[evv]

I get freaked out when I consider the future of archive.is. Thanks to the nature of the web today, it is incredibly fragile.

As the co-creator of a censorship-resistant publishing platform, I really wish we would migrate to a peer-to-peer technology. We could develop network effects on a decentralized platform with a cryptographically-provable network of trust. Most people don't realize it is possible to handle media distribution in a robust way.

I'm not just trying to shill my solution! I wish there were more competitors using these techniques to try and save the web.

[eXpl0it3r]

Except a lot of people wouldn't participate in a peer-to-peer network for fear of legal repercussions.

[evv]

Utilizing p2p tech is not illegal. It is illegal to redistribute copyrighted content without authorization- and we are working to build this into the protocol so that peers will respect copyright by default. People can redistribute at their own risk. I'll be the first to admit that this is complicated, and we have a long way to go in this regard.

Plus, the vast majority of people will just use the web frontend, with a peer on the server. Most peers can be hosted by content creators and tech-savvy friends+family.

[tremon]

Almost every machine in the world participates in at least one peer-to-peer network: Windows Update. There was a time when the Steam client also used bittorrent technology, not sure if they still do.

[eXpl0it3r]

Obviously P2P gets used in various things, my point was just, that (most) people likely won't willingly join P2P networks to fight "censorship" or help archive things with questionable content or tainted with potential copyright infringements.