I understand part of the scalability concern being about the physical network capabilities ("Today's networking ecosystem evolved for the client-server model, what kind of problems could this create for switching to peer-to-peer model...") as opposed to the scalability of the IPFS protocol and node implementations.

I want to have IPFS services built up to the point that I can rely upon it so I can .. take the 100 or so of my peer group, and give them access to Content I Create.

I think I can have a machine up and running in my life that serves the principle nodes, and if a few of my other peers are also capable, we can build a scalable net among us that would serve the rest.

This is a very different scenario to mass-scale datacenter levels of delivery, and at a much more localised scale.

Among my peers, it'll scale just fine.

(So its mostly about the UI and presentation... I don't mind sending my friends a funky/cool URL. If that URL solves the IPNS->IPFS issue .. and if we also can get some pub/sub channels happening, to make the URL-swapping even more fluid .. wrapped up as a standard distro item .. )

His point was about scalability within centralized (logical) services, which people often confuse or understand them as a single point of failure or not scalable. But that's not true, as he pointed out there.