Back to News
Advertisement
Advertisement

⚡ Community Insights

Discussion Sentiment

62% Positive

Analyzed from 3006 words in the discussion.

Trending Topics

#ipfs#protocol#https#labs#content#nft#more#iroh#technology#nfts

Discussion (85 Comments)Read Original on HackerNews

devttyeuabout 3 hours ago
Sad to see it go having been a maintainer some years ago.

For anyone wondering, there are more sustainable (with a viable, focused business backing the project) options to do p2p, namely Iroh - https://www.iroh.computer/ which was built by ex-IPFS ex-Protocol Labs devs (I have no relation to the team beyond having worked with them back in the day).

Sadly Protocol Labs is doing.. ehh whatever now, except apparently supporting the projects it got its VC/crypto funding from.

Panda_44 minutes ago
IPFS does/did more than just peer to peer, which is all Iroh does, eg decentralised file sharing.

Something quite similar to Iroh but meant for more than a VPN over the internet: is Reticulum. Which is a custom network stack and meant to run over any connection type (TCP, UDP almost anything you can get a program to input and output data over, down to LoRa) using Interface connections.

Although the main implementation is in Python currently and mainly available only over Reticulum (no client side script "NomadNet Micron pages") and rngit for Git over RNS itself (intended kinda as a self host Reticulum Git forge with "workdocs") as well a (sometimes, normally every major release, updated) GitHub mirror. And another caveat is that the LXMF messaging protocol and LXST voice call protocol doesn't directly support group messaging currently.

tonyhbabout 1 hour ago
Iroh seems more comparable to an L7 scoped Tailscale than it does IPFS. It's good, but pretty unrelated.
devttyeuabout 1 hour ago
Iroh got started with IPFS-style content-addressed blob transfers as the primary way to use it, still has that functionality but its now a bit of a second tier citizen. See https://docs.iroh.computer/protocols/blobs

Besides just p2p streams seem to be much more useful, those are plug-and-play into most software, e.g. I wrote https://github.com/magik6k/git-remote-iroh that just plugs the git remote proto into iroh and lets you move repo commits between computers by just copying a string from one place to another on push. Doing that with blobs - not gonna happen, not that easily.

dgellowabout 2 hours ago
What is PL doing nowadays? I checked the website and don’t understand at all
exploriginabout 2 hours ago
This. Haven't seen this in the news in years. A few years ago (2022?), they got some $x00 million in investment money. They already had IPFS/IPNS at that point so it was some deep push into Filecoin. But it felt odd at the time. Bitcoin was starting to jump the shark at that point and none of the smarter cryptos had truly found a market fit either.
devttyeuabout 2 hours ago
"The next big thing" usually
jadboxabout 2 hours ago
who uses Iroh?
ycombinatrixabout 1 hour ago
developers, not end users
smalltorchabout 1 hour ago
isn't it brand new?
CommanderDataabout 3 hours ago
I love Iroh but it doesn't quite work the same as IPFS if I understand correctly.
knowaveragejoeabout 2 hours ago
It doesn't, it's a lower level primitive. But things like IPFS can be built on top of it.
doctorpangloss41 minutes ago
there are a lot of completely free file sharing services for authentic activity (e.g. github, google drive)

inauthentic activity seems to move from one product space to another. in 3 years we'll be hearing about stripe shutting down openrouter for example.

virgil_disgr4ce32 minutes ago
please define "authentic activity" and "inauthentic activity"
rhodeyabout 3 hours ago
This is really unfortunate. When cloudflare dropped IPFS you could say this next step was sort of already on the way. I may be biased but I think when IPFS decided to put so much time into "IPNS" in order to support non-static webapps years ago what they came up with did not fit the need. And without webapps on IPFS things were going nowhere.

A year or so ago I wrote IPFS-boot which allows serving webapps on IPFS while providing also an update path and without breaking content hashing:

https://github.com/rhodey/IPFS-boot

But now if you want to serve a secure webapp and not use IPFS IMO the only option you have is to tell users to install Tailscale and to host the webapp themselves and then to install Tailscale on all devices.

scirobabout 1 hour ago
oh man and when Brave removed native IPFS support. https://github.com/brave/brave-browser/issues/37735
chriswarboabout 2 hours ago
I agree that IPNS has always seemed a bit naff; but alternatives naming systems can be used too (if your system's name resolver can understand them); e.g. this uses pkarr addresses for IPFS content: http://www.chriswarbo.net/blog/2026-05-08-pkdnslink.html

Regarding an "update path", GNS has support for that built-in; though I've not been able to try it myself, since I can't get GNUNet to bootstrap :-(

noman-landabout 2 hours ago
I always thought that they should have used ENS instead of whatever coin they ended up making. GNS is cool but IIRC (years ago) it had no incentive mechanism which is I think where a lot of these solutions fall down. Even imaginary "ratio points" that p2p file sharing sites have being using for years work better than "donate your resources out of the goodness of your heart".
toomuchtodoabout 3 hours ago
I see this very similar to IPv4 and IPv6, and adoption. Non content addressable URL addressing simply is "good enough" for most use cases, and bittorrent is "good enough" for serving content durably and somewhat in a content addressable manner (file hashes, magnet torrents, immutable torrents). Do we need IPFS URLs? It doesn't appear so, it seems like a solution seeking a problem. IPFS gateways will always be a target for abuse and copyright claims as well.

If you want to reference resources securely, https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Web/Security/Defens... is available and widely supported.

rhodeyabout 3 hours ago
I think something like IPFS is definitely needed. There is nothing stopping you from distributing a webapp on bittorrent but you'll also need to add a README for instructions on how to run the webapp on localhost so a browser can render it. So thats not something that any non-technical user wants to do.
toomuchtodoabout 3 hours ago
Can you share potential webapp use cases that would rely on IPFS or using IPFS for referencing resources would be an improvement? Perhaps my mental has gaps on this topic, and my thoughts and assertions could be incorrect.
stackghostabout 3 hours ago
Content-addressable storage as a whole is a non-starter with non-technical users.
rhodeyabout 3 hours ago
Oh and sorry I missed your comment on "Subresource Integrity".

The deal here is Subresource Integrity will only help you if the index.html is considered trusted/authoritative. So you still need a way to get index.html to users and users need a way to say "is this the true index.html"

ErroneousBoshabout 2 hours ago
Why do you need Tailscale?

Edit: Okay, so a couple of people have downvoted but no-one has answered.

Why would you use tailscale to secure a web app?

scirobabout 1 hour ago
I tried to build a few non crypto decentralized apps. The killer was reliable always deliverability inside the browser. https://inbrowser.link/ was a huge jump in utility but came to late the ipfs.js just never worked consistently. In the end the only way to get good XP for yours users was that you provider the IPFS to http gateway for all content but then whats the point its just decentralization theater.

I remember in 2015 having the IPFS concept blow my mind its such a memorable moment when it really felt like someone designed something significantly different that current mainstream paradigms. But in the end it seems like it was still a case of a cool technology looking for a use-case not solving a real problem.

JuniperMesosabout 2 hours ago
> If you have a favourite memory of working with Shipyard, or an idea you always hoped IPFS would eventually achieve, we’d love to hear it. Google Form

One important thing I'd like to see IPFS or a similar decentralized web technology achieve, is getting rid of the necessity of filling out a Google form in order to tell the Shipyard people what I think about their maintenance of IPFS.

Seriously it bugs me when people who ostensibly care about decentralized or privacy technology use a centralized service hosted by a gigantic tech company to accomplish a task because it's convenient (if you already have an account with them), and don't even try to make a decentralized version available. It would have been better if they simply invited people to send them an email.

zeafoamrunabout 1 hour ago
Dude they just got shut down and will need to look for new jobs, cut them a tiny bit of slack.
JuniperMesos42 minutes ago
It's a problem for the entire ecosystem that the most expedient thing to do, the thing that we should have sympathy for them picking under a time of stress, is the thing that relies on people who want to communicate with them having a Google account and having that communication intermediated through Google with no alternative. And since the entire point of Shipyard as an organization is to be stewards of the decentralized web software ecosystem, the fact that they're not using decentralized web tech is relevant to their mission and values.
ktm5j14 minutes ago
I could (sort of) see why you might get this upset if people were required to have a Google account themselves to submit this Google form, but that's not the case. Who are you to tell an underfunded opensource dev company that just lost their biggest project what tools they should use? That email you hypothetically sent will probably get delivered to an account in their Google Workspace, how on earth is that any different?
Grombobulous13 minutes ago
There is no ecosystem. IPFS is dead. Relatively speaking, nobody’s using it. There’s no strong use case or benefit.

This is the last gasp of a blockchain hype cycle solution that never found its problem.

zeafoamrun30 minutes ago
Is anyone aware of where IPFS community discussion is taking place? The forum seems almost dead and the community page has broken discord and matrix links.
its-summertimeabout 3 hours ago
Kubo, Helia, Boxo, Rainbow, IPFS Desktop, IPFS Companion, Someguy, Service Worker Gateway, IPFS Check, libp2p, ipfs.io, dweb.link, check.ipfs.network, delegated-ipfs.dev, Wikipedia-on-IPFS.

It kinda feels like the AWS or Azure of file distribution, so much stuff so confusing. Also apparently with Protocol Labs owning several of those things despite not operating those things?

Ironically seems quite a fragile setup.

Regardless, very sad news.

mikert89about 3 hours ago
Does IPFS actually have users? I remeber when they raised 270 million and a bunch of people there got wildly wealthy
muragekibichoabout 1 hour ago
I guess IPFS is an artifact from the crypto craze. It's pretty silly if you think of it. However, I must admit, I got my first ever developer grant from Filecoin while they were flush with ZIRP era money.

btw,I thought it was an Initial Coin Offering, not an actual fundraise.

gwerbin44 minutes ago
What's silly about it? Content-addressable decentralized storage -- not tied to a cryptocurrency -- is really valuable for censorship-resistant archiving of politically-sensitive data (such as climate change research).
muragekibicho23 minutes ago
It's the crypto aspect that's silly. Tech is cool IMO. However, the crypto adjacency makes it all look scammy tbh.
crest21 minutes ago
What people did or planned to do with IPFS is pretty silly, but the idea of content addressed storage with cryptographic (not in a crypo coin way) names makes a lot of sense. It would make for a great software distribution method e.g. your game downloads get faster the more people want to play the latest version. It's the combination of Git and BitTorrent and has uses far beyond just hosting warez and NFTs.
deweyabout 3 hours ago
The only place where I regularly stumble upon on it was/is on libgen.
airspressoabout 1 hour ago
Most of the generative art is hosted on IPFS.
runarbergabout 3 hours ago
Wait are you telling me yet another supposedly ground breaking technology turned out to be yet another grift.

I know a lot of people on HN are going to call me overly cynical. But this pattern should be so obvious by now. Any cynicism to any new ground breaking technology which is gonna solve a problem that exists because of capitalism, that this cynicism is more than warranted.

At this point we should all be cynical of any new technology.

dgellowabout 2 hours ago
Yeah, I now understand why gray beards are seen as grumpy. Mine isn’t gray yet, but after the 2010s and half of 2020s I can only see as very suspicious any new technology pushed hard by the industry
gritzkoabout 3 hours ago
I can not say IPFS was a bad idea. Consider GitHub: it is a massive content-addressed store with a smiley on it. There has been some very hot P2P products, e.g. Tailscale. Protocol Labs had its peak during/after the ICO, but long-term, (1) they did not focus on some particular audience and (2) performance of the network was not great. I personally believe that their bet on DHT was not the right one (I worked in this area long before IPFS btw). OK, in retrospect we are all wise.
mmastracabout 1 hour ago
I'm currently on sabbatical looking for volunteer work. I always thought IPFS was an interesting project, might be happy to pitch in some of my now-free bandwidth.
thataccountabout 1 hour ago
What makes/made IPFS special was how it could be seen with relative ease on the standard internet. That feature allowed it to bypass censorship. I cannot say I am surprised that the funding was not re-upped since it seems like the modern web really loves censoring the crap out of things.

Edited: I also liked how it bypassed the traditional domain system.

JuniperMesos39 minutes ago
These are good qualities in general; but it's worth asking why this anti-censorship technology required funding from one organization (Protocol Labs) that could cut off that funding and now has done so. Being economically non-viable without grants is one way that anti-censorship technology is ineffective at its stated goal.
jackinloadupabout 2 hours ago
I hope this doesn't signal the decline of ipfs overall. I really would like to see an internet where content addressed routing is a thing.
Advertisement
ruinedabout 3 hours ago
has protocol labs itself made any kind of announcement? i don't see anything on the blog
chriswarboabout 2 hours ago
Just checked protocol labs site and... holy shit:

> Protocol Labs is an innovation network driving breakthroughs in computing to push humanity forward. PL connects more than 750 tech startups, funds, accelerators, foundations, open source projects, service providers, and other organizations.

What happened to them? Seems like they drank their own "Web3" Fla-Vor-Aid.

throwawayffffasabout 2 hours ago
Always found ipfs and the whole "web 3.0" company to be incredibly obtuse to work with especially compared to previous peer to peer networks like bit-torrent.

I could never shake the feeling there is an unnecessary layer of grift embedded in all the protocols.

tingletechabout 1 hour ago
I always thought https://named-data.net in this are was pretty interesting
mickael-kerjeanabout 1 hour ago
Kubo is absolutly amazing, is there a group of people interested in keeping kubo alive? If so I'd love to join that conversation
aftbitabout 1 hour ago
I tried to query a lot of resources (NFT images, many of which are/were hosted on IPFS) from IPFS myself using the official Go server, running on some pretty fast/wide hardware, for a good part of 2021 and 2022. It was a dumpster fire. Here are two specific problems that I remember, though I ran into several more. First, the UDP storm that it created somehow broke my network, where all of my switches gave up and just started sending all of its traffic to all of the nodes on the network. That could have been a "me" thing but it really made it hard to trust. I ended up having to give that server its own VLAN. Second, the caching was brain dead. By default, it would write every resource to the cache even if I was just using it to download them to a local directory, so it wrote everything twice. Even worse, when the cache was full, it would just drop the whole cache, which created huge spikes in IO util. I ended up patching the app to remove caching.

It felt like a really cool demo that never got cleaned up to work as a real production product.

Animats40 minutes ago
Ouch.

Remember Filecoin? The original concept was that you could buy perpetual storage with a one time payment. It was funded by a crypto asset which was a derivative of mass storage prices, or something like that. Lighthouse supposedly sold such a product.[1] They no longer do.[2]

[1] https://www.lighthouse.storage/blogs/Permanent%20Storage%20P...

[2] https://www.lighthouse.storage/pricing

jMylesabout 2 hours ago
I publish all of my music in ways that are pirate-friendly, which for the moment just means Bit Torrent and IPFS.

See: https://pickipedia.xyz/wiki/Cryptograss:Delivery-kid

If IPFS is starting to wane, does anyone else have a suggestion of a replacement about which I might start to educate my fans?

haunterabout 2 hours ago
See I thought if IPFS was picked up by the piracy scene (some bigger private trackers for example) then it probably would have been more successful. Alas I haven't seen it outside of libgen and even there I thought it was a backup option only.
TiredOfLife28 minutes ago
Hyphanet (nee Freenet)
scirobabout 1 hour ago
also still getting used in some libgen sci-hub mirrors
zeafoamrunabout 2 hours ago
I wasn't aware of the relationship between Shipyard and Protocol Labs but it looks like Protocol Labs spun out maintenance and development of a lot of core IPFS technology to a new company called Shipyard, with the idea of cordoning off what was a cost center to Protocol Labs, and the hope was that Shipyard would be able to find other sources of revenue beyond the services funding they got from Protocol Labs.

I'm personally quite disappointed because I just built an IPFS based system built on top of Kubo that I was hoping would take off. Now this throws future maintenance of Kubo into question.

sneakabout 2 hours ago
IPFS never worked right for many years. Great concept, poor implementation. Someone will one day build something that incorporates these ideas.
rvzabout 2 hours ago
Another shut down post which many of its users did not support the maintainers.

You are going to see a lot more shutdown posts around decentralized or federated technologies if you do not support those tools.

dgellowabout 2 hours ago
There are close to no users of IPFS
its-summertimeabout 2 hours ago
Protocol Labs owned significant parts of the infrastructure. Regardless of community support, PL leaving would always be damaging.
Machaabout 3 hours ago
All those NFT holders where the NFT resolved to a ipfs.io link in shambles
neoncontrailsabout 2 hours ago
I know you jest, but both the IPFS contributors I knew in college graduated to become web3 degens working on decentralized file storage projects. Specifically Walrus, which grew out of Meta's Libra project.
timcobbabout 3 hours ago
Hahaha thanks for this. It's ok, the asset is the block chain entry duh
0x457about 1 hour ago
The checksum of the asset is on the blockchain. the asset is somewhere else.
timcobbabout 1 hour ago
Hmm I thought the asset is the block chain entry because that's what you have the key to, that you can re-sell to someone else. It's like crypto, no?
bigbuppoabout 2 hours ago
All my apes gone.
timcobbabout 1 hour ago
Gone but not forgotten
yieldcrvabout 2 hours ago
all the NFTs I launched actually were fully onchain SVGs and CSS

tried to be the change I wanted to see

given where the concept actually found staying power (liquidity pools, instead of collectibles) it wholly needs a new name

“NFT” is distracting at this point, they should just called them 721-structs so people don’t get distracted by the fumbled poorly implemented art use case

jMylesabout 2 hours ago
Yeah, when we do NFT ticketing these days, we just say, "have your 1155 ready" with a link to explain what that means.

I still think it's pretty obvious that on sufficiently long time-scales that some variant of NFTs will be the winner for event tickets.

frollogastonabout 2 hours ago
Why not just use the IPFS hash?
Machaabout 2 hours ago
This sounds like a smart idea. That's probably why the NFT hype train didn't do it.
frollogastonabout 1 hour ago
Looks like at least some of the valuable ones did though. The json payload is on ipfs, then the image url is ipfs://. Example: https://bafybeihpjhkeuiq3k6nqa3fkgeigeri7iebtrsuyuey5y6vy36n... (they stored an ipfs hash only, this link is just a random viewer pointed at it)

Btw it's weirdly annoying to get the json payload for one of these

apiabout 2 hours ago
Finding out NFTs were just links, didn't even embed the asset, was such a moment for me... like either the people pushing this are complete fools or 100% conscious grifters who know it's total bullshit. I suspect it was a mix.

Insane.

I think a lot of the AI skepticism comes from the fact that the last major New Thing (tm) pushed by this industry was crypto. People are very, very burned by that.

That and how badly social media turned out, but that's a whole different discourse.

Ekaros13 minutes ago
Even more so when in most cases no one could explain any real type of ownership in terms of working in most existing legal frameworks.

What would I have owned exactly? What would have ownership entitled... All very reasonable question. Mostly entirely ignored or handwaved...

JuniperMesos11 minutes ago
An NFT doesn't have to be just a link; nothing in principle stops someone creating a NFT that stores the full bytes of some digital asset directly on the blockchain, just as nothing in principle stops someone from creating a NFT that doesn't do this (or equivalently, a NFT whose on-chain content is simply a text hyperlink to something). The Bitcoin Ordinals concept of Inscriptions (https://docs.ordinals.com/inscriptions.html), which is an attempt to build a NFT system for Bitcoin, does culturally encourage placing the bytes of a digital asset into the Bitcoin blockchain, and the tooling around it assumes this model; but again nothing prevents someone from creating an Inscription whose contents are simply a link to something else.

And of course there's no reason why a NFT has to be used to represent ownership of some kind of digital art - there are other uses for NFTs, such as modeling transferable network permissions or resources.

Ultimately NFTs are a just a specific application of blockchain technology, to represent some kind of resource on a blockchain which could in principle be digital art. If people care about ownership of NFTs representing digital art, that's a social fact about what kinds of art there is market demand for; and whether it matters that the bytes of the digital art are on a blockchain or linked from somewhere else (where they could get taken down or bitrot) is also a social fact.

I actually agree that treating NFTs that merely contain a link to some bytes elsewhere that worked at one point in time is a pretty dumb thing to care about, or have a market for (and the use cases for NFTs where the bytes are actually on-chain are, at best, fairly limited, although I wouldn't say completely nonexistent). And certainly the NFT market of 2021 or so, which had a lot of such NFTs, was driven by a weird social mania and people attempting to grift upon that social mania. This has never bothered me though, because I feel the same way about many markets for physical pieces of art; and ultimately it needs to be possible for people to create markets for things I personally think are dumb or at least don't care about.

grebcabout 1 hour ago
Crypto / AI, it’s the same people. Same grift for other people’s money in the form of equity.
Advertisement
Zxc369about 2 hours ago
Thanks, this is helpful