Ah, OK, thank you. So one would need a static IP as a minimum to run a stable server, much like Apache and unlike IPFS. This also means that most people will not be able to run a server as most people connect via dynamic IP.
This is problematic because it means mass adoption will take place in the context of most users paying for or otherwise relying on service providers, those who can provide a static IP or URL.
I know there used to be services, and probably still are, that could take your dynamic IP and serve it up via a static IP, but that’s no different, really, than just buying a static IP either from your ISP or a provider, and most people aren’t going to do that.
So this seems to be a problem. It means people don’t really have control if they must depend on another service, a server with a static IP or URL, to share their stuff. But, but, it is a step closer to independence than the current model.
Regardless, thank you for the clarification.