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.
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
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?
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
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.
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.
Anybody got a torrent?
I don't believe you.
Maybe people will find a better method for p2p warez stuff, but right now, BT is great for getting a file quickly because everyone's sharing some of the load.
"file sharing" != "warez file sharing"
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 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??
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".
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.
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
... 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.
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.
Actually, while we're at it, Caltrans and Honda enable me to speed on the freeway. The telephone enables me to call people to make slanderous remarks. The more I think about it, the more lawsuits I see that need to be filed.
Comment removed based on user account deletion
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.
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.
eMule!
Since the subject has come up, can anyone possibly explain why eDonkey/eMule downloads are so painfully slow compared to BT, despite them using essentially the same technique of breaking files into small packets and sharing them around?
Even if the file on eMule has hundreds of complete sources, I can still find myself "queued" for hours before receiving anything. On BT, even with a few sources and many leeches, data is received immediately and at decent speeds.
phozzThe 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.
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.
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
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.
"Oh yeah? Then we'll double bankrupt him!"
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.
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.
"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!
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.
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
I wondered about that too. I came up with three likely reasons.
1) People share more than a couple files at a time with eMule. With bittorrent I never share more than 4 torrents at once, but with eMule there can be quite a few available. This doesn't slow the network down as a whole, but probably allows traffic to concentrate more strongly on the popular files.
2) Tit-for-tat. Bittorrent is more aggressive in enforcing upload/download ratio, so the pure leechers have a somewhat harder time. It also encourages people to open the appropriate ports on their router/firewall, which can improve overall network efficiency.
3) Many people don't realize that if you have an upload cap imposed by your ISP (DSL modem or one of many cable providers), bittorrent will clog it easily and downloads will slow to almost nothing. You'd think people would figure it out, but many don't, especially those using the traditional client on windows (you have to use a command line argument to choke upload speed). Those users who don't figure it out give the rest of us a boost.
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.
Kirk Cameron?
Karma: Dyn-o-mite!(mostly affected by Jimmy Walker reading your comments)
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.
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.
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.
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!
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.
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.
You are correct sir.
In fact... google searches torrent files.
Actually... thats a nifty feature...
Wow, the government artifically increasing the price of using a product. You're a god damn genius. That definately won't hurt the technology market or even keep the US uncompetitive with other contries that won't do your genius plan. Fuck the people that develop Linux or host free websites, they should charge for there software anyway.
Besides with all the taxes we already have to worry about, what's one more?
I hate people that always think of great plans the government can force "solutions" upon you. You are an idiot.
As a programmer and software publisher, I can add my two cents to this situation, and I think it applies to all types of "software" including music and movies.
I had a successful software company throughout the 80s and the early 90s. We sold over 100k copies of our software (which wasn't bad for our tiny operation), and I estimate that there were at least ten to a hundred times more pirated copies in circulation. Even with the piracy, the market was plenty big to provide for us. Piracy actually helped promote our product, call attention to the company and spawn sales. We weren't happy about the piracy but we also knew that it compensated for a lack of resources to advertise on a large scale.
To increase revenue we continually improved our products and released upgrades. We also provided an ancient concept called "support" that our customers appreciated greatly.
To answer your question specifically, I don't think any "true" programmer would ever be discouraged by piracy. That's like asking a painter if he is bummed out that too many people were appreciating his art but not hanging it on their walls.
Generally speaking, profit margin in software is *enormous*. Any product worth large scale pirating will be a product that also generates substantial legitimate revenue. I suspect one reason why publishers are griping about piracy is that the quality of a lot of software today is such that it's not worth the price they're asking in the first place, and they rely on advertising and insider deals to move product, as opposed to the quality and value of the product itself.
My contention is that these days, piracy is more a form of protest than theft. Publishers are not producing products that have the same value they used to. You have companies like Quicken which shake down their customer base each year for a few hundred bucks to install a stupid tax table that should be free. That's bullshit.
The software business may be dying, but it's not dying because of piracy. It's dying because it has matured like other industries and become controlled by a small number of "mafia" publishers and distributors of inferior products who gain market share via unfair trade practices and massive ad campaigns. Those companies are compelled to fight piracy moreso to protect their dynasty and squelch competition, than they are at risk of suffering any substantive financial losses due to piracy.
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.
Ah, I see.
:)
In Sweden, where piratebay is located, a BBS-related lawsuit years ago concluded that the BBS-administrator/owner could not be held responsible for "warez"/illegal-stuff traded on the BBS by the users of the BBS. The same is argued to be true for a torrent tracker. The tracker is simply viewed as the means by which you can share digital material to others. Now if the material is shared without the copyright holders permission, the responsibility lies with the uploaders and not the tracker administrators.
Furtheron, as everyone knows, no actual copyrighted data is transmitted through the tracker, so I guess it should be even more legitimate than a warez-BBS.
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