>>12616560 (pb)

Agree on your first points, but totally disagree with the last one.

These kind of things need to be build over other protocols, it took 20y+ to have support for IPv6, the telecom world isn't going to drop anything under the lv4 of the osi model and or buy new hardware to support stuff that may or may not be used.

You can't 'softwarize' shit that goes at the speed an internet backbone (few tens/hundreds of gigabits per seconds per links) especially with cpu going at a few ghz, this stuff needs asics and simple protocols, that's why we have stuff like ethernet, tcp udp and ip (first time I've seen an osi model who put lv3 in software btw). Decentralization via p2p and end to end encryption is a good thing and is already hard enough to get going with normies despise technicals solutions existing for decades (most successful application being probably dht for torrents). Just looked at the ipfs website and it don't seems to being anything new, i2p or gnunet seems to be better and older solution to that problem. I can see what they are trying to do with filecoin, if stuff goes p2p you need to give people a reason to share part of their ressources, it's not going to be decentralized a long time if everybody hit and run, worse it will indirectly centralize content even more by making stuff often accessed go fast and stuff less used really slow or even without source. A blockchain system where you need to mine seems stupid and a waste of ressources, a ratio system and a good algorithm to disperse data would probably be better thanks to optic fiber becoming mainstream.

Lower parts of the osi models are already automated, what are arp, bgp, ospf and many others.