Add to Chrome
Add to Edge
Add to Firefox
Add to Opera
Add to Brave
Add to SafariWhen comparing Alexandria.io vs Uncensorable Wiki, the Slant community recommends Alexandria.io for most people. In the question“What are the most important IPFS projects?” Alexandria.io is ranked 1st while Uncensorable Wiki is ranked 2nd. The most important reason people chose Alexandria.io is:
Because of IPFS' decentralized system, no one company is in control of the content you're served. Instead, it's up to the users to serve that content. This means that that single company can't censor or delete content that disagrees with its views, leading to less censorship and a more free content marketplace.
Question Ranking
Pros
Pro Less censorship
Because of IPFS' decentralized system, no one company is in control of the content you're served. Instead, it's up to the users to serve that content. This means that that single company can't censor or delete content that disagrees with its views, leading to less censorship and a more free content marketplace.
Pro Creators have more control over their content
Under Alexandria, creators would be their own publishers. This means they can set their prices as they wish, make what they want, and aren't shackled by contracts or companies.
Pro Content creators can interact more directly with their consumers
Alexandria's decentralized system allows content creators to have direct control over the monetization and spread of their content, allowing them a closer relationship with the consumer.
Pro Truly difficult to censor
Because the IPFS system is decentralized, node based, and cryptographically hashed, you don't need to be connected to, or get your information from, a single server. As long as you're connected to the IPFS network, you can pull data from any other node. This means that even if someone scrubs Wikipedia of all references to bread, as long as one person adds the bread Wiki page to their node, you'll have access to it.
Pro Safer and more secure than regular Wikipedia
Due to the decentralized, peer-to-peer nature of IPFS, the Uncensorable Wiki is far more secure and harder to attack than the regular client-to-server Wikipedia is. In fact, the trigger was finally pulled on the creation of the Wiki in response to the Turkish government blocking Wikipedia in their country (See, "What Triggered This Announcement" here).
Cons
Con Not yet widely adopted, so your consumerbase may be small
While Alexandria is an exciting prospect, it is yet to be widely adopted. For the short term, you shouldn't expect to strike it rich here.
Con Un-editable
Unfortunately, so far you can't edit the Uncensorable Wiki. This is due to technical complications within the IPFS system, and these issues are currently being worked on.
Con Only three languages available
Only English, Kurdish, and Turkish are so far available on IPFS.
Con Minimalistic UI leads to some odd formatting
The UI for the Uncensorable Wiki is simplified from the normal version of Wikipedia, which is really saying something. For one, it's missing Wikipedia's image viewer. This means you won't be able to expand images, or even interact with them to begin with. Long strings of images are also sometimes organized in-line, meaning they'll take up a lot more vertical space than they would in a grid (example). It is also missing some features like the sidebar and the Contents box at the beginning of every article.
