Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Open Content Network (P2P meets Open Source)

Posted by michael on from the leveraging-synergies dept.

Orasis writes "The creators of Swarmcast have announced a new peer-to-peer content delivery network called the Open Content Network. The OCN will allow users to download open source and public domain content from multiple peers and mirrors in parallel. The system is designed to augment the existing mirrors with bandwidth from the p2p network and should eliminate the "Slashdot Effect" for popular open source content."

11 of 128 comments (clear)

  1. Need for Checksumming by skroz · · Score: 5, Insightful

    A secure system for validation and verification of downloads will obviously need to be implemented. Imagine all of the fun things someone could do if they, say, inserted a rogue module into the linux kernel code. Or the latest release of samba, gtk, glibc, Mozilla, ssh, openssl... the list goes on and on.

    --
    -- Minds are like parachutes... they work best when open.
  2. Open Content, Open Source, whatever by new+death+barbie · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Maybe it's just me, but this makes me a little nervous that when the "Open Content Network" gets too popular and dragged down in litigation, the "Open Source" folks are going to find themselves tarred with the same brush; guilty by association. Not what's needed at this juncture.

    --

    It's supposed to be completely automatic, but actually you have to press this button.

  3. The Spirit of the OLD Internet Lives by ausoleil · · Score: 3, Insightful

    ...longbeards can remember the "good ole days" where the free flow of ideas and not making money were what made the pre-commodity internet a very worthwhile place to be. Everyone was expected to contribute their resources for the benefit of all, and none of it was (apparently) designed to make help smartass b-school dropout come up with enough cash to buy a 4,000 square foot "bungalo" in Palo Alto.

    Count me in.

  4. Guesses as to how long this is going to last? by inkfox · · Score: 5, Insightful
    While this is a great concept, it scares me a bit.

    I'm fully expecting that if we ever reach a point where a substantial percentage of users' traffic becomes outbound traffic, the cablemodem and DSL providers are going to start to rethink the current pricing and service packages.

    How long before we find ourselves NATted away, able to originate connections only? A few cablemodem providers have already done this to reduce the traffic from file sharing and to knock out code red and other such silliness. And each time a major ISP does this, it leaves a slightly smaller number of other ISPs providing the outbound service, causing the traffic on the holdout systems to rise.

    At some point it's going to snowball, and most of us are going to find ourselves NATted away, with only those paying premium prices for real IP addresses getting the priviledge of having their uplink monopolized by strangers.

    --
    Says the RIAA: When you EQ, you're stealing bass!
    1. Re:Guesses as to how long this is going to last? by inkfox · · Score: 2, Insightful
      Why shouldn't this be the case? I have DSL and I have the AudioGalaxy Satellite setup to run at logon. Whenever I take a look at the satellite, I see that I have only received usally less than 1/10th of the data that I have sent. Why shouldn't people (individuals included) be required to pay for the bandwidth they use?

      At current, I'd say say we are paying. We've signed a usage agreement that says we get this speed down and that speed up.

      From a business standpoint, the upstream hasn't been the interesting part of the pricing equation to date, however. But when they usage increasing, and their costs going up for something they can turn off or collect an extra fee for, you can bet we won't see so many symmetrical connections or directly-addressable and unfiltered IPs.

      --
      Says the RIAA: When you EQ, you're stealing bass!
  5. Great idea, but I can see a problem by Rogerborg · · Score: 5, Insightful

    The problem being that people are bastards.

    • "The Open Content Network will work with the Creative Commons to use their machine-readable licenses to automatically identify open source and public domain content to be distributed through the OCN"

    Why is this a problem? Well, what's to stop an ignorant or malicious individual wrapping up some content with an CC complaint license and injecting it into OCR?

    I'm thinking of:

    • Advertising porn with embedded html links that pops up adverts (gnutella is rotten with this stuff).
    • Virii.
    • Other people's copyrighted content.

    Why would anyone do this last one? Pure malice, to open OCN up to DMCA attack, simply because people (as I said) are bastards, and can't be trusted to behave in a rational civilised fashion. OCN will be a trusted network, and that leaves it open to abuse. I really hope that an actual trustable human will vet everything injected into it.

    --
    If you were blocking sigs, you wouldn't have to read this.
  6. such a good move? by tps12 · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Okay, I'm sure I'm with the rest of the slashdot communisty when I say that my first reaction was "wow, awesome, score another 3 points for Open Source and freedom."

    But I've reconsidered. Before you mod me down, please read what I have to say.

    Basically, we are talking about P2P filesharing here. Now remember, other P2P services, like Napster, Gnutella, and IRC, were all originally based on good, sound, legal, moral ideals. But in the course of time, they each became corrupt with those who would use the infrastructure for illegal filesharing and copyright infringement.

    Now, I don't want to throw the baby out with the proverbial bathwater. And I don't want to get rid of a useful tool because of a potential for abuse, since by that logic we would not have silverware, cars, or handguns. But we in the Open Source community need to ask ourselves, is now the time when we want to risk associating Linux, *BSD, and Open Source with illegal activities? Don't we have enough anti-hacker rhetoric to fight against?

    We need to pick our battles. This isn't one of them.

    --

    Karma: Good (despite my invention of the Karma: sig)
    1. Re:such a good move? by EvilAlien · · Score: 3, Insightful
      Excellent point.

      The threat to filesharing as a technology comes from the rights-holders and from the legal system. Precident is being set all the time which threatens ISPs with liability for illegal activities on their network that they are "made aware of", DMCA notice and takedown letter or not.

      Its much more scary in the UK and in Canada. Canada just passed new legislation which will make ISPs vulnerable for distribution of child pornography on their network. SOCAN Copyright Tariff 22 was just it through the Court of Appeals and makes ISPs liable for infringing material stored on their "cache servers".

      P2P technology may by-pass these, but it is only a matter of time before some powerful organization convinces some judges that ISPs should be held liable for allowing P2P on their network. Blocking of ports, account terminations, and worse are all coming if the rights-holders have their way... and technology such as swarmcast which acts to distribution free software will likely get lumped in with the Napter/Kazaa/Foo P2P technologies.

      --
      perl -e 'print $i=pack(c5, (41*2), sqrt(7056), (unpack(c,H)-2), oct(115), 10)'
  7. Those were the good old days, all right... by gaudior · · Score: 3, Insightful
    When the Internet was available only to career college students and others feeding at the public trough. The internet was paid for by public tax money and corporate subsidies, but unavailable to most people.

    The good old days really weren't so good. It's kind of funny, though, listening to some so-called old-timers constantly whinging about the commercialization of the 'net. Do they really think the huge advance in capabilities would have come about without the economic incentive? Sure, the early days were inventive. They invented the bricks and mortar of the Internet. But the commerce guys have driven the construction of cathedrals, roads, libraries and schools with those bricks.

  8. Eliminate the slashdot effect? bah! by ipmcc · · Score: 4, Insightful

    If the goal here is really to eliminate the "Slashdot Effect" a much more effective solution would be to set up a network of load-balanced caching proxies on geographically distributed fat pipes.

    Some will argue that this is in essence what a P2P network is, but why not do it right, using technology we already have that everyone can use(squid.)

    Other users' comments regarding the cumulative effects of NAT on P2P networks are incredibly apropos.

    But realistically, theres nothing I love more than when the story submitter posts a link to a Google cached version of the content he's posting. We're an agressive bunch and that calls for aggressive measures :)

    --
    This too shall pass.
  9. Wheres the code by nervlord1 · · Score: 2, Insightful

    In those now famous words, wheres the code?

    Im sorry i wish i could say im excited, its certianly a VERY good idea, and noe in desprate need of realising, but untill i see the code, its just more hype.

    Certianly be a great way for non coders to contribute though, so many times my linux friends say "oh id love to contribute to open source but i can't code", this would definatly be one way, and one which requires very little effort too.

    --
    Microsoft IIS is to webserving as KFC is to healthy eating