What "argument"? I said that filesharing/storage-incentivising projects can build on whatever they like; and that they have been doing, for decades.

My "argument" is that the IPFS project/protocol is not such a project. It is a network protocol (or suite thereof; for peer discovery, data transfer, hash representations, etc.).

> the fact of the matter is that a lot of web3 content is built on IPFS and not on all those other technologies

So what? Hopefully those projects chose to use IPFS due to its technical features, its stated goals, etc. How's that working out for them?

Note that, in particular, those technical features and stated goals do not include getting other people to host your shit. If some "web3" projects have decided to build their crypto bullshit on top of such a fundamental misunderstanding, then that's hilarious! More realistically, I'm guessing they know full-well that's not how any of this works; and are just keeping the illusion going until their inevitable rug-pull.

Either way, that's not IPFS's problem (which, again, is a (suite of) network protocols).