Collapsing P2P Networks

Andrew writes "I'm a undergraduate at the University of Washington, and after seeing this article on Salon, I dusted off a paper I had written last year. I examined P2P networks under a model usually used in describing animal populations, and found that it may be possible to cause a collapse in the network based on the intrinsic nature of the technology. Just as in animal populations, P2P networks require a sizable "critical mass" of users, and overharvesting can cause a systemic collapse - what if this were done on purpose? Quite ominously, my second recommendation on disruption was carrying damaged or incorrectly named files. You can read theabstract and the actual paper"

Comments

P2P is dying!*

[teamhasnoi]

P2P has offically said, "Hey, we're dying over here!" You don't need to be a Kreskin to predict *P2P's future. The hand writing is on the wall: *P2P faces a bleak no-future because *P2P is laying in a ditch somewhere, and doesn't have any ID, so we don't know who to call. In fact we can hear the screams of pain out there because*P2P is dying.

Things are looking very bad for *P2P. As many of us are already aware, *P2P continues to lose market share, and it's car keys all the time. Red ink flows like a river of blood, and a river of blood would be pretty cool, but not when it's *P2P's blood. FreeP2P is the most endangered of them all, and since I've never even heard of it, it must be hurtin'.

Umm, something about a charnel house being turned over, and 2 usenet post about P2P, and bought out by someone who ruined everything. Yeah. And so P2P for all practical purposes is dead. Long live P2P!