Slashdot Mirror

Man, that was the least confusing part of your post. At that point I was still wondering how many Slashdotters own colleges.

After understanding what you wrote, though, it is indeed a solid easy strategy. You don't even need to have drives in the systems of your colleagues or family. Just place a NAS in their network and put BTSync or Syncthing (FKAPulseFKASyncthing) on it. With BTSync there even is a hidden method to create an encrypted key so that the data on the 'untrusted' nodes is only there in encrypted form: http://forum.bittorrent.com/to...
Syncthing is actively considering adding this feature: https://github.com/syncthing/s...

I haven't tested the BTSync encryption yet and am not aware of how secure it is, especially considering that BTSync is closed source, but this approach seems to me to be the future of small scale offsite redundancy (and of ad hoc file sharing in general).

I used to be a big fan of BtSync, but lately the whole project just started to seem a bit too shifty for my taste.

Despite numerous promises, they never published a detailed description of the protocol. It's still unclear how secure a lot of the mechanisms really are.
For instance, how is the search for another share accomplished? Does it expose your hash to others? Are files encrypted in transmission? What information do relays have access to? Who is acting as a relay? Can I unknowingly be acting as a relay just by running the software (Skype used to do this)?

They've also published an API to interact with their software, but that API requires that you accept a EULA just to get an access key. A lot of people were asking in the forums why they would need a key if the software is decentralized and supposedly doesn't use their servers at all (typically such keys are used to limit damage to the service from bad apps).
The answer given was so they could "block abusive clients". When pressed for what they considered "abusive", or why they think they have a right to tell me how to use software running on my hardware in my network, they replied with silence. http://forum.bittorrent.com/to...

In all BtSync continues to be a very useful piece of software, but I just can't trust the company behind it. Unfortunately this means that I can't use it to sync personal files, which drops its usability by at least half.
I understand that there are quite a few open source projects which sprang up, but as far as I've seen none of them even approach BtSync's usability.

No, they literally copied over the LAN and are intentionally being vague to throw people off that fact. The original Sync blog post did not use Sync across the Internet but the Venturebeat author did disclose sharing across the Internet and stated:

"The transfer process was much longer. Times were in the double digit minutes, and largely depended on what connections my friends had."

In other words, in real-world scenario using the Internet, Bittorrent's Sync was not any faster than the times posted for the other services.

This is a terrible hack job by Bittorrent to spread lies and a horrible job by Venture beat repeating them with no critical thought.

Original Sync Blog post - http://blog.bittorrent.com/201...

a.) Yes, we do because the blog post says as such.
b.) True, and that is why they intentionally nerfed the Dropbox test by creating a new random file to not only avoid "deduplication" as they say, but the LAN Sync being available as well (which they do not admit).

RTFA:
http://blog.bittorrent.com/201...

Maybe because 3-4 people actually read the Sync blog post where it states, and I quote:

"Our tests were conducted over local LAN – on the same switch – in order to rule out available bandwidth as a limiting factor. It’s important here to note that Dropbox, Google Drive and Microsoft OneDrive all rate-limit uploads and do not fully utilize the 1 Gbps bandwidth available (in regards to the office Internet connection, not the LAN switched). We’re confident that a slower Internet connection would yield similar results."

In other words, people agreed with me because they knew what I said to be true.

Not only did they give themselves the preferential treatment of same LAN, they also intentionally adjusted their tests to discount an advantage of a competitor. Again, quoted verbatum from the blog post:

"Dropbox has a deduplication scheme in place – what this meant for our tests is that even though we deleted the video file from our Dropbox folder, traces of it still remained and Dropbox got ~50% faster at transferring the same video file each subsequent time we uploaded it. To correct for this, we needed a new file that wasn’t bit-for-bit identical to the video file we previously transferred. "

Why don't you RTFA.

http://blog.bittorrent.com/201...

There is of course a fairly high bar for deciding whether something is intended to be used to break the law or not. Often (though not always), emphasizing legal uses in the branding and advertising of an item is sufficient to ensure the bar isn't reached. There is a large amount of legal content available as torrents, and these are used in advertising (e.g.).

Also, the existence of grey areas doesn't invalidate the general principle. RANDOM PROFANE OUTBURST!

It's been renamed to Bleep and is in closed pre-alpha testing:
http://blog.bittorrent.com

Personally, I'm waiting for a good decentralized solution.

Hopefully Bittorent Chat will fit that.

We have that; it's called XMPP. ... open standards ...

XMPP is almost as centralized as Twitter. You still communicate through a server that can be shut down. The only difference is that, if you lose access to one server, you can switch to another server, or start your own if you have enough money. (The other difference is that XMPP is not a broadcast medium.)

A proper uncensorable platform would be peer-to-peer. That's where IPv4's lack of true end-to-end connectivity has irritated me for years. There are attempts to work around this problem using, for example, BitTorrent's distributed hash table protocol or Bitcoin's blockchain or both or Onion routing. The problem is that there is no money in a truly peer-to-peer communications system, so development has always been slower than centralized systems.

and some kind of automated easy to set up and disable file updating utility (like dropbox without the third party server)

BT Sync? http://www.bittorrent.com/sync

I'm curious, or maybe just ignorant, why the open source community does not already have a mature, widespread file storage application that is peer to peer, like BitTorrent Sync. Maybe because peer to peer is so much harder than client-server. But I would have thought it would be further along by now, given our:

- technical savvy
- awareness of the importance of good back-ups
- distrust of corporations and governments

If we had a free file back-up service that was standard for Linux (or if there were two or three, for the sake of competition, but that at least each distro had one that it picked as its standard), then I think it would help Linux catch on as well as improve the sense of community: I'm helping host some of your data, you're hosting some of mine --- even though I have no idea what or whose it is because I have just a bunch of encrypted shards.

I'll add my voice to the recommendations for Bittorrent Sync. It's fast, encrypted, doesn't rely on a third party hosting, and it doesn't even have to leave your LAN if you're at home. Avoiding needlessly uploading over a crappy ADSL connection is a major plus point.

This may not be the cheapest solution, but it's what I'm planning to do...

• Everyone acquires a NAS device (Drobo, Synology, etc) of an appropriate capacity, ideally something that can handle several TB and is expandable.
• Fill up with 4TB drives.
• Install BitTorrent Sync, and share out a portion of the NAS.

You can install the client on your desktop, mobile, linux, and freebsd devices, too (you'll want a supported NAS, so something linux-based or FreeNAS or such, unfortunately nothing MIPS-based.

I'm primarily planning on just dropping something (probably a Drobo 5N) off at my mom's (she & my step-dad aren't tech savvy), and setting everything up for them, including backups of their PCs to the device, sharing of photos & videos, etc. And then setting up replication of critical, irreplaceable data between their place and mine. On my side, I already have a Synology DS1813+ that I need to set up, first.

The Synology stuff also has the capability to deal with IP Cameras for monitoring (though I suspect that if you just set up a share to dump images to, you won't need a license for it). For streaming, I believe both Drobo & Synology (as well as others) have media servers, so app-enabled TVs, BluRay players, and game consoles should be able to stream appropriate movies and music as needed.

I'm thinking the NAS, my laptop (which I'll also start backups to the NAS, likely NOT shared), my VPS, and my mobile devices (phone, tablet) will all sync, as will my wife's laptop & devices.

Yes, this is probably heavily overdone, but it also avoids putting private data on systems that I don't control, and avoids the commercial cloud providers at the same time. And, not surprisingly, I play a sysadmin for my day job, so this ties in nicely with that, too.

This may not be the cheapest solution, but it's what I'm planning to do...

• Everyone acquires a NAS device (Drobo, Synology, etc) of an appropriate capacity, ideally something that can handle several TB and is expandable.
• Fill up with 4TB drives.
• Install BitTorrent Sync, and share out a portion of the NAS.

You can install the client on your desktop, mobile, linux, and freebsd devices, too (you'll want a supported NAS, so something linux-based or FreeNAS or such, unfortunately nothing MIPS-based.

I'm primarily planning on just dropping something (probably a Drobo 5N) off at my mom's (she & my step-dad aren't tech savvy), and setting everything up for them, including backups of their PCs to the device, sharing of photos & videos, etc. And then setting up replication of critical, irreplaceable data between their place and mine. On my side, I already have a Synology DS1813+ that I need to set up, first.

The Synology stuff also has the capability to deal with IP Cameras for monitoring (though I suspect that if you just set up a share to dump images to, you won't need a license for it). For streaming, I believe both Drobo & Synology (as well as others) have media servers, so app-enabled TVs, BluRay players, and game consoles should be able to stream appropriate movies and music as needed.

I'm thinking the NAS, my laptop (which I'll also start backups to the NAS, likely NOT shared), my VPS, and my mobile devices (phone, tablet) will all sync, as will my wife's laptop & devices.

Yes, this is probably heavily overdone, but it also avoids putting private data on systems that I don't control, and avoids the commercial cloud providers at the same time. And, not surprisingly, I play a sysadmin for my day job, so this ties in nicely with that, too.

This may not be the cheapest solution, but it's what I'm planning to do...

• Everyone acquires a NAS device (Drobo, Synology, etc) of an appropriate capacity, ideally something that can handle several TB and is expandable.
• Fill up with 4TB drives.
• Install BitTorrent Sync, and share out a portion of the NAS.

You can install the client on your desktop, mobile, linux, and freebsd devices, too (you'll want a supported NAS, so something linux-based or FreeNAS or such, unfortunately nothing MIPS-based.

I'm primarily planning on just dropping something (probably a Drobo 5N) off at my mom's (she & my step-dad aren't tech savvy), and setting everything up for them, including backups of their PCs to the device, sharing of photos & videos, etc. And then setting up replication of critical, irreplaceable data between their place and mine. On my side, I already have a Synology DS1813+ that I need to set up, first.

The Synology stuff also has the capability to deal with IP Cameras for monitoring (though I suspect that if you just set up a share to dump images to, you won't need a license for it). For streaming, I believe both Drobo & Synology (as well as others) have media servers, so app-enabled TVs, BluRay players, and game consoles should be able to stream appropriate movies and music as needed.

I'm thinking the NAS, my laptop (which I'll also start backups to the NAS, likely NOT shared), my VPS, and my mobile devices (phone, tablet) will all sync, as will my wife's laptop & devices.

Yes, this is probably heavily overdone, but it also avoids putting private data on systems that I don't control, and avoids the commercial cloud providers at the same time. And, not surprisingly, I play a sysadmin for my day job, so this ties in nicely with that, too.

Disclaimer, Chat team member here. Chat is based on the Distributed Hash Table DHT and Arvid Nordberg, the head engineer on this project, has just released our DHT bootstrap code as open source on github. At the start of this project, we frequently ask ourselves why anybody should trust us over any other group. The only answer that we could come up with is increased transparency. http://engineering.bittorrent.com/2013/12/19/dht-bootstrap-update/

Get BitTorrent Sync from http://labs.bittorrent.com/experiments/sync.html and set up your own server, either locally or "in the cloud" (which you control). There are clients for all major platforms, including Android, and it works well. Traffic is encrypted and storage is only on computers you control yourself.
There is one drawback, though: It's not open source so you have to trust BitTorrent Inc.

http://labs.bittorrent.com/experiments/sync.html bittorrent sync is a really cool tool that i use for this. its free and the more machines in the group to sync the faster it will sync.

Bittorrent Sync is exactly what you're looking for.

I just setup this same thing to backup all my photos. I was bouncing between rsync, samba and other random different programs. I wanted something to sync between numerous different computers and off site.

Bittorrent sync solved all of this. It's almost as if they planned for people using it the way I am. In addition to having Mac and Windows clients. They also have

• Linux ARM
• Linux PowerPC
• Linux i386
• Linux x64
• Linux PPC QorIQ
• Linux_i386 (glibc 2.3)
• Linux_x64 (glibc 2.3)
• FreeBSD i386
• FreeBSD X64

You can either set it up from the command line with a JSON config file or through a web interface on headless machines. I have it setup on one of my VPSs with a large disk. All of my family photos are now 'in the cloud'. Backed up off site. I added another VPS just to see what it'd do. It' synced at around 2-3 MB/s between them and a bit from my home connection. (It does use the bittorrent protocol). So now my home photos are on 2 different VPS on two different continents. If I want to give some one access to them I can generate a read only key or a time limited read only key.

One of the coolest features is that I have a webserver where I have people upload family photos. I HAD an rsync cron job set up to sync the photos to my computer every night. Now the upload folder is a BitTorrent Sync folder. Within seconds of someone uploading photos. They get sync'd to my desktop, my laptop, my server, my VPS on another continent.

If you want more redundancy add more servers. The more nodes you add the faster new nodes get 'up to date'.

Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic.

All the more reasons for decentralized solutions. Such as BitTorrentSync perhaps.

Or have them synced automatically and securely with BitTorrent Sync for Android.

take a look at bittorrent sync. http://labs.bittorrent.com/experiments/sync.html with cheap hardware and multiple locations(the locations could be virtual servers at different data centers around the world.) you could set up your own cloud for the cost of the hardware. run the host machines on your favorite flavor of linux and configure the different machines to do the rest. you add stuff to your onsite machine and it gets distributed securely and quickly to the other nodes. ive been playing around with the software for a week now but it seems to be exactly what we needed as a community.

BtSync is not officially opensource, but authors are considering opening it: http://forum.bittorrent.com/topic/17782-bittorrent-sync-faq-unofficial/

How about BtSync?

It's based on the BitTorrent protocol, and it can sync over the internet as well.

That will still take ages...

Why not give Bittorrent Sync a go? It's a decentralized "dropbox" on steriods!

http://labs.bittorrent.com/experiments/sync.html

If this isn't completely killed by the major publishers of art (music, movies, etc.) in the near term, then this could end up being a major distribution channel rivaling iTunes.

Imagine grabbing a torrent and having the option of directly paying the band, or having the option of going to the band's homepage or storefront for physical media or memorabilia. That would be pretty sweet. Of course, this could theoretically be subverted by bad actors (like people falsely representing others, the publishers themselves, or malware peddlers), so Bittorrent as the gatekeepers would have to be very careful about what they accept and not.

The bundles site itself is atrocious though. They really should be taking design cues from popular trackers and not the old Myspace pages of the artists they're featuring.

Hi, Christian here from BitTorrent. We updated our post to qualify this. Here is the update: "Sync was built for secure sharing. While we have general statistics about the app, we don’t have any access to private information. The client reports back anonymous usage statistics in the same way our other clients do. Sync uses this call to check if there’s a new build available. This call also contains some anonymous statistics that allow us to understand how Sync performs, and how it’s being used; data transferred directly, through relay, size of folders, and number of files synced. This is the only information we collect, and we left it open intentionally – so that people could see the data we’re collecting. That way, it can be easily verified that we don’t have access to any private information. Read more here: http://forum.bittorrent.com/topic/17002-btsync-calling-home/ "

But its cute to try and blame it on one particular ... protocol? I'm not sure what 'deal with bittorrent' means. I mean, I get the 'first 7 minutes to bittorrent users' but who is that exactly? People that use software from bittorrent inc? Anyone with a bittorrent client? Who are they actually talking about? Well thought out statement you have there.

If you visit http://www.bittorrent.com/ it will become quickly apparent what they mean, I think.

http://bundles.bittorrent.com/torrents/BitTorrent-ArthurNewman.torrent

I imagine they're seeding it.

But its cute to try and blame it on one particular ... protocol? I'm not sure what 'deal with bittorrent' means. I mean, I get the 'first 7 minutes to bittorrent users' but who is that exactly? People that use software from bittorrent inc? Anyone with a bittorrent client? Who are they actually talking about? Well thought out statement you have there.

If you visit http://www.bittorrent.com/ it will become quickly apparent what they mean, I think.

http://bundles.bittorrent.com/torrents/BitTorrent-ArthurNewman.torrent

I imagine they're seeding it.

I have three computers. Home desktop, Work Desktop, and, a laptop.
I use this newly released piece of software to keep them all in sync. I added a server to the mix as a backup, and now all my data is on four computers. The peace of mind given by having my data automatically mirrored in four locations and the resulting lowered chances of loosing all my data enables me to sleep better at night.

After reading over threads such as http://forum.bittorrent.com/topic/8816-will-syncapp-be-open-source/ on their website, I am disappointed to find that SyncApp (as well as Surf, and Live, other BTLabs projects) is not currently open source, and apparently the most they're shooting for at the moment is some sort of API in the future. While I was initially intrigued by Sync's feature set, especially the "shared secret" encryption variations (master key, one way sync, one time sync and more.), as well as that they could be integrated within BitTorrent's existing (and open source) protocols such as DHT, using a BitTorrent tracker, PEX, stream encryption etc, when I read that the implementation was not planning to be free and open source, that is a major blow to its long-term viability as part of next-generation file-sharing protocols.

Especially in a world of "Six Strikes", overzealous industry groups and corporate cronies, government censorship and more, it is absolutely imperative that the tools that those interested in privacy, activism, journalism etc...be free and open source. From being able to audit the code if you have the skills, to crafting decentralized and inter-operative networks across multiple platforms, operating systems and more etc... FOSS is necessary. I can nearly guarantee that if the original BitTorrent protocol had not been released free and open source (along with many of the most popular evolutions of said protocol, such as DHT/PEX/uTP, encryption, private trackers etc..) it would not have come to such prominence. I personally am no fan of the proprietary uTorrent client, but thankfully I can make use of Deluge, KTorrent, or Transmission and have access to the latest features on the BitTorrent network, able to interact with others so long as they were using open protocols. I'd love to see this extend to Sync, which I feel could be excellent not just for users syncing their data amongst multiple computing devices of their own, or sharing with friends, but creating another protective web when it comes to file-sharing, adding privacy protections - an intermediary step that doesn't have nearly the speed/hardware demands of say, operating BitTorrent exclusively through Tor.

Sync, Torque/btapp.js (One has to install the proprietary, headless Torque client (or uTorrent) which has very little documentation on its features/privacy etc... why not have them simply integrate with an open API that any BT client with sufficient support can be called to utilize - thus, using all the safety features like my blocklist, encryption preferences etc... in my client of choice?), Live, Surf (Which I hope will be open and customizable, available on Firefox ASAP,) SoShare - all of these BitTorrent Labs productions sadly seam to be proprietary in nature (though, I must give them kudos for offering Linux versions of Sync for instance). Much like the acquisition of the proprietary uTorrent and the "Plus" version of the client being sold, BitTorrent's latest ventures seem to be steering away from the free and open source paradigm that made the protocol such a great advance in filesharing.

When it comes to file sharing in today's legal and technical clime, proprietary and centralized just won't do. What Sync offers is novel and could create additional layers of security (consider an entire tracker using Sync technology where connecting to each torrent requires a unique "Shared secret", which is available exclusively on a totally different site, extrapolating another legal level of obfuscation, deny-ability, and privacy protection), the community cannot trust it offered as a proprietary service with a central point of failure (legally) and the inability to audit the code. Hopefully, this will change and that Sync and other elements will help to extend BitTorrent as the excellent, multifaceted, free and open tool for disseminating data... but for the time being, it is a curiosity that is in the hands of a company that seems to put profit and control above user privacy and technical freedom/openness

None that I can see. The answer wasn't "no", but the most they committed to was an API for developers when open source question was asked in the forums.

I'll take a look, but OwnCloud or Unison is still looking better in terms of knowing what is being done internally with your files.

Crappy links in the article. To sign up, er "apply", for the alpha:
http://labs.bittorrent.com/experiments/sync.html

How unfortunate for the RIAA that their biggest target can't leak information like that.

I find it hard to believe that they don't have control over their own copyrights.
ORLY?

Next time you should ask at the official BitTorrent IRC channel.

The Python BitTorrent client, which runs on Unix, has a version called "launchmany" which is easily controlled via script. It should fit your needs very nicely.

BitTorrent Trademark Guidelines: "Misleading or Confusing People. If you are using any of our trademarks in a way that will cause people to get the wrong idea about BitTorrent's involvement in something, you should stop! If you have some reason why you think your proposed use isn't misleading or confusing, let's talk."

Bah; this tool can recover discs you don't even have anymore, or hell, discs you never had to begin with!

While their video sales business is DOA, this is what they're up to: http://www.bittorrent.com/devices/

I forgot to add my link.

http://www.bittorrent.com/

I'd also like to add that while companies like BitTorrent are hashing out distribution deals, that does not absolve them from scrutiny. The RIAA and MPAA have been known to cut off their own nose to spite their face by suing and then subsequently alienating the customers and artists they seek to "protect".

Off the top of my head:

* Quicksilver?
* BitTorrent?
* ZFS?

Both BitTorrent DNA and Red Swoosh have JavaScript APIs for starting, monitoring and controlling BitTorrent downloads. The actual BitTorrent client runs in a service process, which you talk to through "http://127.0.0.1:port#".

The JS libraries just rewrite the URL of the file you want to torrent so it goes through the proxy. They also allow you to monitor and control the progress of the downloads via a ReST interface to the proxy that returns json or xml.

The JS libraries both support putting links into the page that are automatically rewritten to download via BitTorrent. You can use the status monitoring interfaces to display a progress bar and give the user feedback about the download process.

Another approach is to develop an XPCOM plug-in that wraps one of the bittorrent libraries like libtorrent. That gives you a lot more direct control over the library from JavaScript. But I think it's safer to have all that complex code and volumous data running in its own separate process, and not bloating up and slowing down Firefox.

Talking to the BitTorrent client in a separate process via http makes it very easy to use from JavaScript, and that does not bloat or slow down Firefox itself.

-Don

People are also downloading porn and pirate content on http also, So p2p is no different in that respect.

There are more and more P2P set top boxes on the market with licensed content using Bit Torrent.
These could eventually compete with the cable companies offering quality HD content.

Look at the http://www.bittorrent.com/ site.
They have customers such as Fox, Lionsgate, Paramount, MTV, Warner Brothers, SEGA, Comedy Central and Netgear using their P2P networking protocols.

And your hindering it. As a side effect this thinking is assisting Comcast's monopoly.

If they might be download porn then why don't you just block the IP address blocks of known porn sites, why draw the line at P2P?

Your applying your moral codes on customers access because it might be porn or pirated movies, it's just a matter of degree then which we all know is a slippers slope.

Why does it matter of the customer is downloading the latest Ubuntu or a porn movie.

If you agreed to offer flat rate X Kbps of service with no mention of limiting or filtering.

It quite clear either you are or you are not?

Unless you have put this in the service contract of up front, you are cheating them.

Yes, WoW does use Bittorrent for it's updates. I'd be rather unhappy if it were to be further restricted.

I was quoted in the Ars Technica article. Here is the text of my FCC comment.

Dear Commissioners,

As a longtime customer of the Comcast Corporation (CMCSA) I feel it is necessary for me to provide you with my views and opinions regarding their use of throttling bandwidth for point to point (P2P) users that access their network.

File sharing is a gray area with regards to the law. It can be used for not only illegal purposes, such as the sharing of copyrighted material like music and movies, but for sharing of information that is perfectly legal such as software updates, free operating system distribution, free movie and movie preview distribution plus free music distribution. I will cite examples of each accordingly.

The most widely publicized use of P2P file sharing is illegal music and movie distribution. As this review for comment does not touch upon the legal issues surrounding the data being shared I shall focus my attentions to those legal methods that are affected.

Blizzard Entertainment, a wholly owned subsidiary of Vivendi Games (Euronext: VIV), uses the Bittorrent P2P file sharing protocol to distribute updates and patches to the players of the very popular Massively Multiplayer Online Role Playing Game (MMORPG) World of Warcraft. If their data is interrupted for any reason, even for a short time, then thousands, perhaps even millions, of users will be unable to play their game. This will directly cut into their profit margin.

The Linux operating system is a freely available alternative to both Microsoft Windows and the Apple Mac OS. As the Linux operating system is free they rely solely on donations of both time and money from people across the planet. That money, however, is not unlimited. To reduce the high cost of bandwidth they use the Bittorrent protocol for much of their software distribution. Interrupting their distribution channel would only benefit Microsoft, an already proven monopoly. To help ensure competition I feel that Bittorrent should not be interrupted.

To give but one example of free video entertainment you may want to look at the TV Guide 2007 Online Video Award winner Star Trek New Voyages. They are a very high quality non-profit production that was able to beat out contenders such as the 4400 and Battlestar Galactica. Their preferred method of distribution is bittorrent as they have a very limited bandwidth.

Many movies distribute their previews via bittorrent. This would damage not only their advertising structure but limit the consumer to one method of retrieval.

To see that Bittorrent and the movie industry, music industry and gaming industry are working TOGETHER and that they are seeking to create a strategic partnership please view the following URL for more information:

http://www.bittorrent.com/about/press/bittorrent-inc-launches-the-bittorrent-entertainment-network

Of course now that you know that Bittorrent is a popular, legal, and economically feasible method of content distribution let me explain a little bit of how it works.

Let us say that the makers of Star Trek New Voyages come out with a new episode. They have a few options at their disposal. One of them is to create a simple link to a file and have everyone who is interested in the file download it from one single location. The downside to this is that the single location will be paying a fortune to accommodate the high volumes of traffic.

The other option is Bittorrent. By having people connect to what is referred to as a "tracker" they can find out who else is downloading the same file and start taking pieces from multiple different users. Essentially everyone is

Hell, even the MPAA/RIAA companies are using it nowadays. Have a look at some of the client logos at the bottom of the splash page at Bittorrent.com. The "all P2P is stealing" argument is brutally idiotic when Warner Brothers, MGM, Playboy, MTV, et al are intentionally and legally distributing stuff through P2P.

Comcast is censoring data they do not own. Comcast is depriving consumers of services paid for. Copyright has nothing to do with it. All files, both copyrighted and non-copyrighted must be COPIED to be seen and heard by those accessing the internet. There's no difference if you click on a web page or if you bitttorent files.

I think that's why he/she/it posted as AC rather than risk sounding like an idiot.

The discussion was about limiting P2P services which every week are use more and more for legitimate businesses. But then again, he/she/it probably doesn't play computer games like WOW. But then again, perhaps I'm too stupid to see how the bittorrent protocol is being used legally.

Just noticed I can download Hollywood movies, songs, tv shows, games and other items from bittorrent themselves.

Sweet!

So much for the AC's copyright argument eh ;D

I feel the same way... uTorrent is perfect on Windows, a good alternative on OSX is Transmission. I used to use Azureus and since it got bundled with that crap beta thing they did it sucks. Then I switched to XTorrent, which in idea it sounds good, but it sucks as well. Later on I got so frustrated I tried other torrent apps for Mac like:

Tomato Torrent is a very plain alternative, seriously lacking in eye-candy and begging for a new icon (and maybe a new name too). It's based on the official BitTorrent client. I think it desrves a mention because I know a few people who swear by it. It comes with an AppleScript file that you can place in folders you want to download to. When you want to download a torrent to a specific folder, you just drag the .torrent file onto the piece of AppleScript to initiate the transfer. One pro is that it's an extremely light client that hogs very little RAM. It's the closet thing to uTorrent on the Mac.

Bits on Wheels is a slightly out-dated (last updated Sep. '05), yet popular Mac BitTorrent client. It claims to be "the first 100% native BitTorrent client for the Macintosh" as it is written in Objective-C and Cocoa. Bits on Wheels is freeware but not Open Source. One of its main features is a visual 3D Swarm with which you can observe what's actually going on under the hood, how many seeders and leechers you're connected to and the bits transferring between everyone. Bits on Wheels is very OSeXy (heh!), it's how I'd imagine the default OS X BitTorrent downloader to look if there was one. bits on wheels sawrmIf not to use the first native OS X B.T. client, I'd download it just to fly around in 3D chasing bits.

And lets not forget the grandaddy of them all, Bram Cohen's self-titled BitTorrent application. It's gotten kind of confusing since he named the protocol, his company and his application all BitTorrent. BitTorrent OSX is a very (and I mean very) basic application. It's as feature-full as Safari's download box and that's not saying much. Now some people wouldn't mind something like that, but if you're looking for simplicity Transmission is a much better choice. BitTorrent OSX also takes an age to start up on my MacBook Pro.

Transmission is my current Mac B.T. client of choice. TransmissionIt's an Open Source project, maintained by the developer of the popular Mac DVD ripping application, HandBrake. Transmission does its job well. A neat feature it offers is the ability to view download and upload rates in the dock, so I don't even have to open up the program to check how my downloads are going. Another great thing Transmission does is copy the .torrent file to its support folder, then trash the original file from my desktop thereby leaving no mess of files behind for me to clean up. Now just like everything Transmission has its flaws, the biggest of which is that Demonoid, a leading BitTorrent directory has banned it on ocassion! They say it doesn't adhere to set standards.

For the different torrent apps I mentioned here you can go to:

Bit Torrent OSX: http://www.bittorrent.com/
Transmission: http://transmission.m0k.org/
Tomato Torrent: http://sarwat.net/BitTorrent/
Bit On Wheels: http://www.bitsonwheels.com/

Hope that helps!

Kil

They aren't charging for the protocol, they are still making it available but only in an SDK kit

Hm, it seems to be referring to UPnP (which I have vehemently disabled on my router).. but I wonder if they have any idea what they're talking about. If you can't accept incoming connections that just means that your client initiates all transfers of data, not that you're completely incapable of uploading. Good clients like utorrent (and apparently not Bittorrent 6.0) will give/trade data without being asked if there's available upload bandwidth. Not the best for efficiency (though I should think it'd at least volunteer less-available data first) but it gets you a high ratio nonetheless.