Opera Embedding BitTorrent Client

Opera Watch writes "The next version of Opera, 8.02, will have an embedded BitTorrent client. Opera has released today a Technical Preview of this new version on its FTP directory, though they have made no official announcement as of yet."

Comments

Apache

[Rei]

Now we just need apache with an embedded torrent generation/serving (or at least just serving; it'd be simpler to configure, that's for sure) for bulk static content. :)

Re:Apache

[sfcat]

Now we just need apache with an embedded torrent generation/serving (or at least just serving; it'd be simpler to configure, that's for sure) for bulk static content. :)

Actually I had this same good idea a couple of years ago. It could effectly wipe out the slashdot effect. What if, each time server load went over a preset amount, it served a torrrent containing the HTML and image files instead of the HTML file itself. When the browser sees the torrent with special HTTP headers, it automagically unpacks the torrent after completing the download and displays the HTML locally. An apache plugin for this was started and never completed. The problem was getting the browser/torrent client to do the right thing once it got the HTML so the fact that you downloaded a torrent instead of the HTML directly was transparent to the user. Once torrent clients are embedded into the browser, competition will force the other browsers to include this feature. Then no more slashdot effect, yea!!!

Re:Apache

[Rei]

I agree. I hardly claim any particular genius for this idea, I doubt that I was the first, and know that I accomplish little by just mentioning it. I like how Michael Abrash ("inventor" of Mode X, and Quake co-developer) put it (also applicable to the discussion of software patents):

Our world is changing, and I?m concerned. By way of explanation, three anecdotes.

Anecdote the first: In one of his books, Frank Herbert, author of Dune, told me how he had once been approached by a friend who claimed he (the friend) had a killer idea for a SF story, and offered to tell it to Herbert. In return, Herbert had to agree that if he used the idea in a story, he'd split the money from the story with this fellow. Herbert's response was that ideas were a dime a dozen; he had more story ideas than he could ever write in a lifetime. The hard part was the writing, not the ideas.

Anecdote the second: I've been programming micros for 15 years, and been writing about tyhem for more than a decade and, until about a year ago, I had never-not once!- had anyone offer to sell me a technical idea. In the last year, it?s happened multiple times, generally via unsolicited email along the lines of Herbert?s tale.

This trend toward selling ideas is one symptom of an attitude that I?ve noticed more and more among programmers over the past few years-an attitude of which software patents are the most obvious manifestation-a desire to think something up without breaking a sweat, then let someone else?s hard work make you money. Its an attitude that says, ?I?m so smart that my ideas alone set me apart.? Sorry, it doesn't work that way in the real world. Ideas are a dime a dozen in programming, too; I have a lifetime?s worth of article and software ideas written neatly in a notebook, and I know several truly original thinkers who have far more yet. Folks, it?s not the ideas; it?s design, implementation, and especially hard work that make the difference.

Virtually every idea I?ve encountered in 3-D graphics was invented decades ago. You think you have a clever graphics idea? Sutherland, Sproull, Schumacker, Catmull,
Smith, Blinn, Glassner, Kajiya, Heckbert, or Teller probably thought of your idea
years ago. (I?m serious-spend a few weeks reading through the literature on 3-D
graphics, and you?ll be amazed at what?s already been invented and published.) If
they thought it was important enough, they wrote a paper about it, or tried to commercialize it, but what they didn?t do was try to charge people for the idea itself.

A closely related point is the astonishing lack of gratitude some programmers show for the hard work and sense of community that went into building the knowledge base with which they work. How about this? Anyone who thinks they have a unique idea that they want to?own?and milk for money can do so-but first they have to track down and appropriately compensate all the people who made possible the compilers, algorithms, programming courses, books, hardware, and so forth that put them in a position to have their brainstorm.

Put that way, it sounds like a silly idea, but the idea behind software patents is precisely that eventually everyone will own parts of our communal knowledge base, and that programming will become in large part a process of properly identifylng and compensating each and every owner of the techniques you use. All I can say is that if we do go down that path, I guarantee that it will be a poorer profession for all of us - except the patent attorneys, I guess.

Anecdote the third: A while back, I had the good fortune to have lunch down by Seattle?s waterfront with Neal Stephenson, the author of
Snow Crash and The Diamond Age (one of the best SF books I've come across in a long time). As he talked about the nature of networked technology and what he hoped to see emerge, he

Good feature

[Dark Paladin]

This is something I'd also like to see built into the next version of iTunes or iPodderX for getting Podcasts and the like (so as to reduce the bandwidth on shows I'm interested in listening to).

Of course, to make sure that Opera doesn't get sued for having a P2P network built into their client that could be used for copyright infringements, they need to add a note into their EULA that says something akin to "Don't steal music, or movies, or - just don't steal, OK? If you do, don't blame us. Thanks." to that their intent in supplying the technology is clear.

Re:I'm not impressed

[hkmwbz]

BitTorrent is far from the only thing which sets Opera apart from Firefox. Speed, size, functionality, integration out of the box are some keywords. Of course, which one is better is a matter of taste, but some people prefer the way Opera works. No extension problems when upgrading, for one.

Firefox with BT support would be a good thing. For Opera too. It would move BT further into the mainstream, and that would benefit anyone who wants to use it. Opera probably has something in mind, such as distributing Opera through BitTorrent. Why else implement it?

Re:torrent

[LittLe3Lue]

your claim is just stupid.

consider this.
the average torrent (i assume a movie or something) is being initially uploaded by one seed with, being generous, a max of 80 kBps. The person still manages to send all that information to everyone rather quickly (given a slower start to send 1-2 full copies out into the swarm).

Microsoft Pipes have like, what, 1000000 times the bandwidth? So yes, you usually download as fast as your connection can handle. So yes, you WILL download faster than a popular torrent at the beginning of it distribution cycle.. if the person hosting originally had a small pipe.

If Microsoft used torrents, their overall bandwidth would increase - they just dont need to.

But let dream of the day that every single dedicated 'fat pipe', 'home user', and business used torrents instead of http / ftp / other p2p:
we would see a HUGE increase in bandwidth across the internet.

The reason you beleive torrents are slower has nothing to do with the protocol, but rather the people who use it.

The only issue I have is that torrents die after some time, because people do not seed to 1:1, or people loose interest files that arent 'fresh'.

If Firefox, Internet Explorer, Safari, and Opera embeded bittorrent, forced 1:1 seed ratios, and seeded every file in your download folder out to whoever needed it most.. well..

wouldnt that be peachy? :)