I’ve been using things like element with matrix protocol for exactly 3 years, I would like to know if matrix could be integrated with IPFS.
IPFS and the Matrix protocol solve different problems. IPFS mostly being decentralised peer-to-peer network for content addressed data while matrix is a federated communication protocol.
It’s hard to answer your question without understanding what you intend to achieve by integrating matrix with IPFS. Perhaps you could share more information on what you’re trying to do?
@danieln thank you very much for the feedback
@danieln I asked about the matrix as I wanted an integrated communication protocol with IPFS.
- I think it’s essential to have a communication protocol in a hypertext protocol. In my opinion ipfs is making web3 very common, easy to understand - So I really like the ipfs protocol.
- However, I feel the need to use a communication protocol as a matrix.
- IPFS looks like a “browser”, that is, it joins several protocols/networking type: “cdn”, “blockchain”, “p2p”, “name service” - you can search for certain content as “built-in search engine” as "cdn-p2p-blockchain " - So I’m speaking generally
- My view of web3 is ipfs with an integrated communication protocol like matrix because matrix allows different services - the matrix protocol calls these “bridges”.
- This would allow ipfs or “web3” to be better known, popular like Google Chrome, Opera, Vivaldi, Firefox - something that people install and use the service.
- I would like IPFS to be my “operating system” - integrate everything I need like “matrix”, “stmp/imap/pop3” etc.
- The main advantage of my argument of integrating protocols within ipfs is to make ipfs popular and common for everyday people. People who don’t know a lot of technology and use smartphones and laptops - people who work in areas that aren’t like as ti.
- I believe that the future of web3 or ipfs may be found. I don’t predict the future, but I try to improve things in the present. What the community is doing for the web with ipfs is amazing and everything I said can be wrong.
- My view of current technology is partial - not complete, but seeing things like hybrid blockchains with email seems like a good thing initially in some specific use case. As I see ipfs integrated with the matrix protocol.
- The success of the web in my view and I can be wrong about that view - it would be that the success of the web was only success because the web integrated different protocols, networks and types of service/product - what I call an ecosystem. Or better - the success of the web was only successful, because of a rich ecosystem: protocols and network types, services/products of companies, etc. I believe that web 3 is trying to do this, today it is possible things like hybrid blockchains for email, cdn-p2p-blockchain like in the case of ipfs etc.
- Is it possible to integrate the e-mail(protocols: imap, pop3, smtp) within the IPFS protocol?
- RFCs and Pre-RFCs - #2 by naren62905
- Email over blockchain: The best bad idea I’ve heard this year | TechRadar
- 🔥 5 Reasons Why Web 3.0 will Fail? | by Vitalii Shevchuk | ITNEXT
@danieln Hi! How are you?
Your crypto shillings are awful. Integrating Matrix and IPFS sounds like combining your gaming laptop and fridges. I suggest you read less buzzword loaded half-baked articles. Also, integrating email and blockchain makes absolutely no sense.
Not within, but actually using IPFS. [WIP] MSC2706: IPFS as a media repository for Matrix by turt2live · Pull Request #2706 · matrix-org/matrix-spec-proposals · GitHub
hi all! please, can someone close this topic?
Closing at topic author’s request.