Which has a rather lengthy section explaining why it's currently a failed experiment: https://github.com/internetarchive/dweb-archive/blob/master/...

(this doc is 5-6 years old though, and I'm not sure what may have changed since then)

In my own (toy-scale) IPFS experiments a couple years ago it has been rather usable, but also the software has been utterly insane for operators and users, and if I were IA I would only consider it if I budgeted for a from-scratch rewrite (of the stuff in use). Nearly uncontrollable and unintrospectable and high resource use for no apparent reason.

IPFS has shown that the protocol is fundamentally broken at the level of growth they want to achieve and it is already extremely slow as it is. It often takes several minutes to locate a single file.

Several minutes sounds more than fine for this purpose ?

Especially if it's about having an Internet Archive backup.

I think the point is that it's already slow at the current amount of data, let alone when you stuff dozens more PB into it

The beauty is that IA could offer their own distribution of IPFS that uses their own DHT for example, and they could allow only public read access to it. This would solve the slow part of finding a file, for IA specifically. Then the actual transfers tend to be pretty quick with IPFS.

What's the point of using IPFS then? Others can still spread the file elsewhere and verify it's the correct one, by using the exact same ID of the file, although on two different networks. The beauty of content-addressing I guess.

That isn’t solving the problem, it’s just giving them more of it to work on. IA has enough material that I’d be surprised if they didn’t hit IPFS’s design limits on their own, and they’d likely need to change the design in ways which would be hard to get upstream.

Right, what I'm saying is that now we need to get the rest of the web (or at least the parts we want to keep) on board.