...then IPFS would just get even slower and use even more resources to manage the index and find content as I am pretty sure the DHT they are using doesn't scale the way you seem to think it does.
log(size of the network) still means it gets slower as it gets larger without any aforementioned speed advantages for all but the IPFS Google popularity equivalent class content.
That doesn't matter, as it clearly grows faster than constant (as in, O(1)), which means that as the system gets larger it will take more time to do queries and maintain the index (which is ridiculously expensive on IPFS), not less (which was the claim we are contending is wrong... a claim which would still be wrong even if the system somehow were magically constant); and any supposed advantages in "caching" don't fix this (except maybe for extremely popular files: at best, ones more popular than the median file, though my intuition tells me it is going to be some inverse log worse than that, and I also suspect it might be the mean file instead of the median) as one is going to expect the number of unique files stored in the system as well as the number of queries performed to scale with the number of people using the system.
