Slashdot Mirror
BitTorrent's Creator Bram Cohen Interviewed
Delta-9 writes "The New York Times
has this interview (free reg. req.) with Bram Cohen, the author/creator of the widely popular BitTorrent p2p application." Talks a bit about BitTorrent, its implications, but also a lot about Bram himself. Interesting piece.
He's made distribution of media and data much more cost effective.
Bittorrent is like the Athlon 64, other p2p apps are like a pentium 133.
Then what did he think it was going to be used for? The popularity of Napster should have taught him that this was going to happen. Anything that can allow someone to get something for free that they normally would have to pay for, will be used for that purpose. Maybe he didn't intend for this to happen...but the best of intentions oft go awry. I find it hard to believe though that someone smart enough to code Bit Torrent is naive enough to not realize how it would be utilized.
The article is very thin on the legitimate uses of BitTorrent. Just last night, I wanted to download the Unreal Tournament 2004 demo... and despite the fact there were literally hundreds of mirrors, I couldn't connect to many of them, and those I could connect to were utterly hosed. So, I looked for a torrent for the file, and a few minutes later, I was done downloading it.
Yes, you can use BitTorrent to steal stuff. But, all of the p2p programs are basically a mix of the roles of ftp and irc. BitTorrent is slightly different - it's a mix of p2p and the web, making a quick and easy means to find whatever you want. A great amount of content is completely legit, and BitTorrent is a dream come true for those times that everybody wants a certain file. I didn't expect NYT to focus on the good aspects of the program, but they didn't even mention how amazingly useful it actually is.
-agent oranje.
that's a coincidence, not irony... blurp...
I believe (RTFA, please) that he wanted a good way to leverage unused bandwidth for large file distribution.
/. effect work for you, essentially.
Linux ISO's are a good example, and are probably the first place that I saw bittorrent used right here on slashdot. Make the
--
There's a difference between not intending something and not forseeing something. It's entirely possible he knew what people would do with it but still wasn't aiming for that market.
Mod down posts with a "Free Mac Mini/iPod" sig, they're spam!
The devil's in the details. I'm sure he knew very early on that BitTorrent would be used for illegal file trading, but by saying that he didn't intend for it to be used that way is a clever way of distancing himself from any potential lawsuits.
Plus, he mentions in the article that there is no claim of anonymity at all and that he's entirely surprised that websites that offer torrents for copyrighted files continue to be online.
Rule #1 -- Politics always trumps technology.
Why anyone would peg their bandwidth for 2 days to grab a flick when you can rent it and burn a copy is beyond me.
Bittorrent shines for grabbing stuff, sure, but I think most people just collect crap, then burn it to disk or throw it on a HD and equate that with penis size.
So, Movie Industry, I really can't see this costing you zillions, or hundreds of thousands for that matter.
The people who want to will go to the theater, buy it on DVD, or rent it. The ones who don't, won't.
Again, if you're going to hunt people down, go after the pressing plants making thousands of copies AND SELLING THEM!
I highly doubt there are more than a few dirty whores who are selling copies of stuff they download. You know who you are. You suck.
It revolutianed the way Fansubs are swapped No more waiting in endless que lines in IRC and dealing with the annoying ops and no more waiting for some kind soul to post it to usenet. Also made it alot easyer to remove once something got liscened just yank it from your tracker and boom the torrent is dead.
Even trackers are not doing anything illegal, as they are just collecting lists of people downloading the same file and provide this list to anyone who is interested (there's no illegal content there either).
The only illegal content comes from the users themselves, and its chopped in thousands of pieces, making them hard to identify.
I'm probably going to be -1 trolled into oblivion, but why don't all the people complaining about the NYT simply register and forget about it?? ;-)
I did that at least three years ago, and with cookies I only ever have to worry about it *once* each time I change browser. And if you are opposed on principle on giving personal info, just put false one.
The whole thing takes about as long as getting the Google link, and you only have to do it once. And I thought geeks were supposed to be efficient
What do you know about World Politic? Find out in this quiz
One big problem with BitTorrent is the opposite of normal client/server file sharing: if a file isn't popular, it downloads slower.
Why not extend the concept to a set of files? Who says that the file you download also has to be the file you upload? If a site is offering a set of torrents, maybe while a client is downloading the most popular file of the moment they can be serving portions of less popular files. (9 to 1, popular to unpopular maybe, if another client is uploading them, that is...) Sure, that would take some bandwidth from the popular files, but they have enough to spare.
For example, I just recently downloaded the Mandrake 9.2.1 power pack ISOs for club members. Download time sucked! If that torrent could share bandwith with the public Mandrake 9.2 ISOs, that'd be keen.
Bittorrent kindof sucks for me because I have DSL which has a limited upload capacity and a large download capacity. I'd like it a lot more if I had a different kind of broadband connection. The "how could he have not forseen" argument is ridiculous. Anything powerful can be used for legal or illegal means. Do you not think http and ftp have been used to infringe copyright? If you're going to criticize for that, let's go ahead and talk about what evil inventions the ink pen and printing press were. The interesting thing to me about the illegal uses of Bittorrent are how those prosecutions will be handled. Imagine a world in which every time you bought drugs, you had to sell some of them to someone else. Then the issue becomes: were you buying with intent? When you "download" (for that's what it will be to the layman regardless of technicality) with Bittorrent, are you intentionally redistributing or is the redistribution an unintended consequence of the lesser crime of simply partaking of the copyright protected work? Authority figures and courtrooms both tend to focus their efforts on the "sellers" rather than the "users." What do you do when every user is also a seller? I get the point that this isn't really anonymous, but neither was Kazaa. It's more a matter of civil disobedience. Speeding is illegal but I've been on many a highway in which you couldn't spot a soul driving under the limit. Most of them... most of the time don't get tickets. "Everybody's doing it," may not be a legal or moral defense, but it's much easier to hide in a crowd.
I use the Mac OS X version, so I don't get to see this, but a friend showed me his Windows version and you could not only see who was connected, but what their bandwidth use was too.
If you want a client with more features (as above) check out Azureus. It's written in Java, and it works really well for OS X. The vanilla BitTorrent client is also fine, but lacks important options like setting bandwidth caps, seeding ratios, etc.
He has stolen my right to distribute my work on my terms.
It's not possible to 'steal' a right. You violate rights, you don't steal them. Even if the government said "you don't have that right anymore", it's still not stolen.
My novel is still there, but I have lost something
No, you haven't. You still have that right, even if some people are violating it. You also have the legal right to go after them in a court of law. They haven't 'stolen' that either.
Please put this "it's not stealing, it's infringement" argument to rest
Yes, let's. You should start by taking your troll elsewhere.
This has been discussed extensively on the Fedora lists. BitTorrent only helps for large files, but many RPMs are not very big.
For somethign to be stolen it has to no longer be in your posession.
This is not a troll. I really am interested in your logic.
How about this.
You bring your car to the garage. It gets fixed and the bills comes to some amoutn of money. You are expected to pay the mechanic this amount. Lets say it was all labor as well and no parts were replaced. You use your extra key and get your car back some night without paying the mechanic for the work he did. Did you just steal from him or did you just violate his right to collect the money you owe him. What is he no longer in posession of in this example. The car was always yours, you just took it back without paying the bill. If the answer is nothing then you did not steal from him although I think a court would disagree.
Actually it seems like its full of incorrect statements for ignorant ways to convince yourself you aren't illegally circumventing the RIAA.
And on top of that the fool who wrote it used the word "kewl".
> Please put this "it's not stealing, it's infringement" argument to rest, folks. It's used as a particularly moronic crutch by some avid P2P fileswappers
I haven't used filesharing in a few years, but I still believe this is true... because it is. Most rational people will admit that it is "wrong" either legally or morally, but it is still not theft. Just saying "It REALLY IS stealing" over & over may convince you, but not to the people who actually think about what words mean.
That's what so great about BT. As soon as somebody does that, their download speed drops to a crawl or stops altogether.
No, they just stopped blabbing to pollsters about it.
Versus those of us who provided false info, but used an easy to remember login and password (i.e. for not often visited forums and such).
At a certain point, idealogy is just another word for idiocy. Stalin had lots of idealogy too.
Yeah, because building a tiny program that manages downloads is definately much harder than programming an entire gaming network with many different games, large installs to manage, etc.
So Kazza [and the clones] are all about being marginally legal by hiding in a "private companies" VPN & TOS...bittorrent is a way to make a better FTP type protocol--along with the responsibilites that come with it.
No, they just lied in case the feds come smashing down their door. ;-)
I think many people here are taking an exceptionally negative view of what BitTorrent is. You're not all from the RIAA, are you? ;-> ("We're from the RIAA. We're here to help")
There's many valid reasons why a lot of users might want to download big files simultaneously. Linux ISOs, Windows service packs, software distribution in general are just three that come to mind straight away. I'm sure Mandrake, RedHat, Knopper, SuSE, and even MS would be very glad they can (potentially) reduce their bandwidth costs by making a BitTorrent download available.
As far as the potential of being used for "bad things" goes - well, I don't exactly put Bram Cohen in the same class as Smith & Wesson, or even the manufacturers of plastic forks. It's obvious to me that illegal download sites using BitTorrent were going to spring up, and equally obvious that both these sites and their users would be easily trackable via their IP addresses at the very least.
I'm gonna have a quiet chuckle to myself if/when people using these sites start getting prosecured, since they obviously didn't think through the ramifications before they started using the service - I'd call it a Darwinian selection process in action.
Why to people keep zipping large lossy compressed data?
I can think of a couple:
And people who make guns know some of them will be used for bank raids, murders and the like.
BitTorrent is a very good tool. Its a pretty dumb way to throw pirate stuff around as the tracker knows everyone who is involved.
well the free reg thing is annoying. but do i not read a site that encourages registration? so maybe i think the free reg needs to be optional and encouraged as opposed to forced upon you. i wonder what bram would have to say!
Keep the faith, share the code
by your logic... anything intangible like ideas cannot be stolen.. only copied. yet the phrase "stealing ideas" is generally accepted when one person takes (copy) an idea from another. If you look up the definition of the word steal in dictionary.com..
steal ( P ) Pronunciation Key (stl)
v. stole, (stl) stolen, (stln) stealing, steals
v. tr.
To take (the property of another) without right or permission.
To get or effect surreptitiously or artfully: steal a kiss; stole the ball from an opponent.
To move, carry, or place surreptitiously.
To draw attention unexpectedly in (an entertainment), especially by being the outstanding performer: The magician's assistant stole the show with her comic antics.
Baseball. To advance safely to (another base) during the delivery of a pitch, without the aid of a base hit, walk, passed ball, or wild pitch.
there is nothing that says explictly about loss of possession being a requirement for stealing to take place... While i do agree with your logic given your definition of the word steal.. but what i'm not sure about is whether your defintion of the word is really the generally accepted definition. languages are defined by the people who use them. if there are enough ppl who interpret the word steal w/o the association of loss of possession being a requirement then copying a book might as well be the same as stealing one... just my 2 cents.