web3.storage VS Go IPFS

https://web3.storage/ https://estuary.tech/

I'm building Flash — a service to deploy websites and apps on the new decentralized stack. It relies on public infrastructure (such as Estuary, web3.storage and others) instead of providing its own, making the bandwidth and storage very cheap and accessible.

https://web3.storage/ does everything you need

Web3.Storage and other similar projects run a network of IPFS nodes that allow users to store whatever content they like, as a kind of competitor to Dropbox or Google Drive: this could be their personal content, or again, any application content, because some apps integrate directly with this service via their API

You can file this as an issue in the repo here and perhaps mention to them that, as a user, it feels phishy to you.

Typically app developers would be the ones to build on Filecoin and you would choose an app like web3.storage to store your data. As a consumer you dont have to directly hold FIL but you benefit from the Filecoin ecosystem.

Filecoin may not have a front-end but our team has worked on https://estuary.tech and it has been easy for our users that have an invite to onboard to the Filecoin Network, another great option is https://web3.storage

clone repos to your computer, dont just fork them

the fork disappears when the parent repository is taken down, clones stay on your machine

upload to IPFS. you can pin on IPFS for free with filecoin. Use filecoin nodes to pin on ipfs at https://web3.storage

As for storing data on Filecoin directly, that would require making a deal with a Filecoin Storage Provider; doing so is currently a complex task but reading the documentation should get you somewhere. You will need a small amount of the FIL token to make the deal with an SP, who will then store your data. Keep in mind that something like web3.storage or Estuary.tech may be better for your needs if you need easy access to the files later; Filecoin can (currently) be thought of as closer to archival storage, but efforts are being made to make it more generally useful too.

nice/renice isn’t what it used to be[0].

Bandwidth limiting is not built in[1].

[0] - https://stackoverflow.com/questions/10342470/process-nicenes...

[1] - https://github.com/ipfs/go-ipfs/issues/3065

For me, https://github.com/ipfs/go-ipfs/issues/9044 is the main blocker atm and https://github.com/ipfs/go-ipfs/issues/2167 is still around and annoying.

It makes me wonder if you use the IPFS FUSE mount and symlink an IPNS address of files that you want to sync if it would be read by Dropbox.

I'm using the IPFS fuse mount to load mine into Plex/Jellyfin. It's nice that I can load a movie into a virtual directory on IPFS and my home and remote servers get updated automatically. (when I update my IPNS) So you could run an official solidaritycinema IPNS address that people load into their Plex as a library.

Maybe tangentially related, I've been interested in IPFS as a network medium. ( Using the IPFS fuse mount ) Rather than syncing the entire file it syncs the Library list. When the Plex server makes the request for the file, IPFS negotiates the download. It makes it more like Netflix.

I've been messing with Plex + IPFS and I think it's pretty cool. The IPFS FUSE Mount gives IPFS network access to Plex as just a regular filesystem. To keep it private within my family I'm using a Private Swarm.

"Implement bandwidth limiting" https://github.com/ipfs/go-ipfs/issues/3065

Going on six years now. You can use external tools (like "trickle") or your OS knobs.

So my plan is to setup plex on a relative's Raspberry Pi so that it works off the IPFS mounted network directories in the same way. They'll have a virtual library that takes basically no memory on their Pi unless they request a video, then it'll start caching to their machine.