Slashdot Mirror
BitTorrent Accounts for 35% of Traffic
Pranjal writes "According to a reuters article on Yahoo, BitTorrent accounts for an astounding 35 percent of all the traffic on the Internet -- more than all other peer-to-peer programs combined -- and dwarfs mainstream traffic like Web pages." The article goes on to talk about how BT is no longer beneath the radar of those who like to sue file sharers.
At least under U.S. law, it's a bit more difficult to find the makers liable as long as the software is capable of being used for innocent uses, which I think (BitTorrent) surely is."
But that doesn't mean that they won't be sued into bankruptcy anyway. Anybody want to bet that is (MP/RI)AAs next move? Sue the creator and coders of the various BitTorrent applications to bully people who might consider writing useful P2P software in the future?
Of course I don't have a whole lot of sympathy for anybody caught infringing on software/movie/music copyrights with BitTorrent. It's not anonymous by any means -- and the trackers provide a nice centralized target. Isn't it clear that BitTorrent wasn't designed with copyright infringement in mind?
I want peace on earth and goodwill toward man.
We are the United States Government! We don't do that sort of thing.
devouring more than a third of the Internet's bandwidth, and Hollywood's copyright cops are taking notice
Jack Valenti started to wonder why his goat-porn downloads were getting slower every day?
Trolling is a art,
That's a LOT of content right there. Can anyone think of items I'm missing?
Javascript + Nintendo DSi = DSiCade
And spam uses another 60% I'm sure
The simple truth is that interstellar distances will not fit into the human imagination
- Douglas Adams
Because of the main stream-ness of BT these days, it won't be long until it will be essentially shut down. It is too easy to obtain the IP address of those transfering and downloading, that the MPAA and RIAA will have a field day. More people will be sued than ever before. Sad day for file sharing.
Given that BT requires a link to a .torrent, how hard is it for companies to send a C&D to the ISP/owner of any site hosting illegal .torrent links?
...we'll all have to change p2p apps again soon, right?
Thanks for writing that article!
Now we all have to find another way to P2P!
I'm confused. Are they saying that mainstream web traffic accounts for far less than 35% of the bandwidth the internet consumes? By saying that BT is "dwarfing" the web traffic, that would make me think that something like 5-10% of traffic is HTTP. Am I wrong in finding that hard to believe?
My sig is blank, I typed this by hand.
What the FUCK does this have to do with my rights?
... that I live in Canada where this is still legal.
And you guys though that America was the home of the free.
DarkMantle I been bored, so I started a blog.
Post a link to it here. Thank you.
I only use it for downloading Linux ISO's. It really is the best way to get them. The old way of FTP sites sucked, especially when a new distribution was released.
Apparently, someone at my ISP does as well. Since it's the only P2P program that they allow traffic from.
35% of internet traffic is BitTorrent
50% is pr0n
10% is SPAM
4% is actual content
And the remaining 1% is slashdot talking about the 4% of legit websites
"The article goes on to talk about how BT is no longer beneath the radar of those who like to sue file sharers." Time to switch file sharing clients. Again.
One interesting thing about Bittorrent is that most people are getting only a small bit of data from you, and from lots of other people.
How much material needs to come from your computer in order for them to be able to sue you? If I provided only a second of content (say for a movie) how liable am I then for damages since I'm not providing the whole work?
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
"We're studying our options, as we do with all new technologies which are abused by people to engage in theft."
Phew, good thing I only use it to engage in copyright infringement.
At least the article went into an aside that, indeed, BT's are not ONLY used for illegal purposes. *sigh* If you're a company, these are a WONDERFUL software dissemination device - you have your CUSTOMERS host your downloads, and you can pretty much tell when the "novelty has worn off", as the seeds will start to vanish with declining demand/use of your product. The distribution model (Peer-2-Peer) makes a lot of sense here, I think - or is it just me?
This article seems like a bunch of hype to me. I didn't see any conclusive evidence that this amount of traffic is due to torrent downloads. I wouldn't be surprised if this is some attempt at raising concern from the masses by the (MPAA * RIAA * ETC). Trying to get people worried about losing bandwidth and having their ISPs block torrent downloads...
I'd guess that spam email, web browsing, and streaming media are all biggers players in the bandwidth game than torrents.
My medium:
35% bittorrent
64% web
1% other
By content:
99% p0rn
1% Slashdot
They are suing copyright infringers and only copyright infringers. Get it into your head if you wish to be taken seriously.
Not even remotly secure. People can see what you are downloading, no problems.
Now, I love torrents. I use them for mostly anime, which the companies have, so far, given us a polite nod to do so. Just take them down when they put in a request, and no scary lawyers. (Although I am confident that this is going to change)
Of course, torrent has also made people used to convenient downloading of big in-demand files.
So, what will the *AA's going after BTs do? The same thing that going after p2p has done. Create a new, more secure, more stealthy "sequal" to bittorrent.
no
BitTorrent wasn't designed to hide your identity unfortunately.
It's only a matter of time until they seriously crack down on Bit Torrent which is too bad because it's the only p2p app that will pull down 160KB/sec for me.
The secret is to allow for unlimited d/l and u/l but then create a perl script to monitor netstat -na and kill those connections via iptables which have a high recv q. Otherwise they'll suck down all your upload bandwidth.
2 years and no mod points. Join reddit. Because openness is good.
When the mainstream press finds out where to find illegal files (or the best P2P app to do so) then that site or app is quickly on its way to the grave.
Anybody got a torrent?
Is it really fair to compare BitTorrent to other P2P applications? Based on the way it works (and in my personal experience), it seems you can get much higher speeds with BitTorrent* than with other P2P apps, and therefore eat up much more bandwidth. *Only on "popular" files, of course. But isn't it just as rare that you'll get fast speeds on an "unpopular" file on, say, Kazaa?
Hey, did they take my pr0n traffic for account? Obviously not.
Ever try running Peer Guardian and downloading a popular illegal torrent? It's amazing how many connections it blocks at times.
if bittorrent is 35%, and the web is less than that, what's the rest??? SPAM? Trojans? Zombie net scanning?
Donald 'Duck' Dunn: We had a band powerful enough to turn goat piss into gasoline.
the true land of the free! :) Let's run as many BT servers here boys and gals! How aboot that hey!
How about some torrent sites with great legal content?
This site is excellent.
If you have never used BT and watched how it consumes bandwidth, you really ought to check it out. Pretty neat.
Tools like Etherape will draw funky realtime network connectivity maps. Watching your computer talk to that many other peers makes you feel pretty exposed.
Azureus is my preferred graphical client under Linux. Any other favorites?
Sandvine's product is being speculated as the culprit. More details here. Is there anyway around this? I don't want to be stuck downloading new distros (which are coming soon) with slow BT.
BitTorrent was intentionally designed not to hide IP addresses as its developer, Bram Cohen, openly acknowledges. That's because his goal wasn't to develop a P2P tool that could be used to share content illegally but to develop a P2P tool that reduced bandwidth for legally shared content, such as Linux ISOs, etc.
"Accept that some days you are the pigeon, and some days you are the statue." - David Brent, Wernham Hogg
This is a good thing, right? I mean it saves a lot of work from servers, for instance: lets say atari releases a game demo, atari saves money by putting up a bittorent link and saving bandwidth. Also congradulations, Bram! Your program is a success. I cannot possibly see negative implications from this, correct me if I am wrong.
What possible reason could there be to disallow me from seeding linux ISO's on my bandwidth, that I'm paying my ISP good money for? Do you think it's a bad idea that an amateur film maker or muscian has a way of distributing their work for virtually zero cost, since people are often paying for the bandwidth anyway, if they use it or not. Wasn't the internet designed as a decentralized network? Is anybody really this stupid?
No. Even back when I had an RHN membership, I downloaded RH9 from BitTorrent instead of RedHat. It was much faster. The official sites got slammed, so the distributed system worked better. BitTorrent is ideal for new releases because there are lots of peers active on those files at that time. This is exactly the situation BitTorrent was designed for, and it works well.
This is a lil OT, but is it legal to download mp3's if you own the physical cd? I know some people just don't know how to rip the mp3's off their cds. What if your CDs get stolen? Do you still own a license to that music? My music collection was stolen.. TWICE! What about dl'ing tv shows? To me, this is nothing more than a vcr, but is it legal??
but how much of that 35% is porn...anyone got some torrents? j/k
Cynical, aren't we?
Doesn't it make more sense to get these from "the source"?
In case you haven't been paying attention, the "source" is usually providing the torrent. (Go to any major Linux distribution to check. I dare you.)
The gutenburg mirrors seem like the best place for this.
But God-aweful slow. Distributing the bandwidth allows for a larger number of files to be moved faster.
Might as well add that with BT there is a chance that your GTA demo is really a mis-labelled Halo demo.
Again, many of these torrents are now provided by "the source". Since they seed the torrent, you can be sure that it's properly labeled. Improper labeling is usually a side-effect of getting it from "questionable" channels.
Google would be better for most of this.
Poppycock. Google only caches HTML. It's difficult to say if even they have the bandwidth to cache multimedia files.
For most of this, it makes more sense to get the files elsewhere. For now, BT makes the most sense for copyright infringement materials, where for the most part no-one dares to host them on typical static web pages or download sites.
Again, this is poppycock. PDF files can be *huge* for freely available information. "The BeFS FileSystem" and "Mozilla Platform Developers Guide" are just two examples off the top of my head. And only a few months ago, I mirrored creative commons PDFs for Slashdot, although I don't remember what they were.
Javascript + Nintendo DSi = DSiCade
I know the RIAA can bust you for downloading music, and the MPAA can bust you for downloading movies... is there any large organization (other than HBO, CBS, etc) that is looking to bust people for downloading television shows?
I have in the past downloaded shows when my VCR or DVR crapped out and didn't tape them so I was curious of the legalities of this.
I've received 2 DMCA notices for downloading "Dead Like Me" episodes... even though I'm a paying subscriber to ShowTime. Oh well, that's why I got a Tivo
because what hunting rifle has a bayonet lug
..where they call *anyone* participating in the enterprise a "co-conspirator" and everybody gets the full punishment, despite only a small participation in the actual "crime".
According to a new study, Sedans account for an astounding 35 percent of all the traffic on the Highway -- more than all other vehicle types combined -- and dwarfs mainstream traffic like station wagons.
The article goes on to talk about how Sedans are no longer beneath the radar of those who like to sue people who transport people and items that might just fucking belong to them in the first place.
Can someone tell me how many percentage points there are in all the internets? I'm pretty certain that about 70% is pron, 50% is spam mail and at least 85% of all internet traffic was in the form of mysterious, partisan, hard to prove or disprove, statistics about internet traffic.
Guess you are: "Do you think it's a bad idea that an amateur film maker or musician..." Where did I say that this was a bad idea? Or that no-one should be allowed to spew Linux ISO's on their account??? I was just listing how most of the things in that list could be done better elsewhere.
Don't blame Durga. I voted for Centauri.
Enabling users to share copyrighted material illicitly may put Suprnova and its users on shaky legal ground.
So, if their torrents enable people to share this copyrighted material, breaking the law, does that mean that the means that enable them to provide the enabling torrents are also on legal shaky (e.g. the Internet)? And if so, are those who enabled the Internet as we know it today (Universities, Companies, etc...) are also on legal shaky ground because they started this whole crazy revolution that has resulted in fudamentally enabling someone to commit a crime?
I guess they should start putting disclaimers on all comoputers, recording equipment, writing utensils and paper, since all of which could possibly enable you to commit a crime.
In reference to Suprnova "They're doing something flagrantly illegal, but getting away with it because they're offshore," said (Bittorrent creator)Cohen. He is not eager to get into a battle about how his creation is used. "To me, it's all bits," he said."
I've always liked Cohen's attitude, and his transparency about Bittorrent's lack of privacy. I do though wonder if Slovenian law might differ from that of the United States.
Three Squirrels
Technology Thursday November 4, 3:01 AM LIVEWIRE - File-sharing network thrives beneath the radar By Adam Pasick LONDON (Reuters) - A file-sharing program called BitTorrent has become a behemoth, devouring more than a third of the Internet's bandwidth, and Hollywood's copyright cops are taking notice. For those who know where to look, there's a wealth of content, both legal -- such as hip-hop from the Beastie Boys and video game promos -- and illicit, including a wide range of TV shows, computer games and movies. Average users are taking advantage of the software's ability to cheaply spread files around the Internet. For example, when comedian Jon Stewart made an incendiary appearance on CNN's political talk show "Crossfire," thousands used BitTorrent to share the much-discussed video segment. Even as lawsuits from music companies have driven people away from peer-to-peer programs like KaZaa, BitTorrent has thus far avoided the ire of groups such as the Motion Picture Association of America. But as BitTorrent's popularity grows, the service could become a target for copyright lawsuits. According to British Web analysis firm CacheLogic, BitTorrent accounts for an astounding 35 percent of all the traffic on the Internet -- more than all other peer-to-peer programs combined -- and dwarfs mainstream traffic like Web pages. "I don't think Hollywood is willing to let it slide, but whether they're able to (stop it) is another matter," Bram Cohen, the programmer who created BitTorrent, told Reuters. John Malcolm, director of worldwide anti-piracy operations for the MPAA, said that his group is well aware of the vast amounts of copyrighted material being traded via BitTorrent. "It's a very efficient delivery system for large files, and it's being used and abused by a hell of a lot of people," he told Reuters. "We're studying our options, as we do with all new technologies which are abused by people to engage in theft." FOR GOOD OR EVIL BitTorrent, which is available for free on http://bittorrent.com, can be used to distribute legitimate content and to enable copyright infringement on a massive scale. The key is to understand how the software works. Let's say you want to download a copy of this week's episode of "Desperate Housewives." Rather than downloading the actual digital file that contains the show, instead you would download a small file called a "torrent" onto your computer. When you open that file on your computer, BitTorrent searches for other users that have downloaded the same "torrent." BitTorrent's "file-swarming" software breaks the original digital file into fragments, then those fragments are shared between all of the users that have downloaded the "torrent." Then the software stitches together those fragments into a single file that a users can view on their PC. Sites like Slovenia-based Suprnova (http://www.suprnova.org) offer up thousands of different torrents without storing the shows themselves. Suprnova is a treasure trove of movies, television shows, and pirated games and software. Funded by advertising, it is run by a teen-age programmer who goes only by the name Sloncek, who did not respond to an e-mailed interview request. Enabling users to share copyrighted material illicitly may put Suprnova and its users on shaky legal ground. "They're doing something flagrantly illegal, but getting away with it because they're offshore," said Cohen. He is not eager to get into a battle about how his creation is used. "To me, it's all bits," he said. But Cohen has warned that BitTorrent is ill-suited to illegal activities, a view echoed by John Malcolm of MPAA. "People who use these systems and think they're anonymous are mistaken," Malcolm said. Asked if he thought sites like Suprnova were illegal, he said: "That's still an issue we're studying, that reasonable minds can disagree on," he said. GOING LEGIT Meanwhile, BitTorrent is rapidly emerging as the preferred means of distributing large amounts of legitimate content such as versions of the free computer operating system Linux, and these be
This
Check http://www.blizzard.com/
Blizzard (how ironic, a subsidiary of Vivendi Universal) will be using torrents to more efficiently distribute world of warcraft beta files, and almost certainly to reduce their future bandwidth costs as they release future game patches.
The idea is for the "source" to host torrent files instead of having to host mirrors of thier content. This allows the users of the content to share in the bandwidth costs.
The way torrents work, its really not possible to download a torrent file from a legit source (for instance your GTA demo) and end up downloading a mis-labelled file.
You are absolutly right! Why didn't I see that before, lets just use Google's infinite bandwidth and hosting instead of trying to come up with an alternative. Or did I miss the point and give fuel to your flame?
Nearly any legal content that you can get via BT makes sense to get via BT if you endup ULing anything at all--that reduces strain on the source. It also makes more sense if the file is wanted from geographically diverse areas, but for which the source has a server in a single location.
... that apparently started all of this. It was published by Cache Logic, who make traffic statistics boxes.
http://www.cachelogic.com/research/slide1.php
sigs, as if you care.
I was just thinking about this yesterday about SafePeer, a plug-in to a popular BTclient Azureus. It contains a blacklist of IP addresses that won't have data uploaded to. The RIAA & co. can get the IP addresses of users running BT but they won't be able to claim that they have uploaded (shared) anything if they can't get any data from us. The theory goes that we'll be legally safer if they can't make this claim.
The blacklist file is impressively large (more than 1MB) but strangely blocks local network IP addresses (in the 192.168.x.x range).
Go give him some money so he can do more cool stuff for us!
bamph
It consistently amazes me the verocity of the RIAA, MPAA, etc. What they are going after is the same intellectual property that they protect. Software, movies, videos, audio, and music.. it's all valuable Intellectual Property. Now, yes, it can be used for Illegal usage (Kazaa, bittorrent as it seems, Morpheus, etc.), but what about the illegal usage of software like, oh, let's say, Word? To construct a document that is completely against the law, about harboring terrorism, etc.
Or the illegal possibilities of using a FTP server or web server? IIS and Apache.. look out! Someone stick up a site that can serve up some divx files or some mp3s and they DOWN... but the software behind it's just fine?
Let's not go off too much here. How many RIAA/MPAA employees' kids are using this is what I want to know (let alone the lawyers defending them). I guess my point here is just that any software can be Illegal. Any service can be used illegally - go after UUNet and Broadwing and all the backbones - for providing the high speed platform for sharing the files. (I'll probably get slammed for saying that now because asir it's not legally possible to go after the ISP for user's issues... but it would be in the same sense that the software company's allowing illegal content to be distributed over their system.)
Let's just figure out a way to use software like this for a use like http://www.akamai.com/.. Mirroring the web and all of its content (legal or illegal) on the web would make all of our lives easier :-)
What about podcasting? I know a lot of podcasters just use plain old references to mp3/ogg files, but have seen several (those with less available bandwidth, for example) using it as a means to distribute torrent files.
---
Other than freenet, what options are there for anonymous p2p?n ymous+p2p&spell=1
a google doesn't show much
http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&c2coff=1&q=ano
Can any bit torrent clients/plugins use anonymous proxies?
I know I _always_ have bittorrent running constantly. Right now I'm torrenting a couple gigs of Love Hina songs and miscellaneous stuff.
Seriously, who here runs bittorrent 24/7/365? Every college guy (like myself) should be running bittorrent. If not, you're missing some good stuff.
n/t
Comment removed based on user account deletion
Most of that traffic is people downloading the betas and stress tests, it'll go down once the game's released.
I don't see any references in the article...
Candy-Coated Knowledge
What group recorded that hit song, linux-2.6.10.tar.bz?
The living have better things to do than to continue hating the dead.
*Enable Cloaking Device* If I may quote and link to an article I read back in June...I find it blends with this topic very well.
"Peer-to-peer systems like Kazaa differ from Napster in another way: They've beaten the entertainment companies in court.
In April 2003, Judge Stephen Wilson of U.S. District Court in Los Angeles said that two file-sharing-service companies, Streamcast Networks Inc.'s Morpheus and Grokster Ltd., didn't contribute to copyright infringement by users. Although they make file-sharing software, the companies aren't liable for what people do with it, Wilson ruled."
"...Leeching' and `Seeding' Next, the pirate loads the movie onto a computer and compresses it, so the file takes less time to upload and download. For distribution, many pirates use BitTorrent, a computer protocol for transferring files. Bram Cohen, a 1993 graduate of Stuyvesant High School in New York, invented BitTorrent as a faster way to send big files.
BitTorrent, which isn't affiliated with the TorrentBits movie site, encourages sharing because it takes less time to download a movie when you're simultaneously uploading one. Uploading a film is called ``seeding,'' and downloading is known as ``leeching.''
Cohen, 28, tailored BitTorrent for the etree community: followers of bands like the Grateful Dead that let fans tape concerts and swap the music on the Internet as long as they don't sell it. Cohen says he opposes trading copyrighted movies. ``You unleash a technology on the world, and you can't control it,'' he says.
Cohen says he supports himself with donations from BitTorrent users. He invites contributions on his Web site, www.bitconjurer.org, and says he has no plans to turn his software into a business.
Yes. Google has excellent image preview, and searches within PDFs. For video, however, you are right.
Don't blame Durga. I voted for Centauri.
We got smart real quick and block it both at work and the ISP I admin for!
Got Code?
can't all be linux distros... I mean we're renowned for checking out distros at the drop of a hat, but 35% of all web traffic... now that's just not on...
Donald 'Duck' Dunn: We had a band powerful enough to turn goat piss into gasoline.
BitTorrent has become the primary transfer method for most porn traders. I don't think the MPAA is going file anonymous lawsuits for copyright infringement of 'Ass Lovers 3'. Do porn studios even belong to the MPAA?
My knowledge of TCP/IP is too limited to know if anonymous and efficient p2p is possible, something other layers of proxies which would just about ensure poor performance.
Can anyone comment (intelligently?)
Since Sloncek means "little elephant" this must be a bi-partisan effort ;)
Sites like Slovenia-based Suprnova (http://www.suprnova.org) offer up thousands of different torrents without storing the shows themselves.
Suprnova is a treasure trove of movies, television shows, and pirated games and software. Funded by advertising, it is run by a teen-age programmer who goes only by the name Sloncek, who did not respond to an e-mailed interview request.
If it gets any higher maybe Microsoft or Disney will buy them and start charging gobs of money.
The porn industry said that it didn't care as long as people share the porn within themself and weren't making a profit out of it, so most of us are fine and shouldn't be affected my our friends at MPAA/RIAA.
The study comes from CacheLogic (http://www.cachelogic.com), which sells bandwidth throttling appliances to ISPs, schools, companies, etc. Considering that their business is to scare large-scale internet users into throttling the bandwidth use of your typical BT user, I don't find it at all surprising that they are claiming somewhat inflated numbers for P2P use on the internet at large.
Do you mean that most of the requests from outside organizations to shut off students' connections are about BitTorrent files, or that most of the requests from your network administrators to shut off a connection that is using too much bandwidth are related to BitTorrent?
Tired of free iPod sigs? Subscribe to my blacklist
I've never used it but heard the name a few times.
I don't find it very likely that BitTorrent authors will be sued. Many Linux distributions use BitTorrent to distribute Linux ISOs. Many download sites, like Filerush.com, offer torrents as alternatives in addition to normal HTTP/FTP download sites.
Heck, even the entertainment industry could use BitTorrent-like technology to offer video or music on demand without having to invest truckloads of money into bandwidth.
Not at all. For one, banning tools like P2P clients just because some people are using them for illegal activities is silly. If that's the path we are going down, why don't we ban stuff like knives and guns? Or PCs. Or the Internet!Wheher BitTorrent was designed with copyright infringement in mind is completely irrelevant. It's seeing many useful legal purposes. I use it for completely legal downloads all the time.
Blame the people, not the tools.
Clever signature text goes here.
Unless they can hone in on your IP (as a seed) and download an entire file from you, they can't really get you for sending/distributing the files as far as I can tell (though they can do this, they'd have to wait in the queue to download XXXMB from you and you alone... or claim they did). On the other hand, being able to send them bits and pieces means that you probably are in posession of the full copy, making you a pretty big target :)
Wouldn't it be wiser to change their business model to harness these technologies rather than fight them? These technologies are here to stay.
when you see the word 'Linux', drink!
And how did they come up with this number?
//A
I mean, is it just traffic based in the US? Traffic from one specific segemtn to another, or is it in actual fact just a number grabbed out of thin air?
Latter seems the most likely to me.
Guys Check out that graph againp hp
http://www.cachelogic.com/research/slide1.
(thx to whoever posted it for posting it)
Its for a Single ISP (TIER one)
And the total of the graph isnt even 1000mbit
This isnt a total internet survey hehe
"We're studying our options, as we do with all new technologies which are abused by people to engage in theft." They still apparently don't konw the difference between copywright infringement and theft.
A recent study found that new "broadband" technologies, such as cable modems and DSL, are rapidly becoming the primary distribution tools of digital pirates. Nearly 99% of illegaly downloaded content is trasmitted over broadband. John Malcolm, director of worldwide anti-piracy operations for the MPAA, said that his group is well aware of the vast amounts of copyrighted material being traded via broadband. "It's a very efficient delivery system for large files, and it's being used and abused by a hell of a lot of people," he told Reuters. "We're studying our options, as we do with all new technologies which are abused by people to engage in theft."
every day http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Random
Didn't FTP address the same issue though. I seem to remember many FTP sites getting nuked for linking to illegal downloads. Quite likely this might depend on who your host is though
Don't think the RIAA/MPAA don't know about these things. Its trivially easy to order a DSL line or a telco leased line without the capabilitiy of outsiders to know exactly who you are.
That's not even a little bit true. Google caches PostScript, PDF, Word, Excel, just to name a few. In fact, according to their FAQ, they cache 12 file types, and plan to add more.
Now, that's not to say that Google will replace BitTorrent, but they cache a heck of a lot more than HTML.
There is no sig, there is only Zuul.
I even took the time to write a Plucker BitTorrent mini-FAQ for the users who are misinformed about the technology itself. We've had great success overall, but it has definately tapered off. When we make our next release, it'll spike to 3-5GiB/day served up as before.
You can see some of our snazzy usage graphs of the BitTorrent traffic as well.
I also modified our tracker so you could sort and click to download the files directly from the tracker webpage itself, instead of using the normal download page from our site. Thanks to some helpful http and rsync mirrors, the load is spread out nicely, and the mirror links are randomized to make sure it spreads evenly.
If anyone is interested in seeding for us, or being an http or rsync mirror for Plucker, please contact me.
Blizzard has been using their own BT client to distribute the clients and patches for World of Warcraft. While it works reasonably well for most testers it is a constant source of negative discussion on the forums. Most of the issues people have with it relate to the specialized client that likes to use up too much upload bandwidth which can cripple your download unreasonably.
"Oh yeah? Then we'll double bankrupt him!"
BitTorrent is probably one of the most transparent systems. It gives each file a unique identifier which is not particular to the site providing the data, so it is much easier to precisely identify an illegally-distributed torrent than a mirrored web or ftp site. It's also easy to determine what places a file is coming from.
I wouldn't be surprised if the ??AA put up searchable lists of the torrents which they claim to own and which they'd looked at and don't own. Clients could check against these lists and inform the user about the claimed license status of files before downloading them.
Using other 'percent' type quotes, all of which backed up their information as much as this article did (which is to say, didn't), I discovered this:
About 80 percent of Internet traffic flows through Virginia.
Over 80 percent of traffic on the Internet is transported by Cisco equipment.
10 percent of Internet traffic, by some estimates, [is viruses scanning]
Music is 50 percent of internet traffic.
All meaningless stats, un-qualified. Pap. Probably just like this '35%' number. How do you measure 'internet traffic'? How can you possibly estimate it?
I have 85% confidence in this message.
Off-topic, but posting near the top in the hopes of a response.
Does this torrent work? I've only played with BitTorrent just a little bit, but I wanted to download a TV movie that I missed and this was the only place I've found it. No dilution of copyright is intended; just wish to "borrow the VHS cassette from a friend who recorded it".
Fire and Meat. Yummy.
I look after a large network and wish to block Bittorrent clients. What ports do you need to block, and which are the main websites that people use to find .torrents? I will be blocking suprnova.org. Alot of our users are Chinese and use BitComet.
even the entertainment industry could use BitTorrent-like technology to offer video or music on demand without having to invest truckloads of money into bandwidth
They *could*, but they won't, because it deprives them the means to control distribution.
This is an industry whose MO has been to resist *every* new technology, whether it's beneficial to them or not - look at the lawsuit launched by Disney/Universal against the VCR - they wanted it banned, caput, illegal... even though today home video sales make up a huge percentage of their profits, they still hate it, because they no longer control the distribution (once they sell a video, they can't stop you from selling it to someone else.)
Look at the music industry, who fought tooth-and-nail against *radio*, claiming it would end music (after all, who would pay to go to a concert when you can get the music for free in your own home, and if nobody will pay for live music, how will musicians earn money?) It wasn't until they discovered they could control the airwaves that they finally (and begrudgingly) gave in - until the advent of the home tape recorder gave them new reason to fear.
The entertainment industries don't *care* about any potential benefits new technology will bring them, they're stuck in their old business model ways, and fear anything that might possibly provide competition for their cartels.
I don't find it very likely that BitTorrent authors will be sued. Many Linux distributions use BitTorrent to distribute Linux ISOs
I disagree.
I believe that this reason makes it even more likely that BitTorrent authors and users will be sued.
Not only is BitTorrent used to distribute copyright infringing material, it is also used to distribute that commie, er., um, I mean terrorist operating system used by hackers. And doesn't that "linux" thing also infringe SCO's intellectual property?
The price of freedom is eternal litigation.
If you were to run a BT client on say port 21 or some other port then the usual... and you had the stream encrypted...
how hard would it be to figure out that you were downloading?
and if we had some sort of peer authentication.. so you know you weren't communicating with the big guys..
God is real unless declared as int
Does this mean that I am now going to get sued by the RIAA/MPAA for downloading the World of Warcraft Beta that I received from Blizzard? Maybe I should start investing in some high power defense lawyers.
-Valen
cos it's fucking class. free stuff, fast.
You're a peer on the network (or a leech as most are) and you're downloading a given torrent, and uploading to others as well. You're intent is obviously to get the entire file or collection of files. I would have to imagine you're busted here as well
.torrent files are named one thing and actually point to something quite different. Again, another area to claim ignorance ("I didn't know what I was downloading! And I deleted it as soon as I realized what it was!")
The loophole here may be that you could claim ignorance. If you don't have the entire file, you can't be 100% sure it is copyrighted. There is a massive amount of LEGAL material going around on BT, so "how can you be sure?" Also, some
What I'm saying is, if you are sharing a complete file of something on some P2P network, you have full access to that complete file and are therefore responsible for its content. If you are sharing random parts of some file on BT and have no way to inspect what the full file is, it would seem to me that you could not be held liable.
If you are seeding that is different, and I'm sure you could be held liable since you have the entire thing.
Of course, IANAL either. And I doubt this matters anyway, since with BT, there are quite clearly a number of central sites that provide torrents of copyrighted material. If they want to go after illegal BT downloads, they simply go after those sites. People will still trade torrents of copyrighted material, but if they shut down those big sites it will stay away from the mainstream.
Blizzard is using BT for transfering files to their Testers of their World of Warcraft game. Every time we get a new client download its well over 2gigs of data they are pushing. Patches are around 250-300megs. That's a lot of data to be pushing around.
Sig? No thanks, I don't smoke.
What point are you trying to make overall? That bittorrent should be illegal because there are other sources of the files?
No problems with bad labels here. Video Game Demos (those things are getting huge!). Sourceforge clearly labels the downloads and organizes them in a way that BT doesn't.
HUH? I have very good luck and speed with torrents when compared to a more conventional mirror. Check out the latest stats for this Knoppix torrent. Over 30k downloads and roughly 20TB. The link to the torrent download is on the same page that lists the conventional mirror sites, what is mislabeled or hard to figure out? Are you making stuff up?
Using your line of thought, we should ban FTP because you can use http to get files also.
Google would be better for most of this.
How many files have you downloaded from Google? I bet it was NONE. Google will help you FIND the link to what you search for. That link can be a ftp, http, or bittorrent link to the actual content.
Bad boys rape our young girls but Violet gives willingly.
"Given that BT requires a link to a .torrent, how hard
is it for companies to send a C&D to the ISP/owner of any site hosting illegal .torrent links? "
A few people are working on an anonymous BT tracker tool system for I2P.*ONLY* the BT tracker will be anonymous in this subtool that is being worked on as seen here on an update from 2 days ago. This would allow for publisher anonymity and should be fast since the tracker only coordinates the peers, with the peers doing the heavy lifting.
Of course having full anonymity (for the peers as well) would be useful , and maybe possible, but as your post suggsted - BT is vunerable at the tracker/publisher source. This is a solution to that vunerability, and in any event I2P is fully anonymous itself, if you want peer anonymity for a file :).
This BT tool is not ready yet for I2P, but I2P itself is making remarkable progress so I would not be surprised if it is ready within less than a few months. For more information you can also find the #I2P channel, with the #Freenet channel, on irc.freenode.net , I2P's chat network and IIP (I2P and the Metro IIP are linked).
The thing to consider is that unlike Kazaa-like networks where the big bad *AA could search for their albums / movies and find out how many illegal files a user has by viewing their shared folder, torrents exist only for a single entity at a time, so the *AA trying to sue someone for downloading [insert crappy pop album here] would only be able to sue for that particular infringment, and they wouldn't be able to prove the user has 10,000 other albums on their system.
This, I would think, makes it dramatically harder, and alot less financially viable for them to start dragging BitTorrent users downloading illegal files into court, and is probably why it hasn't happened yet.
She's built like a steak house, but she handles like a bistro....
When I was using torrent to d/l the latest Ubuntu Linux ISOs, I noticed a huge spike in the number of probes and scans to my system. It's not just the RIAA/MPAA that BT doesn't hide your identity from! :)
Interestingly, I don't see this kind of spike when getting (legal) concert recordings from bt.etree.org. But that's probably subject to change without notice at any point. Fortunately, my only open port (ssh) is configured with libwrap to block access from any but a few specific IPs, and I keep an eye on my logs just in case. But I definitely think this is something people should be aware of. Using BT does make you a more visible target for attacks, and not just legal ones!
Certainly no reason not believe them, its not like they have a conflict of interest or anything. Nothing to see here, move along please!
But is google designed for distributing this pdf to everyone? When 40,000 people hit your site for your latest programming book, do you really want to tell them "sorry, I'm over bandwidth, just download the crappy html-ized cache copy sans images from google"
If I have been able to see further than others, it is because I bought a pair of binoculars.
The more I see articles like this the more I think the software business is dead -- at least for small time outfits.
The question to programmers: have you been burned by traders of software? Have you released a program only to see it traded freely? Has it made you want to quit?
I haven't been able to load Suprnova for the past couple of days. I'm sure Slashdot isn't helping but it seemed to be dead or dying beforehand.
"People that quote themselves in their signatures bother me" - athakur999
If that is one of his masterpieces, what is the rest of his work?
/. a family site...
Don't answer, we want to keep
Not having many users.
No no no. He said it was clear that BitTorrent wasn't designed with copyright infringement in mind. And that's why copyright infringers should use something else. Because it is sub-optimal for stealing. The distributors (supernova or whatever) will be wide open targets.
There are no trails. There are no trees out here.
Wheher BitTorrent was designed with copyright infringement in mind is completely irrelevant. It's seeing many useful legal purposes. I use it for completely legal downloads all the time.
Incidently, BT *was* designed for legal purposes. There is a distinct lack of anonymity in the application, making it easy to see who to sue. This, of course, is not usually a problem in legal sharing.
You mist the negative. The GP was saying it was clear BitTorrent was *not* designed for copyright infringing uses.
Look out!
They cache HTML conversions of those non-HTML files, not the original formats. You can lose a lot in the HTML conversion...
I didn't know until now you could do that. The only reason I got BitTorrent was to download Knoppix.
Ignorance is curable, stupid is forever.
>I don't have a whole lot of sympathy for anybody caught infringing on software/movie/music copyrights with BitTorrent.
Well, I gotta ask, how would you categorize me? The few times I've made a torrent is to show a video clip, like the daily show or some animation. I don't get permission and believe this falls under fair use. There are two bitorrent communities, at least as far as I can tell, the P2P suprnova crowd and the "crap I dont have enough bandwidth from my webhost to offer this" crowd. They both deal in copyrighted materials, yet their intent and use are almost opposites. suprnova gives you free stuff, I give you something I want to comment on or share (usually not the full episode).
On top if it, I wonder how many more Venture Brothers fans and Daily Show watchers there now just because of internet buzz and torrents? Be it full episodes or just snippets.
AtariAmarok completely missing the point of BitTorrent and has probably never used it.
BT is crap for most copyright infringement materials. Why? Actually, for the exact reason stated--"for the most part no-one dares to host them on typical static web pages or download sites."
BT is nothing like napster or kazaa or that sort of P2P app. There is no search function in the BT client. Most BT links are on typical web pages. (Ok, they're not static--the list of torrents is probably in a database or flat file and page generated. But then again, look around the web, the typical web page these days is not static.)
As far the best source for ISOs, Gutenburg, game demos...
WHERE THE HELL DO YOU THINK YOU ARE?
No, not Earth, silly...this web site. /.
Hello, McFly. Ever hear of the slashdot effect? Ever hear of so many people hitting a server at the same time the poor thing dies? DDoS?
So when the DNF demo comes out, and a million fanboys on DSL at home and T-1s at work all go to download it at the same time, "the source" is the ABSOLUTELY WORST PLACE ON THE INTERNET to try to grab a copy.
Now, follow me, over the rainbow.
Imagine...it's easy if you try...an internet where we harness the bandwidth of all those fanboys. A system where instead of the flow of information getting choked off, the flow actually increases as more people download the file!
AtariAmarok mentions mirrors. Well, what if--I know this is crazy, but hang with me here--what if not only did each person downloading a file share that file to others to take advantage of downstream and upstream bandwidth, so that each download becomes a mirror, but what if this could happen simultaneous to download. Each user could share whatever piece of the file available locally without waiting for the download to complete. Each download, instead of being part of the problem, is part of the solution!
If only such a wonder system of distribution existed. Oh wait, it does.
AtariAmarok does make one valid point. How do you know what you are downloading is what you think you are downloading?
You don't. But then again, someone could hack the DNS server so when you try to visit slashdot you actually end up at some goat-related web site.
So, for AtariAmarok the solution is to unplug your modem, turn off your computer, and encase your hard drive in carbonite.
For the rest of us, BT is here. Ask your doctor if BT is right for you.
If you're not downloading copyrighted material, then you're not uploading it, either. Since BT was not built with any sort of security in mind, then the "man" (the *AA, your campus network admin, your boss) can check on the bits you're passing... and will see that you're not passing any copyrighted bits.
What's that, you say? You want to transmit copyrighted bits? Then be warned: with BT, the "man" is watching you, and if you're doing something illegal or unethical, you may be caught. There's enough freely distributable bits out there to keep you happy for the rest of your life. Try it out.
The cure for cancer is coming: Reovirus
How to leech the latest distro without killing your connection:
/path/to/torrents
btlaunchmanycurses.bittornado --max_upload_rate (75%ofupstream) --max_download_rate (95%ofdownstream)
Its important to use launchmany because you want to be able to run multiple torrents concurrently, and limit their total upstream capability.
A little overkill never hurt anybody.
I mean, look at what all that high-level coding nonsense is causing! Look what it's being used for!
I say go ahead [RI|MP]AA! sue Kerningham & Richie! That will put a cap on all the terrorrists that hog our internet downloading child porn!
Or maybe we can sue the IETF for giving us IPv4?
Pah. Sueing the guy who invented torrent. I doubt even americans will go that low.
-
Just a note on use of BT to distribute files. Blizzard has been "evaluating" a bit torrent file distribution system for some time. AFAIK it is now the planned distribution mechanism for patches and content updates in the soon to be released World of Warcraft MMO.
:-)
Many of the posts on how this system handled the 2.6 GB files they were throwing around are terrible, giving the entire distribution mechism a black eye in that community. If any of you are skilled in the coding of a BT, call Blizzard for a job!
No matter how subtle the wizard, a knife between the shoulder blades will seriously cramp his style.
First there was FTP, downloaders were at the mercy of said server's selection and disk space. It was easy to send legal threats to the site's owner and get things shutdown.
Then we had Napster, people traded a song at a time. Things got a little rougher for the suers, but they eventually got Napster shut down.
Next, they used GNUtella, people traded all kinds of files like mad. It was impossible to "shut it all down", but they could sue individual users.
Now we have BitTorrent, you can get entire albums or sets of software media with a single click. The more people you had on a torrent, the faster it went, so people handed out torrent links like mad.
Seems to me like these suers are making life more and more difficult on themselves. They should probably stop before the uber-crypto, super compressed multicast version of BT comes out.
You don't stop piracy, you just force them into better and better (for them) situations and give yourself a damned headache.
But it is a P2P protocol. What it isn't is a file sharing protocol.
One use of torrent tracking sites that many people seem to not see is as a rating system. Another words, how many seeders and leechers there are for a specific torrent. If you just look at last night's prime time tv shows/sitcomes/reality tv/whatever, you have a Nielsen system of sorts, except that these actual numbers of people wanting to see the show, versus a canned response to a questionnaire.
SuperNova doesn't actually provide any content. They only provide information about exisiting content. I have not seen a single Torrent site where you can actually download a movie, MP3, or anything other than a .torrent file (which is basically text that described the Torrent).
????
In the mean time, I'm starting a petition at my University to un-ban BitTorrent. Of course Slashdot's now reporting how much bandwidth it can use, so there goes that idea.
:)
Damn it!
Pereant, inquit, qui ante nos nostra dixerunt.
"Confound those who have said our remarks before us."
Change the default ports for BT. They're just limiting the default ports. BT allows the clients to determine ports so if you use a group higher, say somewhere in the 10000 - 40000 range, you should see an improved download speed. I used to get 6-7K on most torrents now I get 30-80 on most. It also makes your dick longer.
If a Distro is producing and distributing GPL'd works, I would hope that they're making the source code available in a non-convoluted form, like conventional FTP or HTTP. Or on physical media by request.
A 'torrent'-only distribution seems okay, but it sets a dangerous precedent
"What's the frequency Kenneth?"
Has anyone determined if it would be theoretically possible to create a file sharing system whose users would be impervious to legal attack? Could files be somehow split up into millions of pieces and storage be shared to create some sort of networked soup of data in which no one person could be held responsible for holding an entire file? Is such a system even mathematically possible? If so, we need it.
You would definitely want to change torrent sites. If everyone knows about Suprnova.org and The Pirate Bay then the MPAA can download and join torrents themselves and harvest IP addresses like crazy.
With the obvious success of BitTorrent I wonder why Firefox doesn't support it nativly as a transfer protocol. BitTorrent is a much simpler then SVG and navive support (not via an extension) for it is currently being worked on.
Does this torrent work?
I guess so, it just came to life. Guess there are other Growing Pains fans out there. (My reason? An old crush on one of the cast members.)
Fire and Meat. Yummy.
Kirk Cameron?
Karma: Dyn-o-mite!(mostly affected by Jimmy Walker reading your comments)
Kirk Cameron?
Hahahaha... No. Jeremy Miller.
Fire and Meat. Yummy.
ermm, Suprnova still works but you have to access it a different way...
For there is always a way
Remember to trust
Always watch out for the MPAA
Never give up
Christmas is near
Exactly what is the problem with SuprNova..
-
Apple is good
Apple is food
Trees grow aforementioned fruit
Ripe is always best
Apples are tasty
Do not eat rotten ones
Else you will be sick
Really really sick
Stop this now.
.
Crazy
Old
Man
of course all links to suprnova from there don't work - including some images.
when everything is working perfectly.. BREAK SOMETHING before something else FUCKS up!
I'm not a programmer, so I'm not even going to attempt to make this, but maybe getting the idea brewing in a few of the heads out there might get something going. I've always thought the lacking part of BT was that it used static torrents. Basically, in order to download the latest episode of say.... Alias, you need to find a torrent of that episode. Whether this is possible or not, I don't know, but having dynamic torrents, which automatically update themselves and share out the files inside of them would be really useful. Expanding on the example above, you have 10,000 people opening up The Alias Torrent right when the show ends, and once someone has the episode ready to send out, they drop it in the folder, the dynamic torrent updates itself, and sends it out to everyone. It's almost like a shared folder across the net. Downsides? Plenty, viruses, bogus files, goatse's, etc... But who knows, it might work. Maybe a "[X] file added to community, would you like to dl it?" would be useful. I'm just sick of having to hunt around for porn, if I have a dynamic porn torrent which automatically downloads the porn for me, I'd be happy. Hah I dunno, just wasting time at work. So programmers, get to work, I expect this to be RC by next week.
No it doesn't. They have the tracker so they control the swarm. Of course someone can set up a new tracker but the same someone could start a bt swarm for the movie file if it wasn't distributed by bittorrent but downloaded from a central server (or with a stream dump if it is streaming-only). The real way to control content is DRM.
Don't think of it as a flame---it's more like an argument that does 3d6 fire damage
BitTorrent is intended to optimize download performance and reduce ISP costs through P2P techniques, with clear efforts to prevent it from degrading into a piracy tool. If you close the download window, and the file becomes unavailable from your computer to others. If you take out the tracker managing downloads of illegal content, you stop the downloads. You take the .torrent files off the web servers, you make it so nobody can find the downloads. If a file loses popularity, as is the case when you have lots and lots of small files, like music, it'll eventually become unavailable as people close their trackers.
Unlike with traditional P2P, where your only route is to sue downloaders, copyright owners have several possible routes to police the network without suing the downloaders or the creator of BitTorrent. They can, if the law does its job, actually go straight to the source and sue the people providing the illegal downloads, just like you can with traditional client server protocols like ftp and http, while leaving legitimate users of the technology unaffected.
Why aren't there more sites like empornium.us? Limited number of new users (mostly invited), trackers keep track of amount uploaded and downloaded. Users can be banned if deemed necessary.
* If the music industry can't make money, they sell off their big ass assets, apply for corporate bailouts/welfare and/or get into another stupid ass business selling yet more garbage that continues to fuck everybody and everything up.
* Just because it's illegal doesn't mean it can't or shouldn't be done. Fuck Britney. If you get sued for illegal downloading, you pay the fine if you can afford it- (apparently like alot of corporate business practices)- and continue downloading.
* If the music industry went belly-up tommorrow, there'd still be lots of great music available, and probably more on the way to fill the wondrous void. Learn an instrument, create computer music, learn recording as a hobby, get together with your friends who are doing the same things, cut a cd/dvd, bung it online.
Fuck music for sale as the only or best kind!
Cars "kill" people, but they're still legal.
You know Torrents are more reliable than FTP or HTTP downloads? Each chunk (largest chunk size I've seen is 2 megs) is compared against an MD5 sum, if its right its put into the file, if its wrong its discarded (and the source that provided that chunk often is banned after a few failed chunks). And once the whole thing is done it checks the MD5 sum against the whole original file. Torrents are somewhat the opposite of FTP & HTTP, the more people downloading, the faster they get.
Oh and some distros may not be able to afford hosting a few hundred meg ISO image on their servers, since they would get slammed whenever a new release is made.
Kirk Cameron is HOT now!
Too bad he only has eyes for Jesus, though.
Which means he's into liberal Jews. Where's Joe Lieberman when you need him?
Fire and Meat. Yummy.
..even if it is used for warez. :) The only ones that are in trouble is the end-users, not the torrent trackers and tracker websites, since they do not distribute ANY copyright protected materials.
.torrent files. It is quite hilarious, since the torrent files are not illegal or protected by copyright and what piratebay does is not illegal as a whole, but lawyers seem to have a poor understanding of reality. :)
:)
The torrent tracker piratebay gets a lot of legal requests, from lawyers who seem to be really bad on law, to remove
Piratebay documents all its legal threats and responses on this website - have a nice read!
As long as they keep targeting Suprnova and similar sites I'm not worried. All the good torrents are kept on private trackers.
The mpaa isn't just contemplating going after bt users: they've already done it. A few weeks ago my ISP sent me an email saying that the MPAA had logged a specific complaint about copyright infringment from my IP address using the Bittorrent client. So... watch out.
So far Suprnova has really managed to escape the mass media, I wonder what sort of protection they have to handle the legal issues. Aren't they based out of the US and use proxies?
Buy Steampunk Clothing Online!
Na, that would mean making a presentable argument and not simply drowning the programmer(s) in lawsuits.
I feel that the arrogant attitude of the pirate bay will come back and haunt them; that it'll get opinion against them. It appears spiteful and childish.
Personally, I do want copyright law to be changed. I want copying to be legalized, and I see piracy as a way to do that (as a sort of mass protest), but I fear a backlash coming if we're too arrogant about it.
Don't make it look like a "problem" they have to "solve". I hear the pirate bay is hosted in Sweden, and EUCD is coming. Maybe they'll look especially into "solving the BitTorrent dilemma".
Not cynical at all, he obviously just doesn't understand what bittorrent is. He seems to be thinking of a a regular p2p search, like with kazza, etc.
Sure, if you're one of these law fetishists, you might care
Law fetishists are by definition the people with the power to lock you up and throw away the key. Sure, Argumentum ad baculum may be strictly a logical fallacy, but if the goal is to stay out of prison in order to prevent being sexually assaulted...
...BitTorrent accounts for an astounding 35 percent of all the traffic on the Internet...
3 6
Yeah, and I bet that a good 90% of that tonight will be the Ep3 trailer http://slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=04/11/04/17182
Just remember that the world can see you whether you have anything usefull to say or not. You might as well get and give something for your connection.
Knowing is half the battle, so good tools like Eatherape, Guarddog and Guidedog are indispensable. Go get it!
Friends don't help friends install M$ junk.
once again legitimate users will suffer for the violations of the very few. Congress has got to step in and put a stop to this harrassment because this one especially blocks technological advancement.
Yeah, I know, the damn copyright warriors want the freedom to crack my password and throw me in jail. They have proposed as much, but have not gotten it yet, thank goodness. I hate them and their stupid 100 year duration copyright almost as much as I hate 99.99% of crap that is copyrighted.
Friends don't help friends install M$ junk.
So when the DNF demo comes out, and a million fanboys on DSL at home and T-1s at work all go to download it at the same time, "the source" is the ABSOLUTELY WORST PLACE ON THE INTERNET to try to grab a copy.
:)
When the DNF demo comes out? That's a hypothetical situation if ever there was one...
does bittorrent use 44% of the network bandwidth. No where else but a university does that shit occur. And American traffic will differ from Western Europe traffic which differs from Eastern Europe traffic which differs from East Asian traffic.
>>Or PCs. Or the Internet! Or the biggest killer of all: the motor vehicle.
All lot of alleged problems with the internet are only problems because the incremental cost of bandwidth is negligable. The government should tax transmission of data at $.01 / megabyte. This will remove Spam and copyright problems. The money generated should be used to fund the Social Security fund.
Online Video Games can suck up a lot of bandwidth too.
"It takes a very long time to count to 2 in binary." ~'Fourlegged'
According to British Web analysis firm CacheLogic, BitTorrent accounts for an astounding 35 percent of all the traffic on the Internet
http://www.cachelogic.com/ - Advanced Solutions for P2P Networks.
Next Topic.
S: 1008. Prohibition on certain infringement actions
No action may be brought under this title alleging infringement of copyright based on the manufacture, importation, or distribution of a digital audio recording device, a digital audio recording medium, an analog recording device, or an analog recording medium, or based on the noncommercial use by a consumer of such a device or medium for making digital musical recordings or analog musical recordings.
What is the future of bittorrent?
Can it be used efficiently on smaller files, to the point of creating web caches online?
Could Bittorrent be used to mirror your Temp Internet Files and spread the network load of a web server accross all of its current users? Using an apache add-on module, some checksumming, and some smart routing/efficient protocol?
This would be the ideal way to cache web pages. Just have a the ability in the server like a nospider.txt that disables the bittorrent caching for particular directories or files, etc.
Could this work?
EMail parts of the source code to thousands of people, and then hire someone in Australia to write software that can compile files into one large binary executable, even when the files are broken up. That way, they can't sue you all, and they can't sue the Australian.
We are using the latest PacketWise v7.0 software. A week after the upgrade, noticed IP addresses that where eating up alot of bandwidth and not falling under any classification. After bounding the ethernet port and forcing the machine to re-establish it's TCP connections, we discovered from a tcpdump that the traffic was BitTorrent. And while Packeteer's PacketWise was labelling some 1% of our traffic as BitTorrent, it clearly had missed this (and *SEVERAL* other) heavy user complettely--even after bounding the ethernet port.
After sending Packeteer "support" the tcpdump, they notified us that we should just rate limit the TCP port #'s that our tcpdump shows is being used. Since BT uses a different TCP port # for every session, their advice didn't help much. After following Packeteer's advice to the letter, we calculated that 25% of our T3 bandwidth was BT traffic that was remaining unclassified and unshapped.
At this point, I consider Packeteer's claim to classify BT traffic to be fraud. I have asked my supervisor to switch to buying a NetEqualizer. Not only was their support staff able to provide more logical answers to addressing bandwidth hogging, the cost of their equipment/license was also less than a 1/6'th the cost we got robbed by Packeteer for!
"If that's the path we are going down, why don't we ban stuff like knives and guns? Or PCs. Or the Internet!"
But... guns and knives are already banned in many places. So I guess your non-DRM-enabled PC is next, outlaw.
Is there some place this modified tracker can be downloaded?
Thanks for blowing my cover.
From bittorrent.com
The tracker is how you normally get other people's IP addresses, no compromise necessary. You won't necessarily get all the IP addresses, but if you have multiple clients at once constantly connecting, you'll get almost all of them. The real question is why don't trackers use blocklists for the *AAs.
And I've never had a single sucessful download with it, despite Gigabytes of crap flowing up AND down the pipe for it.
Now I find out its practically clogging up the net.
This has got to be the biggest Internet scam ever.
Ironically this is one situation where the solution is sticking your head in the mud.
It's simple looking at suprnova it's clear there are at least 100,000 people using this at any given moment.
They really can't sue or jail them all it's impossible (unless they have some sort of referendum to assess public oppinion and get the publics backing, which seeing as how they are large faceless corporations they probably can't do).
So basically ignore the lawsuits no matter how loud they scream it on the front page and sanity will eventually prevail.
I downloaded a popular recent movie off of a suprnova bittorrent link, and the next day my internet connection was down. I called up the Cox customer support and they gave me another number to call but wouldn't tell me who I was calling. I called the other number and the guy on the other end knew the exact movie I had downloaded, explained politely that I was not supposed to be "uploading" that movie (which bittorrent automatically does), and then turned my internet connection back on.
I asked the guy if Cox was monitoring my usage, and he said no, that "someone else" had called them to complain. I assume this someone else was the MPAA or somebody working for them.
The author of this article should inclue http://www.thepiratebay.org
This site is based in Sweden and the operator has a colorful way of telling the senders of C&D letters where to shove it.
In Sweden it is not illegal to store the torrent tracker files. Check 'em out the letters are very entertaining.
* Symantec has released a study showing 35% of all network traffic are viruses and worms
* RIAA claims 35% of all music people own are downloaded illegally
* SPA announces research showing 35% of all software is pirated
It's just a coincedence that Cachelogic is marketing products to control P2P traffic.
I suspect Cachelogic must also own 35% of the crack in the country because they must be smoking it if they think 35% of all network traffic is bittorrent.
They have tried that and failed miserably. :)
Since, as other posters point out, the torrent file is NOT "illegal" and it is not protected by copyright. What they can do, OTH, is go after the file-traders themselves, just like they do with all other warez-via-p2p-users in USA.
A friend of mine who is a lawyer in the music industry told me the other day that Cox is one of the ISPs that coughs up subscriber information without adequate legal due dilligence. I also believe that the RIAA and other organizations are primarily targeting users of specific ISPs that are more cooperative.
If you're doing any P2P activity, you should shop around for a more responsible ISP that fights to protect their customers' privacy. Generally speaking, the cable Internet providers are much less respectful of customer privacy than the telco companies. This is why I will not use Cox or Comcast.
Given that BT requires a link to a .torrent, how hard is it for companies to send a C&D to the ISP/owner of any site hosting illegal .torrent links?
.torrent file may not be illegal, as others have pointed out. But what about the seed version of the file with the actual content? Isn't a URL to that file stored in the .torrent? So, to rephrase your question: Why don't they send the ISP hosting that file a C&D?
The
Back when I used Mandrake, I got the torrent; oh man what a difference! It used to be you had to wait a couple of days for the new download; when torrent came out I was downloading faster than I've ever downloaded anything
You are correct sir.
In fact... google searches torrent files.
Actually... thats a nifty feature...
Since when can someone go to prison for copyright violation?
Since at least 1997, with the No Electronic Theft Act. See 17 USC 506. Both the Republicrats and the Republicrats are bought and paid for.
Due to some crazy lawsuits recently, there's very little that you can't copy in canada. Music uploading and downloading is fair game. And any movies or tv shows that aren't licensed for distribution in canada can be copied.
Why? He's not liberal.
-- This and all my posts are in the public domain. I am a lawyer. I am not your lawyer, and this is not legal advice.
Moderation:
:).
80% Funny
10% Flamebait
10% Overrated
And it still gets a 5
Thanks. I was hoping for at least a 2.
-The Anonymous Coward who wrote this silly thing
Why? He's not liberal.
Not Kirk Cameron, no. But the fundamental irony of the conservative religious right is best summed up in the wisdom of a T-shirt: "Jesus was a liberal Jew".
Fire and Meat. Yummy.
and you wonder why mozilla became the bloated pig it is now, infact it was so bloated Firefox came into being, and you want to add Torrents or whatever the current p2p fad of the month into it natively ?
sorry dood but you suck
if you really want to add BT into it, create an extension plugin and use that, and leave the moz team to fix bugs instead of adding svg/p2p/ABC/XYZ crap
lets keep the bloat out of the browser FFS, feature creep is a bad enough problem as it is in open source without adding more shit to it as standard, firefox is a web browser, lets keep it that way
nt
I've got more mod points and GMail invi
I was talking about Liberman.
-- This and all my posts are in the public domain. I am a lawyer. I am not your lawyer, and this is not legal advice.
I never really liked BT, slow file transfer speeds, having to use a browser to locate links to download from. IRC seems so much easier and more linear to me as well as more organized.
If you want a solid example of a video file that's legal to share, here is one I'd recommend. I helped make it:
Captain Insaino Man of the University of Regina.
So far only 10 downloads, but those people are not going to get sued for doing that, unless their ISP forbids the use of P2P.
Saskboy's blog is good. 9 out of 10 dentists agree.
I can see arguments both ways for this, but it's not a clear one in any direction, so lawsuits are quite unlikely.
Since when does ambiguity prevent lawsuits? Aren't many lawsuits the RESULT of ambiguity? Is there anything that makes a lawyer happier?
Anyway, this exact question was asked during one of the EFF sessions at Defcon 0xC. Wendy Seltzer (EFF intellectual property attorney) responded that downloading TV rips is very likely an infringing act; the copyright holder simply has not authorized their distribution over the internet.
Why not evolve the bittorrent concept into serving e.g. webservers, instead they are located on one single host. One thing to figure out would be how to get changes updated stat.
Any competent CS student can write a bot to listen on the major torrent sites, connect to all the trackers, and scan for single IPs downloading multiple files. The RIAA/MPAA are many things, but they're probably not too stupid to develop or purchase that technology.
Leave the bot running for a few months and they're bound to build a nice example-setting case against a few BT addicts.
The little "secret" of the media industries is the absolute raking that they make versus expenditures. 50 cent cd's selling for $15 (ok I'm not an expert in this area, maybe $3-4 for artist expenses, promotion, production, distribution?) Actually, it's not a secret but it's accepted by joe consumer, which is extremely curious. The internet and the peer-to-peer revolution obviously goes to the opposite extreme. Is there shame or dishonor in ripping off bloated megacorps that have been ripping you off for decades? Maybe yes, maybe no, but there sure is a great sense of karmic balance about it.
Would google cache a renamed DivX file ? like.. Starwars.htm
Fnord Fnord Fnord
Suing bittorrent would be like suing tim-berns-lee for http.
bit-torrent == http == ftp == smtp.
If I email someone an MP3 are you going to sure Outlook makes (please pelase say yes, and I use thunderbird, but sue M$!)
Right, 35% I am not suprised look at my previous posts on bittorrent, I predicted that ALL internet traffic will use this, so even 'http' pages will use a bit torrent architecture, either at client level, or as a higher node level, like proxy level.
If the technology comes good enough for d/l web pages quickly via a torrent, then we may enjoy a more balanced and quicker routing internet.
Of course, right now you wait 30 minutes, then it does its magic.
#hostfile 0.0.0.0 primidi.com 0.0.0.0 www.primidi.com 0.0.0.0 radio.weblogs.com
Thank you. That's probably the most useful thing I'll see all day.
"Physics is to math as sex is to masturbation." -R. Feynman
You have nothing to fear. As others have said, it would only increase your exposure and leave them with egg on their faces.
Visceral Psyche Films
what if you just said you didn't do it. can they really win a lawsuit against you based on your ip address with no physical evidence that you did what they said you did? their "evidence" is that your isp says you had that particular ip address at that time and they say that ip address was involved in infringing a movie from a bittorrent site. don't they have some sort of obligation to find the copyrighted work in your possession before finding you guilty?
Maybe it's my own movie made with Star Wars figures that acts out the restaurant scene from Pulp Fiction that just HAPPENS to be called 'The Incredibles' as well.
Then the studio who owns the copyright on 'Pulp Fiction' would be able to sue you for preparing an infringing derivative work of the script.
it's a homegrown pilot for a reality TV show based on living with The Incredible Hulk!
Infringing on Marvel Comics' trademark on "The Incredible Hulk".
So start litigating already. Or perhaps you misunderstood that quote.
I'll be brief/readable (hopefully):
1. Suppose the MPAA / RIAA achieve their goal of *complete* control of content distribution - do they not risk an underground revolution in legitimate free content? Is there not the risk that such control would ignite the market for free media sharing? Diminishing the very market (commercial media dist.) the MPAA/RIAA seek to control?
2. The last point referred to all media (audio/video/software) as a whole. Consider the age old Windows / Linux example and ask the same question - "If windows pirating could be controlled completely and utterly, would we not see the biggest uptake of desktop Linux to date?" People may even prefer to GIVE money to linux development, BECAUSE they don't like the idea of being boxed and controlled in this way.
Prodigy / Jilted generation, inside cover, ppl vs. the system artwork.... it still seems accurate.
No it doesn't.
Yes, it does - continue reading my post (the end of the next paragraph)
They have the tracker so they control the swarm.
But they don't control the *content* - which was exactly my point. They can't control what you *do* with it.
The real way to control content is DRM.
No, there is *no* way to control content - that's the problem. DRM will fail because it's trying to solve an unsolvable problem: "How do we prevent someone from having something after we've given it to them?"
SHaring clients could possibly be adapted though to make sure than any given connected computer only got a subset of the file if there were enough hosts to go around.
In any case it brings up the question of how many people you sue. I would imagine they would be more likely to sue the seed, but what if they are not sharing the file at all? Then you have perhaps 50 people on the list to sue, and legal costs related to that... It seems pretty rough especially given the transient nature of any one sharer who might not be around long.
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
You're basically screwed, and you're gonna get held liable because the judicial system basically hates copyright infringers, and people who think they can outsmart the system.
I think I agree with this one, if you think about it judges are real people and are not going to be impressed with someone trying to game the system. They see stuff like that all the time and it makes them angry.
So I don't think the system is for it so much as it is human nature to be displeased when someone is being a smartass.
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
Even so, if you factor in the chances of actually being sued then loosing a computer is not too bad.
I think the thing to do would be to keep a wireless network storage device somewhere pretty hidden, and share files from that. When they come to collect the computer, by golly there really is nothing there!
Or tap into a local office building connection for sharing.
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
BitTorrent is as legal as HTTP or FTP or UUCP. It's not designed to support infringement by providing anonymity. Bram has worked on anonymous/pseudonymous/other privacy-protecting software systems in the past, and this was designed not to do that, and not to have a Napster-like central server that's used for all material, legitimate or otherwise. That means it's safe to use BitTorrent for applications like distributing Linux distributions, which otherwise cause a really annoying Slashdotting on anybody who wants to do it, and that it's possible to use it for non-commercial publication, because you can run your own tracker for your own material, rather than needing to fund a central server for everybody's material or use a badly-scaling distributed indexing service.
Somebody who distributes pirated material using BitTorrent may very well be an infringer, and somebody who knowing runs a torrent and tracker for pirated material may very well be a useful lawsuit target, but Bram's work is neither infringing nor inducing infringement any more than Apache is.
Bill Stewart
New Fast-Compression-only CPR http://preview.tinyurl.com/dy575ks
But you have to punch a hole in your firewall to participate. And it's a convoluted format. It's clearly not an adequate offering of the source code per the GPL.
My point had nothing to do with efficiency. It has to do with compliance with the GPL regarding source code. Probably it's a non-issue, but it's worth thinking about.
"What's the frequency Kenneth?"
You may not have caught this, but the courts have changed their opinion on the matter, at least as it relates to using the music in new commercial works.
After De La Sould was sued by The Turtles in 1989 all recognizable samples had to be cleared (ie rights to use them had to be obtained).
This year, Sept. 7, there was a new ruling regarding NWA's use of a two second Funkadelic clip in the song "100 Miles and Running".
A lower court said that the sampling "did not rise to the level of legally cognizable appropriation." The federal appeals court, however, has this to say, "If you cannot pirate the whole sound recording, can you `lift' or `sample' something less than the whole? Our answer is negative,"..."Get a license or do not sample. We do not see this as stifling creativity in any significant way."
To help point out the extreme absurdity of the notion that this is not stifling creativity, someone put up a website and requested submissions of songs made entirely of the two-second sample. There are currently 177 examples . But of course, that's not creativity...
It makes no difference whether they use bt or not.
Of course you can crack DRM but unlike getting the encrypted file that's actually a non-trivial task
Don't think of it as a flame---it's more like an argument that does 3d6 fire damage
Update: As of November 16 I2P has FULLY anonymous BT (For peers and trackers both).