It's the fundamental lie of IPFS. IPFS people will jump in and say that it's not a lie, what they're actually saying is yadda yadda, but then they turn around and say exactly that five minutes later. It's the motte-and-bailey ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Motte-and-bailey_fallacy ) of IPFS.
In a world of finite storage, nobody's going to keep up a copy of everything. Nobody will have a copy of most things. Even if IPFS worked acceptably, even if it worked as very narrowly promised, plenty of stuff would fall off the web. At best, we'd see somewhat fewer temporary disruptions of very currently popular content.
Yeah in the article there is an example of a video that was downloaded multiple times. That is so inefficient because "HTTP".
Solution for it becoming more efficient is that someone else should host it for you ideally for free.
It is just exercise in throwing big numbers and utter ignorance to impress people but downloaded megabytes are not magically going away.
Just like torrents - no one wants to seed or pay hosting costs everyone wants to download. There is no protocol that is going to fix that. Why is everyone mining BTC like crazy, because they get money for that
In a world of finite storage, nobody's going to keep up a copy of everything. Nobody will have a copy of most things. Even if IPFS worked acceptably, even if it worked as very narrowly promised, plenty of stuff would fall off the web. At best, we'd see somewhat fewer temporary disruptions of very currently popular content.