ipfs

Farcaster

Cohost /gmfarcaster livestream Farcaster news and culture show🎙️💬 Founder Tenger Ways, bringing joy into work with DevOps practices 🤗 mom x 3 💗

1) IPFS can be slow and unreliable
2) The network is less self sufficient because casts now depend on IPFS
3) Embeds rot over time if data is not pinned or preserved
4) Clients need to build custom UI for every possible extended cast type
5) Competing standards for different data types may fight each other

Love you horsefacts, but this is one of the most tired arguments against IPFS. If I run an HTTP server on my computer and expose the port to the world, anyone making requests to it would say it's slow and unreliable. That's why people don't do that when they need speed and reliability.

Writer. Head of Product @ Stablecore. Working on simple web hosting https://orbiter.host \ https://polluterofminds.com

Doesn't IPFS [nodes] (unless pinned) down score/remove files that aren't accessed often? 

If true:
Comparing with HTTP: direct access to the server adds reliability, while IPFS if I ask for a file, the network decides whether I'll get it or not depends if someone has it.

Pinning makes the purpose of the network redundant too. Unless I'm not up-to-date with any upgrades, pinning services are centralized?

Pinning services are centralized like Farcaster hubs are centralized. Both are decentralized protocols that have centralized providers running them. Source: Pinata runs both

Everyone is from somewhere. Cofounder and CEO of Pinata. https://www.pinata.cloud/

I assure you Farcaster without large centralized hub providers is also bad. Again, my company runs a Farcaster hub and IPFS nodes. We are intimately familiar with the dynamics of both.

I'm not sure if you can compare those two like that. IPFS, without pinning services is just bad service (unless things have changed for the better).