What Sets Us Apart: Filecoin’s Proof System
filecoin.io
filecoin.io
The main argument that I hear is that somehow Filecoin will be cheaper than centralized competitors. However, services such as Backblaze are already quite efficient. Why exactly would costs be cheaper and why can't Backblaze do those same things and overtake Filecoin?
I have the same question.
In contrast, GUN, has 20M+ downloads/month from known sources: Internet Archive, HackerNoon, etc. (https://github.com/amark/gun see jsdelivr download stats).
Could you expand further what didn't work? We have some pretty heavy load in-production systems running. Definitely some rough edges still, so I'd like to hear what problems you had, so I can focus on fixing them in the future.
Thanks again.
try creating a youtube video of getting it to work from scratch, reading and writing data and i think you will see the problems. Or maybe ask a friend that is less familiar than yourself to try it, the problems seemed rather obvious as it just didn't work for a basic use case.
If you ever have time, it'd be great to snag whatever code or data you had, to create a replicable test case for us to make a fix against. Sorry about the wasted time you experienced, I hate that.
Surveillance capitalism and privatized censorship are byproducts of data centralization.
Cryptocurrency has a political aspect. Why view it only through a lens of technical complexity?
And there's the added likelihood that people providing hdd space on filecoin are not going to even measure the impact of extra power consumption, they're just going to notice the revenue. (Not that this is a good thing, if someone was losing money, they should know)
Cloud storage is a commodity race to the bottom. Cloud providers want you to use their storage systems because it means that you’ll also use their more profitable associated services in order to save money on egress. Accumulate enough data, and you’re locked in because of the high cost to migrate. Because IO dominates so many workloads, you already get a bunch of bytes for cheap when you are running a cloud storage provider. It’s already dirt cheap and potentially a loss leader (I suspect).
So, I have a hard time seeing how “spare free resources” are going to be competitive when you factor in the network, capital costs, power, etc. Then there’s some unknown legal risk that you are e.g. accepting money to distribute child porn to people, just like there’s a legal risk associated with running a Tor node (not commenting on whether this is just or not).
Just my opinion. Not speaking on behalf of anyone here.
Decentralized storage is going to replace the cloud. We have a working platform today with thousands (and growing) of users which is cheaper, faster, and more reliable than the centralized alternative.
One of the major challenges of the cloud today is deplatforming and loss of ownership, two things that are squarely handled by decentralization. It opens the door to innovation and allows builders a lot more freedom in how they approach solving modern problems.
Decentralization also ends up being a huge element in cost reduction. Our platform uses dozens of hosts at one to store and serve data, which means any given host only needs about 95% uptime. The network is completely open and anyone with good infra can join at any time, making revenue, and competing, which drives prices down. We're currently at 1/10th of Amazon.
Decentralization also makes it possible to build apps that don't shut down. Users today have to worry about the health of a parent company when choosing a product, with many people having been displayed by a "Google RSS Reader is shutting down" message. That problem disappears with decentralized infra.
It may take some time for the rest of the world to catch on, but decentralization is just a better way to build apps.
>> We're currently at 1/10th of Amazon.
Curious, where is the "1/10th of Amazon" coming from?
Maybe this could work as an alternative to glacier. But even then, I doubt it. I'd take Amazon with an SLA any day of the week.
I gave a presentation at Berkeley a few years back, right before Bram Cohen (BitTorrent) presented his Chia proof, Proofs of Space and Time (before IPFS ripped the name from Bram).
https://www.facebook.com/BlockchainatBerkeley/videos/2006069...
Inversely, people could be storing their files for 10x cheaper than on AWS.
The difference between sealing and an actual proof of work based network here is that once you've sealed a sector, you don't have to keep computing anything that expensive. If you seal 1TB and thats 1% of the network, you should win 1% of the blocks (ignoring network growth) without further sealing work required. I tend to think about it like a (calculus) derivative of PoW.
So then, dumb question. Can I delete the file, keep the "seal", and keep winning 1% of the blocks?
If yes, then that seems bad for the system.
If not (hopefully), I'd like to also understand what's the ongoing compute cost of using the seal plus file together.
I understood from the article that sealing is something you do if you are publishing a mirror of a file. Is that right?
Feel free to get bored of this conversation and link me to a paper or something. :) I'm grateful for the reply you gave above already.
The ongoing compute cost for these PoSts are quite small, I think the current numbers (obviously subject to change) are that you have to do one PoSt per day, which is a single 100M constraint zkSNARK proof, which should take about 10 minutes of machine-with-decent-GPU time to compute.
- Sealing: Done once. 3-4h compute on one CPU initially, plus 2-3 hours on a few CPUs.
- Proof of space time: 10 minutes of GPU time per day.
What are the latency expectations within the system when my node is asked for a Proof of SpaceTime? Is it feasible to keep the sealing data, delete the file itself, then spend ~5 minutes downloading the 32GB on my 1 gigabit/sec home Internet connection when someone asks me to do the Proof of SpaceTime, and return the Proof of SpaceTime in 15 minutes (5 min to download, 10 min to compute)?
Thanks again for engaging with me here! It seems the compute time itself isn't a constant enormous cost necessarily.
Of course :)
> What are the latency expectations within the system when my node is asked for a Proof of SpaceTime?
We want them to be as low as possible, but the practicality of getting messages included into a blockchain, and the high cost of running snarks means its definitely on the order of minutes, realistically in the tens of minutes.
A few things to note, the Proof of SpaceTime happens over all of your sectors, not just one. So that ten minutes of GPU time per day is amortized across all of the data you are storing.
> Is it feasible to keep the sealing data, delete the file itself...
Yes, thats feasible if the file you are downloading is already sealed (note: sealing generates a piece of data unique to you, so wherever else that thing is stored is effectively your owned storage). This isnt really different than you having your data stored on a NAS box somewhere. What you cannot do is download the original unsealed data and hope to respond to the challenge in time, as that would require rerunning the expensive sealing process.
As an example, if my ec2 prices went up in line with Amazon stock, I would be paying 5x the cost compared to z few years ago - which means I would have left to digital ocean, and AWS would lack customers. Lagged hype would falsely bolster the stock price.
It's why this decentralized bullshit doesn't work - in the end the greed of it's founders/majority holders destroy it.
Also if the price externally is changing, you could just... reduce the amount of FIL you pay per GB.
So if in t=0, the price of FIL is $1, and I choose to pay 1 FIL for 1 GB, and in t=1 the price of FIL goes to $2, I could just pay 0.5 FIL. Sounds like a miner (whose cost basis denominated in fiat) would be happy to accept either deal if its net profitable.
"Check out, for example, mutual credit systems like Sardex, where small businesses get together to issue money as credit to each other. Everyone starts from zero in the system, and then goes into and out of short-term debt to one another by either receiving goods and services — which creates a future obligation owed — or by being prepared to offer goods and services to people on the system, which earns you positive claims on others—otherwise known as money." [2]
[1] https://medium.com/holochain/holochain-reinventing-applicati...
[2] https://howwegettonext.com/the-future-of-money-depends-on-bu...