Slashdot Mirror
Trackerless BitTorrent Beta Posted
jgarzik writes "BitTorrent development is occuring at a furious pace. At the beginning of May, an Azureus update added distributed tracker and database features. Yesterday, Bram updated BitTorrent to include support for trackerless torrents in the new BitTorrent 4.10 beta."
Will this eventually leave the BSA and others with no BT tracker sites to shut down, so that their only option will be to go after end users or to DOS the P2P networks themselves?
Plenty of geeks with big pipes to host trackers for linux releases...
But lets say your band releases an album online, or your movie club makes a film... You've only got a geocities website and the desktops of your members.. With tracker-based BT you had to talk someone into running a tracker for you... With tracker-less that limitation has been removed.
What's needed is some kind of distributed HTTP overnet that works; that can handle dynamic content semi-intelligently, and MUCH faster than freenet/frost sites.
Power to the Peaceful
This doesn't seem to accomplish much in the way of providing anonymity if everyone in the swarm still had to go through the same starting node somewhere.
.torrent file without having to connect to a tracker (which you may not hae access to).
.torrent without needing a tracker.
I don't think the idea was to make an anonymous torrent; I think it was to make it easier for bloggers and websire owners to post a
Joe Six Pack wih webhosting can now post a
It's the classic question. How do you make "make"? How do you untar "tar"? How do you decompress "gzip"? How do you compile "gcc"?
.Z and non-compressed forms, as well as a shar file. tar is distributed as a shar file. etc. etc. etc.
...
The answer in all cases is to work around the problem by not storing the code in the format it supports. eg: make comes with a shell script to build the binary. gzip is distributed in
BitTorrent isn't all that large, so there isn't much to be gained by distributing it that way. It's best at file packages in the multi-hundred megabyte and larger range. The largest BT download is only around 1 MB
OTOH, the lack of centralized control means that trackerless BT will likely be vulnerable to a new class of attacks that could make it possible to disrupt the download of a file you don't like. So, ironically, warez groups might stick to running trackers for attack resistance and Linux providers might move to trackerless for the scalability. It all depends on how scalable and attack-resistant trackerless downloads turn out to be.
main(c,r){for(r=32;r;) printf(++c>31?c=!r--,"\n":c<r?" ":~c&r?" `":" #");}
The *AA can still nail you for being a distributor of unauthorized Copyrighted material if you use Bittorrent. You are of course giving out copies to other users; so all the *AA needs is a list of IP addresses that are in the swarm. Granted, the *AA hasn't really done this. But if there's one thing that they have shown is that they are extremely motivated to find people who are involved, and hit them with a bill for a $2-3K settlement.
With an economic bounty like that, the only thing the Lawyers of the *AA are lacking is a way to automate the technology. From what I hear, that technology is coming. Supposedly some of it is in beta test now.
The only defense one might hope for in the U.S. is a scheme which added plausible deniability. That's not here yet with BT; and even if implemented, would undoubtedly result in a slowdown of downloads.
Personally, I think your best bet if you are concerned is to use an offshore ISP.
This drives me fucking nuts.
Y is an activity that saves lives, such as buying vaccines. X is a frivolous activity such as buying a DVD. People don't live their lives choosing Y instead of X every time because you end up with no life of your own.
And you only whine about it when X happens to be something that reminds you of the need for Y, or when Y suddenly occurs to you and you want to make a point. But every single time you buy a goddamn DVD, you're choosing X over Y. That's how life works. Every cheap novel you buy is a child who dies because you didn't spend the time to go out, find her, and help her. Come to terms with this before you start tossing it out as a random argument against a given X.
And why does Bittorrent even remind you about the need for charities? I mean, you've got a strange set of connectiosn going. I mean, pointless artwork in Central Park, sure, but why on Earth do you jump on a random technical project like this?
(Score:-1, Flamebait)
Oh, right. Some people. So there's a 50/50 chance you're flamebaiting or that you've just got a weird set of things that trigger thoughts of Y for you. Either way, spend some time thinking about these issues; it'll do you good. Maybe think about the kids dying as you sit there. Think about that each time you speak with righteous indignation about what people should be spending their time on. I'm not even telling you not to say what you're saying. I'm just saying give it some thought.
$10 can buy vaccines to absolutely save someone's life. With what rationale are you buying a DVD with that $10? I know why I do it. Do you?
xkcd.com - a webcomic of mathematics, love, and language.