OtterBrowser/otter-browser

IPFS in Upcoming features

GreenLunar opened this issue · 5 comments

GreenLunar commented

Please add IPFS to the Upcoming features list

Emdek commented

@GreenLunar, would it be enough to use that HTTP based "viewer"?
Using a proper client seems like too much effort for such a niche use case.

GreenLunar commented

I think not. though...

  1. It's gonna be easier and also usable with any web (http) browser.
  2. User can run his/her own http based proxy/intermediator/viewer locally and remotely

Yet, by having no dependency on the centralized DNS System (and its fees), it's just gonna be a beautiful web browser with a beautiful web. An unstoppable (ipfs supporting) browser and an unstoppable (ipfs based) web.

So beautiful, like BitTorrent.
BitTorrent still continues and it's one of plenty communication means that Venture Capital and "Law" firms hate so much.
Speaking of which, just yesterday someone closed a ticket of bittorrent which had ipfs and pulse mentioned isohuntto/openbay#22 and I don't believe in coincidence.

Long live DHT (:

Emdek commented

@GreenLunar, IPFS is not the answer, ArWeave is (in theory) way better.
Also, that makes sense only for completely static content, since updating the "index" will change the URL…

GreenLunar commented

Thank you for sharing ArWeave ^^

What do you think of these IPFS and DWeb instances?
I think these are constantly subjected to change. Maybe they use iframe to preserve the address.

I'm not yet familiar with the technicalities of IPFS.
I've read of plans to integrate blockchain system as a redirector (or DNS) for IPFS.

I still think IPFS support is an important feature for Otter.

I suggest to add to the list ArWeave, DWeb and IPFS.
Perhaps an enthusiastic developer will read it and join to Otter :)

Emdek commented

@GreenLunar, no idea, I'm not that familiar with IPFS.
For retrieving files I would go for this "viewer":
https://ipfs.io/ipfs/QmTkzDwWqPbnAh5YiV5VwcTLnGdwSNsNTn2aDxdXBFca7D/example

I'm not against adding support for these, but it might be hard to come up with a way that would make it easy to create modules that support additional protocols and work with QtWebKit and QtWebEngine.
Perhaps something returning instances of QNetworkReply…