I'm not sure that this will actually solve the problem. This seems more like a facade for a move they wanted to do anyways.
My guess is the model is let the Github mirror repo be hit by bots and just do the dev work on the Radicle node.
- [0] https://hardenedbsd.org/article/shawn-webb/2024-09-23/harden...
Not even a facade really. They say this further down in the thread:
> Given our previously communicated desire to migrate to #Radicle, this is a good motivating factor for moving in that direction.
Every user has their own node, and everyone's node talks to several seed nodes. Even if the official HardenedBSD seed is down, there's still going to be another node to sync with.
IPFS in theory has a similar model, but in practice I've mostly found that if the original seeder goes away, at least part of a dataset becomes inaccessible.
If anything is good for the bittorrent model, it's git/source control. Movies and images get moved to different drives or deleted, movies become far less worthy of keeping after being watched, and images may have never been useful to the person mirroring them anyway; just a favor they were doing for a site they like. Source code sits, and source code continues to be used. If I understand correctly, Radicle works as your local git server, too.
The question is whether people will dedicate a little bit of bandwidth to seeding, but I don't think it's a serious question. It's a cheap and easy thing to do if you want to help FOSS, and it's obviously a good and a nice thing to do. It's not like you're seeding stuff that you don't know what it is, or why it is useful.
And, again, they can keep a seed up indefinitely. But they don't need to have either great uptime or great bandwidth.