on this use-case in favor of using some bootstrapped selection of remote helper nodes.

  • hperrin@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    23
    ·
    edit-2
    13 hours ago

    Ok, hear me out.

    We find the users with the slowest internet and start sending them all the data. They don’t have to keep anything on disk. Then they send it all back and forth between each other. Any time a user makes a request, we just wait for one of the slow nodes to come across the data and send it out.

    We use the slowest wires for all the storage. It’s fool proof.

  • TORFdot0@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    9 hours ago

    Is a p2p system for media with the instances just hosting magnet links too slow for fediverse purposes? To me this seems like the most resilient way to handle media in a decentralized system

  • tehn00bi@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    3
    ·
    10 hours ago

    Is file hosting really a must? I mean Reddit and feddit are basically forums. And not many forums allow file uploads. Also, we should have retention limits. Low value posts are allowed to fade away. High value posts that have some level of interaction stay alive longer.

    • Azzu@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      8 hours ago

      Reddit is basically entirely image or video posts, all hosted by reddit directly.

  • bulwark@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    3
    ·
    13 hours ago

    I wish there was some version of PBS for Lemmy, like public funds for hosting. I’ll admit I haven’t really thought this through, so there’s probably some problems with my idea.

  • Valmond@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    12 hours ago

    I think Tenfingers could be an interesting option as hosters do not know what they host, the data can be modified, and it’s 100% decentralised.

  • Lost_My_Mind@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    13 hours ago

    What is stopping some big giant, let’s say Yahoo/Verizon from buying a shitload of storage, starting their own private instance which is open to the public, but private in the sense that only Verizon employees are admins and mods. Only Verizon controls things. Then advertise to the point that the average person on the street knows that Verizon.Lemmy exists, and assosiates Lemmy with being a Verizon thing? What is stopping big tech from pouring the money required for this concept to take off, and using their control over their instance from making the decentralized a centralized service in the general public’s minds?

    Right now Lemmy is 60k people. Ok. What if Lemmy was 200 million people, and only 60k knew it was a decentralized service? Everyone else just thought Verizon owned Lemmy?

    • smeg@feddit.uk
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      12 hours ago

      Either they federate and all their users are exposed to the rest of the fediverse, or they don’t and they may as well be a separate thing

      • Lost_My_Mind@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        11 hours ago

        Yeah. What I’m saying is, they federate, but people have no idea what “federate” means. So they’d come here, and see “@smeg@feddit.uk” and not understand what feddit.uk was.

        They would see you, and think you are a user of the verizon owned service. Not question it one bit, and just move on thinking it’s all verizon.

        The same way people in Atlanta will say “I want a coke” “What kind of coke?” “Root Beer”.

        Or the same way parents in the 90s would say “I bought you a Nintendo Game!” then you open it, and it’s a Sega Saturn disc, when you have Sony Playstation. It’s all just a Nintendo to them.

        I’m saying if Verizon grew Lemmy to 200 million users, and all except 60k were on the Verizon instance, then despite being incorrect, Lemmy becomes “The Verizon owned Facebook”.

        Doesn’t matter that it’s federated.

        • smeg@feddit.uk
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          11 hours ago

          I guess that’s what instances are trying to avoid by preemptively blocking Threads. If everyone else blocks it then Lemmy carries on existing as it is. And I can’t imagine big corpo wouldn’t want to create their own name.

  • JaggedRobotPubes@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    13 hours ago

    This feels like something the Fediverse is ultimately going to build for itself. I know jack squat about the details, but it’s gonna have to be a thing eventually, I think.