So the big question that first pops up to my mind is when the current internet standard protocol makes the web so centralised, inefficient and expensive(large files cannot be transferred and real-time media streaming is a bit difficult) what are the alternatives? Like if I am an advocate of the whole idea of decentralisation through Web3 and blockchain then what solution could there be for a sort of decentralised storage system where opportunity is not limited by a centralised system?
This led me down a rabbit hole to find some possible alternatives such as IPFS(Inter Planetary File System), storj and the maidSafe network(SAFE network) which is not up yet and am actively researching it.
So back to IPFS, what actual features or benefits does it have you may ask…?
Well the IPFS boasts a versioned file system, is a peer-to-peer model thus no single point of failure, and uses content addressing and multihashing. To be more clear IPFS is a decentralised general-purpose file system that uses a distributed hash table (DHT) and Merkle DAG to route and transfer content-addressed data, not a storage or cloud service provider.
There are quite a few solutions to a different suite of protocols but through my research, all of them seem to have one similarity which is that they used content-based addressing.
In exploring Internet decentralization, the concept of content-based addressing is quite compelling. Picture asking me to fetch coffee beans from your kitchen, which I've never visited before. In a traditional IP-based scenario (location-based addressing), I'd try to retrieve the beans from the precise location you instructed, like the first jar on the second shelf. If the coffee beans aren't there, I'd return empty-handed, unable to fulfil your request and get the beans back.
On the other hand, content-based addressing, akin to what IPFS uses, behaves differently. No matter where in the kitchen you last left the coffee beans, I'd search for and retrieve the actual 'content' - the coffee beans themselves. This content-driven approach, relying on unique identifiers (hashes) for specific content, provides robust data integrity and reduces redundancy in the system. Any change in the content changes its hash, which makes data tampering evident and ensures you always get the coffee beans you asked for, not something else.
However, like all systems, IPFS has its own set of challenges. The issues range from potential unreliability with private data (the content is accessible to anyone with hash access), limited security for verifiable content, and complexity in setting up a local node. Additionally, the system is not very beginner-friendly, consumes larger bandwidth, and lacks economic incentives for setting up a local node for the network.
Given these challenges, you might wonder why someone would still choose to use IPFS. It's essential to remember that every technology has its pros and cons, and the choice often depends on specific needs and contexts. For instance, despite its limitations, IPFS shines in its decentralized nature and freedom from a single point of control.
Indeed, the value IPFS provided to me as an end-user turned out to be exceptional. The ease with which I could upload my website through Fleek was remarkable. This process was as simple as pointing it to my React Native GitHub repo. Within the next minute or so, it was deployed either under my own custom ENS domain or one would be provided for me. This streamlined approach is just one example of the many solutions built on IPFS. Others include notable projects such as Fleek, Audius, the Brave browser, the Opera browser, and more, all demonstrating the diverse applications and expansive potential of the IPFS ecosystem.
I have tried to skip all technical jargon for now but would definitely love to write a more technical piece focusing on either core concepts or topics in the future and would love any sort of feedback if you made it this far!
References:
Projects featured on the IPFS-ecosystem
An interesting read regarding the average website lifespan - link