Re:Filecoin Foundation Successfully Deploys IPFS in Space
by jauntywundrkind on Tuesday January 16, 2024 @11:36AM
(#39015252)
You're asking about why run this service in space, but this service is a reliable scalable data store. Ask instead what kinds of data would you want in space, and why?
The throughput probably won't be great, but mainly if we assume 1:1 not broadcast connections! There will be roving access, not continual, to a given satellite - a fact until there are thousands of other satellites also serving ipfs. Costs will be high.
But still, there are wins. So far, satellite reliability is fairly high; there haven't been natural or human-made disasters afflicting many satellites. In some conditions the roving nature of the satellite could be a boon; you can get information out to a lot of people.
Wikipedia, news, important events... those would all benefit from guaranteed-reoccuring-availability model, perhaps. This would be an interesting tamper-resistant way to store something like votes, if it could be vetted. If there's satellite to satellite communications, the ability to have an expanding archive of crucial orbital information is useful; the swarm can grow & update vital behavior with ipfs in interesting ways.
Rather than assess just on whether this will make a good ipfs node as ipfs is typically used (high bandwidth, high storage nodes), I think it's worth considering this on the merits of what this technology offers that is distinct. Pulling out a single ruler to measure everything isn't always the best and only way to judge; indeed I think we miss a lot when we apply only our current set of expectations to new ideas & encounters. I'd encourage a more liberal consideration. Although I agree, I'm not sure either what the killer use is, I want to see thinking that pioneers what could work, that explored what values are on offer, even if it's not the same old values as the incumbent (fiber optics on the ground).
The throughput probably won't be great, but mainly if we assume 1:1 not broadcast connections! There will be roving access, not continual, to a given satellite - a fact until there are thousands of other satellites also serving ipfs. Costs will be high.
But still, there are wins. So far, satellite reliability is fairly high; there haven't been natural or human-made disasters afflicting many satellites. In some conditions the roving nature of the satellite could be a boon; you can get information out to a lot of people.
Wikipedia, news, important events... those would all benefit from guaranteed-reoccuring-availability model, perhaps. This would be an interesting tamper-resistant way to store something like votes, if it could be vetted. If there's satellite to satellite communications, the ability to have an expanding archive of crucial orbital information is useful; the swarm can grow & update vital behavior with ipfs in interesting ways.
Rather than assess just on whether this will make a good ipfs node as ipfs is typically used (high bandwidth, high storage nodes), I think it's worth considering this on the merits of what this technology offers that is distinct. Pulling out a single ruler to measure everything isn't always the best and only way to judge; indeed I think we miss a lot when we apply only our current set of expectations to new ideas & encounters. I'd encourage a more liberal consideration. Although I agree, I'm not sure either what the killer use is, I want to see thinking that pioneers what could work, that explored what values are on offer, even if it's not the same old values as the incumbent (fiber optics on the ground).