I’m sorry what? Internet is already decentralized by definition. There is no one entity that controls the entire thing.
Not literally the entire internet, just ridiculously large swaths of it. Such as Tier 1 ISP networks.
Also, cloud data hosting providers are a problem, Amazon Web Services for instance. Which hosts an immense amount of the internet compared to any other single source.
The idea is that, if any one company, say Amazon, wanted to remove access to data, say NASA’s public facing website, they could just click a button. And poof, it’d be gone. If AT&T wanted to cut off your internet, chances are they could, cut off your access to most of it anyways. The idea behind IPFS is that no 1 place hosts anything, everything is hosted by multiple computers in multiple locations, so you can access NASA’s website even if the original server goes offline. Obviously IPFS doesn’t do much to protect against the cables being tampered with, but other projects like GoTenna work on that.
1 Like
I don’t think they imply one entity controls the entire thing (yet ? ). It reads “increasing consolidation” and “threat” which means it’s ongoing (and it is, see CyberVenus answer). So, the 2 drawings picture 2 simplified versions of what the Web could look like. IPFS wants the version on the right. I personally don’t think it’s misleading.
The only misleading part would be the last sentence, which should unfortunately reads “IPFS […] delivers technology which should/will/is make(ing) that vision a reality.” Can’t wait :P.