Slashdot Mirror
100 P2P Users Upload 75% of Content
An anonymous reader writes "Researchers say that about 100 people (called pirates in the article) are
responsible for 75 percent of all downloading on BitTorrent (and the same group does 66 percent of all uploading), and says that the way to shut down the p2p network is simply to disincentive that relatively small number of people. The other large group identified in the study were people (such as from copyright enforcement agencies) who uploaded fake content to frustrate other users. No suggestions were made about how to prevent people from uploading fake content — but it was suggested that the first group could have their ad revenue cut or could be heavily fined."
I don’t really get (and the article didn’t really seem to explain) how these elite uploaders of the pirated content receive this ad-revenue. Are they saying that the people who post the bulk of the infringing torrents on various networks receive ad-revenue from the indexing sites (where the ads would be displayed)? I don’t understand how ad revenue flows from the indexing sites to the users who upload the content.
It almost seems like these guys asked themselves “why do they do it”, looked at a torrent site, saw the ads, and just said “ah, that’s why” and wrote a paper.
Also, the suggestion in this article to provide “disincentives” to the people uploading the bulk of pirated content is kind of obvious and silly. If the media industry had any way of actually doing this, it would have been done a long time ago. I think it’s already recognized by most people that the bulk of pirated content originates from a small number of sources. I can’t imagine that big media hasn’t been trying unsuccessfully to shut this group down for quite a while.
Unless I’m missing something, this whole article comes across as another one of these ridiculous studies where after 3 years of research and a few million dollars they reveal that fire is hot and scissors can be sharp. I file this right next to
And now you have part of the real MO behind the doj's mandatory data retention treason. Toss all these dicks out in 2012
Headline says uploading, summary and linked article say downloading. Headline is wrong.
Researchers say that about 100 people (called pirates in the article) are responsible for 75 percent of all downloading on BitTorrent (and the same group does 66 percent of all uploading),
So if they upload about 66% of the content then why does the headline say that they upload 75%?
Why don't they just pay off the 100 to get them to stop?
Yup!
I'd be willing to bet that there is a 'core' of people on tpb and others that represent a bulk of the trusted content. I, like many others, tend to download off of tpb from the 'trusted' uploaders most of the time. Coincidentally, those also tend to the the torrents with the most seeders and leechers. When you factor in the fact that many of the big torrent sites mirror to the same torrents, this really doesn't sound too far fetched. Again, I think the 100 number is a little low, though...
So... what would be the uh... (you know, I'm just curious) technical specs and bandwidth for the 100 titanic (perhaps god-like) users, (purportedly the nigh-sole users) of ALL of bitTorrent evar?
Don't they realize that artists are being disincentivized from creating content? That means only the safest, accountant-friendly products get made (e.g. crappy romantic comedies and bubblegum pop). I'm a big movie buff and it's infuriating that Hollywood is getting so creatively conservative.
I swear to God...I swear to God! That is NOT how you treat your human!
.es
I doubt the numbers are nearly this tight. Although I do know that the same people often upload most of the material time after time. I guess they are trusted and enthusiasts. I also see these people change over time...
I am sure the IRAA and MPAA know this is the case. Surely they do. If I saw it, then they saw it. But let's get real here. They won't do anything about it. And neither will software companies with deep pockets like Microsoft.
When I run Windows 7 in a virtual machine and use a cd key that "came with it" from ThePirateBay.org, what does one of the 2 updates that don't automatically check include the one that is supposed to look for "hacked" activators? They want you to share (not pirate, this isn't violently taking ships) their poison so that you are not free but a slave to them and at the mercy of their whims. If one couldn't use a "shared" copy, what might happen? LIke I explained to my father last night, he uses Windows because I used Windows. And now, he is moving to Linux. End of story.
Like a city whose walls are broken down is a man who lacks self-control.
These people don't really seem to understand the P2P hierarchy. Content gets pirated by groups, who release it to top sites, which sell slots to people and have affiliations to closed torrent trackers. The users of those trackers then leak the stuff to the public p2p networks. So yes, there may be a closed group doing the actual leaking, however, that does not mean the content does not exist and that no-one will take their place once they are gone. It's utterly ridiculous to think you will stop pirating by attacking the lowest part of the food chain.
"In our opinion," the authors of the study conclude, "the success of BitTorrent lies in the availability of popular content which is typically protected by copyright law, and people who take the risk of publishing that content do it because they receive an economic benefit. If in the future these users lose their incentive, either because of a decrease in advertising income or due to having to pay very expensive fines, BitTorrent would very likely cease to offer this content, which would make people stop using the application on a massive scale."
These people have no clue how torrents and seeding works. When someone completes a torrent, they can choose to then seed that download. There is no economic incentive there whatsoever. The seeder gets absolutely nothing out of seeding. All it takes is one person to make an initial seed, and then if each downloader joins in seeding that content, then the number of seeds grows exponentially. Anyone can create a torrent, and anyone can seed. These guys make it sound like there is some sort of main repository from which all other downloaders get their torrents.
If you have such a small number of people posting content, and they are making money (meaning they have accounts which identify them), then they would be easily tracked and prosecuted. How can this really be true?
That said, most people "pass along" content rather than rip it themselves. Is it really possible to tell the difference between a user that passes along content they acquire from some other source using bittorrent vs a user that actually rips content and passes that content along?
If the contributors are also the heaviest users (downloading 75 percent of the content) then it is really unlikely that they are ripping that content in the first place. How would they have the time, and why would they download what they ripped themselves? So if we assume that these "100 users" on these two sites actually contribute 66 percent of the content, and that most of that content isn't actually ripped by them, but acquired via other sources outside these sites, then does that that only 4 or 5 people are really ripping content?
Seriously, none of this makes a great deal of sense. It seems to me that the content flow comes from a much broader bases, and that the active users on these sites are not the same as the active users on other sites.
I see no "take these 100 out and problem solved" magic bullet here. But I'd have to see more details than this article gives to know for sure.
I'd just like to say, "thank you!"
I've abandoned my search for truth; now I'm just looking for some useful delusions.
I've been on a variety of trackers in the past and I can assure you that 100 users are not responsible for anywhere near 75% of the content available. But even on crappy public trackers like piratebay it can't be that bad.
it may be closer to reality to say that 5% of peers are responsible for 90% of the traffic however. There are always small clusters of high speed seedboxes running on any good tracker.
I work for the Department of Redundancy Department.
Ignoring all the contradictions from the article, look up any popular movie on any bittorrent site and there's tens of thousands of people downloading it. Are they saying it's the same 100 guys downloading the same file over and over?
--
Stay tuned for some shock and awe coming right up after this messages!
The fact that they were only analyzing Mininova and The Pirate Bay explains the erroneous nature of their results. Those websites don't represent the entirety of BitTorrent - in fact, the real copyright-infringing pirates try to remain unaffiliated with torrent sites entirely, and private trackers represent the majority in terms of data transferrence these days in regards to BitTorrent. These "researchers" obviously know practically nothing about how the torrent tracker heirarchy works. Their article is just a nice source to cite to my friends when they ask me why they shouldn't use TPB or Mininova to download that new Kanye West album.
Their analysis demonstrates that a small group of users of these applications (around one hundred) is responsible for 66 percent of the content that is published and 75 percent of the downloads.
This makes no sense whatsoever. Anyone with even a shred of IT knowledge knows that there are a lot of downloaders, far more than the quoted 100, even if that number is limited to 75% of available content. Hell, a quick search of TPB will show single torrents with more peers than 100.
Now, if they meant uploads, then that's slightly more believable, if they're counting each major release group as one "person". But that's a pretty bad typo to make in a paper about IT, enough that it makes me doubt the credibility of anything else in the paper.
It's better to vote for what you want and not get it than to vote for what you don't want and get it.
- E. Debs
Yes you do.
My first Journal Entry ever, in 8 years! http://slashdot.org/journal/365947/aphelion-scifi-fantasy-horror-poetry-webzine
The worst offender is named Linus Trovalds. He uploads huge files on a regular basis and tens if not hundreds of thousands of people download them. Clearly he is the biggest pirate of them all and must be stopped from distributing other peoples copyrighted works.
The article refers to: "P2P piracy networks", which ones are those? Pretty much the only one I know of is BitTorrent, and that's not a "piracy network", it's just a regular network, but some pirates do use it.
Something about this "research" is amiss. It is just not plausible that one hundred users are responsible for 75 % of BitTorrent downloads.
Most of the major uploaders are actually groups of people. They have people responsible for getting content, for ripping content, for packaging and for uploading it. If any of these researchers had a clue what they were talking about they'd have realized that each one of these accounts is backed by at least 25+ people. Even if they did get the person doing the actual upload (which I doubt because that's what they specialize in) the reset of the group would just move on and find someone else to do the upload.
I wish them the best of luck in their effort of killing ants with a hammer. Meanwhile, there are about a zillion other methods in use, and another ten zillion being thought up. Be careful not to ruin your nice marble furniture while hammering at the ants.
Build your own energy sources from scratch. http://otherpower.com/
This is just an excuse to target a reasonably sized group and make examples of them to the much larger and harder to 'hit at once' group. This is one of those situations where they are just going to target the small group of people because they can, but in the end, it will only lead to them having to target the 'next' small group of people that miraculously fill their void when they realize "Oh snap! File sharing is still happening at exactly the same level without these 100 people in the mix!". It's people who got paid to head-hunt, trying to show that the money they received was worth it so they continue to get paid to 'head-hunt' in the future. Rediculous, it's like Napster days all over again, it's all fun and games until Grandma is arrested for an Elvis mp3.
So, a small number of stable and fast seed boxes are used by many uploaders?
Truly, this is news...
So 100 people are getting 75% of the Internet's love from the downloaders. Researchers suggest that if we "disincentiveize" these people, we'll stop 75% of the downloads.
This is bonkers.
Sure, you could smother those 100 people with RIAA-issued pillows, but then the Internet would go to the next best 100 people providing content. Because this is a perfect marketplace, people can move to the best content. Get rid of the best content providers, and you might slightly diminish content quality, but consumer behavior would be the same: download the best available option. There'd be a new group of 100 people that get the download love, and we'd have to get more pillows..
Hmm so a mere 100 people are responsible for most that is uploaded to BT sites.... their names?
ub3rh4x0r ...
Al De Boner
PirateBob
Huge Jackman
Have these people never seen the movie Sparticus?
CmdrTaco posted a different study of the same sites claiming that a third (ie 33%) of their content was fake. It now appears that 100 users are responsible for two-thirds of the uploads. Clearly, this suggests that those same 100 users are uploading _all_ of the real content on bittorrent; everyone else is responsible for the fake content.
Um, headline is very misleading based on examining the paper itself. They found those percentages based on 55K files. What statistical hash are you smoking to think that you can extrapolate from that to the millions of files available via torrent across all p2p sites?
I realise that most of the hollywwod movies and popular MS Win platform warez (windows, photoshop, norton etc) come from just a relatively few sources. That fits with what anyone can observe and makes sense (not that many people have good enough contacts to obtain pre-release movies, not that many people are skilled and interested enough to care about cracking authentication mechanisms and also sharing the product of their work) but 100 people doing 75% of the downloading? This doesn't fit either experience or make sense. Millions of people use bittorrent with public trackers. You can find numerous torrents on public trackers with *thousands* of seeds, even some movies with tens of thousands of seeds. How would a small group of 100 people account for 75% of the downloading? Are they downloading the same content over and over? And why would the same group of people seeding content also be downloading it? This is all nonsensical, isn't it? I rtfa hosted by Carlos III University of Madrid and I can't find the numbers or methodology that support these claims, only the one page summary.
I wonder of the article is really a decent representation of the research, and if the researchers didn't get their data horribly skewed by numerous malicious clients which by their nature offer fake data re content hosted, fulfilling requests, ratios and so on.
The idea that 100 people are responsible for even 10% of all content on P2P networks is laughable. Let's just consider torrents.
The Pirate Bay alone claims that it currently hosts 3,655,124 torrents. 75% of this is ~2.7 million, but lets say that means the 100 have uploaded 2 million torrents.
So in 10 years (bittorrent is less than a decade old), 100 users have uploaded 2 million torrents. That works out as 2000 torrents per user per year. That means each of these 100 people uploaded on average about 5.5 torrents every day.
5.5 torrents uploaded each day, every day for 10 years. That's what it would take to meet these researchers claims.
Assuming that these uploaders are the ultimate source of the illicit data, and that each torrent costs on average, say $10 (assumming they are largely movies and torrents), then each of these users is spending ~$55 a day on content meant for ripping and uploading. That's ~$20,000 a year, and that's before we even consider the time and resources put into ripping and uploading.
The numbers don't add up. Argue 1000 users and it still works out at $2000 a year and 4 torrents a week, both of which numbers I regard as still being too high. 10,000 users would seem far more feasible.
May the Maths Be with you!
WTF? Either there's very little downloading being done or those 100 people are very busy watching all those films and listening to all that music they download...
What this really means, is that you only need 100 people to be seeding huge amounts of content. Remove those 100 and a different 100 will take their place. If it required 101 people, then there would be 101 people doing it. The data doesn't mean if you take out those 100, the whole thing would stop.
No I don't. And it certainly wouldn't be a measly million dollars, which is less than what one can expect to make in a lifetime, even if I did. For what, to ruin 30 of his "friends" (or people he knows) lives? Words can't hardly describe what I feel about that idea.
Like a city whose walls are broken down is a man who lacks self-control.
Had to do AC due to not being a TOR endpoint.
University Researchers find that 100 p2p IP addresses account for 75% of the traffic and that strangly the 100 p2p IP addresses are also endpoints for a network called TOR. The TOR 100, as they are now being called, will come up for arrest as soon as they can figure out how to do co-location.
Here it is: http://conferences.sigcomm.org/co-next/2010/CoNEXT_papers/11-Cuevas.pdf
The only way you can "take down" the peer to peer file sharing "network" is by forcibly removing p2p file sharing software from every person. Why are their still efforts like this and who are the jerks who pursue these "solutions"?
"Stratigraphically the origin of agriculture and thermonuclear destruction will appear essentially simultaneous" -- Lee
I feared it was only me ...
It is troubling in many ways that the IP owners are uploading fake content. One is I doubt that their fake content is separated out from the real content when they generate charts and graphs of illegal downloads and availability of unauthorized IP. I'm sure the "whole" data set is used when they beg for help and sympathy to the courts and the US government. Another issue is how much of this fake content is counted towards their case when they sue someone? Are they really downloading the content and using the file as evidence or just using a list of file names and possibly some hashes? Look here your honor, Jimmy had a file called Metallica-some_good_old_song_before_they_sold_out.mp3, we own that and it is proof he was distributing our IP illegally.
The authors calling themselves "researchers" doesn't make them any more qualified than the guy who wants to perform medical procedures and uses the nickname "doc".
More accurately: ......
Random idiots say that about 100 people (called pirates in the article) are responsible for 75 percent
At least most Slashdot users are intelligent enough to see when an article make no sense.
Is this like facebook?
Honestly, really don't know and my sarcasm detector seems to be malfunctioning.
Was this a joke?
At the absolute top were 127.0.0.1 and 192.168.0.1 ?
The "study" may be BS. But it does raise the issue of how to disagree with the law, disobey it, without being punished for it. You are essentially risking punishment for ignoring the law. It may be a small issue, it may be a stupid law, but if someone picks you out for punishment, you could be set up, screwed, and ruined big-time. Cheating on taxes, drinking a beer in the wrong place/time, smoking a joint, downloading copyrighted things, running a red light, all of these things could set you up as a target for someone who wants to make an example out of you or whatever. For example I refused to comply with a local law requiring me to check ID for every user that used a computer at the cybercafe. (No, not in the US). I just couldn't agree. However, eventually a user abused the law, and now I'm answering in their place in a defamation case, perhaps being forced to pay thousands in damages - alleging I allowed the defamation by not following the law. They too felt abused by their boss apparently, and went to a cybercafe to send some emails accusing the boss of corruption and a dozen four-letter word things. Well, it's a big crime here. Not checking the ID is nothing, but now I'm caught as a target in bigger issues.
So disagreeing with the law is legal, scoffing at the law may result in nothing much of the time, but it's actually perhaps best to consider better ways to protest the law, while checking your options in case you are required to show your compliance with the laws.
Build your own energy sources from scratch. http://otherpower.com/
I'm used to exercising caution with other browsers as well. But, as parent says, Lazarus is one of the greatest addons I've tried.
You can password protect your databases and customize storage in several ways. There's a chrome extension as well, that works slightly different (relating input to each form)
http://lazarus.interclue.com/
"Science can amuse and fascinate us all, but it is engineering that changes the world. " - Asimov.
Although I don't think the study was done with any brains, I think the real figure is not too far from that. In the case of pirated content most of the releases are done by very few 'scene groups'. Each scene group uploads the content only once to a certain site (ftp, of course) and then it's spread all over via whatever protocol. So, under that point of view, there's just as many 'main' uploaders as there are 'scene groups'... and I guess it's closer to 100 than 1,000 or 1,000,000.
I think one of the 100 was named AXXO....
all pirating we to come to a complete stop... for CDs, DVDs, or Blu Rays?
1. Realistically speaking how much is the price inflated to make up for all this theft...
2. How much would we see the price come down? or would we?
Although the summary is bad, this seems like a known phenomenon. I'm pretty sure they mean that 66% of the content by number of .torrent files, or 75% by GB downloaded is first-seeded by about 100 people. Honestly, the number is probably closer to 1000, but it's still a relatively small number.
Now, I don't know how movies or music go, but as far is pirating games, there is a relatively small number of people or cells that are responsible for obtaining, cracking, and first-seeding the games.
Disincentivize with extreme prejudice. Presumably by overwatering the flowerbed by the basement windows.
If the content creators, particularly tv shows, would setup official subscription torrent rss feeds and trackers, they could cash in on it instead of spending so much money fighting the 21st century...
Long live demonoid...my main man!! if u were a gurl i'd kiss ya
No I don't. And it certainly wouldn't be a measly million dollars,
By admitting that your price is higher than a million dollars, you're pointing out that it exists.
I'm using all of my mod points to mod ancient memes down. Please join me.
Is it CowboyNeal, CmdrTaco, or the Slashdotter behind door number 3?
Knowledge is how to play a game, intelligence is how to win, wisdom is knowing what game to play.
I'm in Brazil, there are a ton of Internet laws being discussed on state and federal laws, some very confusing and completely contradictory. The only laws that ever passed, however, require cyber cafes to keep complete records of all clients for five years. Based on that law, several civil lawsuits have been launched against the cafe if it doesn't have data on the client sought, making it responsible for the original offender's actions, and requesting damages going into tens of thousands.
Build your own energy sources from scratch. http://otherpower.com/
75% of torrents are fake, visit-our-website-and-click-our-ads-for-the-password nonsense or malware. I can believe that around 100 accounts are responsible for the majority of this stuff. They may also fake-seed each other to raise the profile of their garbage files. I do not, on the other hand, believe the vast majority of legit torrents are posted by a small number of people. I mean legit as really in what they claim to be, not as in legal.
The thing is... if some politician who's being paid by a corporation wants to enact a law that will mean harsh punishments against 10,000 kids sharing books, music, and movies online, the rest of the government will tell him where to go. BUT, if said corrupt politician can point to a "study" saying that there are only 100 hard-ass criminals spoiling the internet for compliant citizens, then of COURSE they can go after those few outsiders. Who cares how many it turns out to be, once the law is enacted?
No, I don't acknowledge it exits. For one, it doesn't. For two, I was pointing out that it is disgusting to me that someone would do that for such a low figure. But then what many people do disgusts me. IF there were a figure, it would be closer to the billions range. But then again, I don't want a billion dollars, so then I don't have a price, now do I?
Like a city whose walls are broken down is a man who lacks self-control.
75% of the uploaders are behind one of 100 proxies
Pick any torrent proxy... I'm guessing they simply gathered IP addresses and failed to examine where they originated from. People are stupid if they aren't behind a torrent proxy, with all of the lawsuit-happy organizations out there like the RIAA. It also avoids getting a DMCA notice just because you were downloading an album that got scratched up when little Johnny decided to play fetch with Fido using your CD collection.
Funny how BTGuard seems to be one of the top uploaders! That guy is some kind of pirate!
If it's only 100 people for the vast majority of all "piracy" -- out of billions that use the Internet, doesn't this say that "piracy" is insignificant? Doesn't this say they should ignore it as not worth pursuing?
This has me wondering: since there is lots of "fake" content out there, isn't it now somewhat defensible that when you tried to download avatar.avi you were looking for one of the fake ones, and not the real one?
We've been after that Anonymous Coward guy for years.
Have gnu, will travel.
Blizzard uses BitTorrent to distribute their client and patches. Does Blizzard count as a person?
Anyone have any stats on how often Linux ISOs are downloaded via BitTorrent?
100 is such an oddly round number. A combination of IP blocking software and a badly configured uTorrent client, maybe?
-- A change is as good as a reboot.
6692d179032205 b4116a96425a7f ecc2ef51af1740 959d3b6d07bce4 fa9f2af29814d9
82592e77a204a8 146a6970e3c4a1 f43a81dc36eff7 568b44f60c79f5 bb606d7fe87dd6
1b91b9b73c68f9 f31c6aeef81de6 9a9cc14469a037 a480bc978970a6 997f729d0a1a39
b3b9accda43860 f9d45a5bf64a1d 180a1013ba5023 42b73df2d33112 851f2c4d21b05e
2901308bbd685c 9fde452d3328f5 4cc518f97414a8 8fca1f7e2a0a14 dc8bdbb12e2378
672f11cedf36c5 f45a2a00da1c1d 5a3e82c124129a 084a707eadd972 cb45c81b64808d
07ebd2779e3e71 9663e2beeee6e5 25078568d83de8 28027d5c0c4e65 ec3f0fc32c7e63
1d6b501ae0f003 f5a8fcecb28092 854349337aa99e 9c669367e08bf1 d9c23474e09f70
3c901d46bada9a 40981ffcfa376f a4b686ca8fb039 63f2ce16b91863 1bade89cc52ca2
4552921af8efd2 fe8ac96a02a6f9 9248b8894b23bd 17535dbff93d56 94bdc32a095df2
cd247c6d30286e d2212f9d8ce80a dc55bdc2a6962c bcabf9b5fcbe6f c2cfc78f5fdafa
80e32223b9feab f1fa23f5b0bf0d ab6bf4b5b698ae d960315753d36f 424701e5a944ed
10f61245ebe788 f57a17fc53a314 00e22e88911d9e 76575e18c7956e c1ef4eee022e38
f5459f177591d9 08748f861098ef 287d2c63bd809e e6a28a6f5d000c 7ae5964a663c1b
0f15f7167f56c6 d6c05b2bbe8800 544a49be026410 d9f3f08602517f 74878dc02827f7
d72ef3ea24b7c8 717c7afc0b55a5 0be2a582516d08 202ded173a5428 9b71e35e45943f
9e7cd2c8789c99 1b590a91f1cffd 903dca7c36d298 52ad58ddcc1861 56dd3acba0d9c5
c76254c1be9ed1 06ecb6ae8ff373 cfcc1afcbc80a4 30eba7ac19308c d6e20ae760c986
c0d1e59db1075f 8933d5d8284b92 9280d9a3faa716 8386984f92bfd6 be56cd7c4bfa59
16593d2aa598a6 d62534326a40ee 0c1f1919936667 acbaf0eefdd395 36dbfdbf9e1439
0bd7c7e683d280 54759e16cfd9ea cac9029104bd51 436d1dca1371d3 ca2f808654cdb2
7d6923e47f97b5 70e256b741910c 7dd466ed5fff2e 26bec4a28e8cc4 5754ea7219d4eb
75270aa4d3cc8d e0ae1d1897b7f4 4fe5663e8cb342 05a80e4a1a950d 66b4eb6ed4c99e
3d7e9d469c6165 81677af04a2e15 ada4be60bc348d dfdfbbad739248 98ad5986f3ca1f
971d02ada31b46 2adab96f7b15da 9855f01b9b7b94 6cef0f65663fbf eb328e8a3c6c5d
e29f0f0b1ef2bf e4a30b29047d31 52250e7ae3a4ac fe3efc3b8c2df1 8c997d15d6078b
49da8b4611ff9f b1e061bc9be995 31fd68c4ad6dc6 fd8974f0c506dd 90421c1cd2b26c
53eec84c91ed17 5159ba3711173b 25e318ddceea6a 98a14125755955 2bb97fd341cea2
3f8404769a0a8e bce5c7a45fb5d4 9608307b43f785 2a98e5856afe75 b4dbead4815cac
d1118af62c964a 3142667a5b0d14 6c6f90933acd3d 6b14a0052e2be4 1b1811fda0f554
12300aa7f10405 1919ca0bff56ea d3e2f3aad5250c 4aeeea5101d2ec 377fc499c07057
6cb1a90cdb7b11 3c839d47a4b814 25c5ac14b5ec28 4ef18646d5b9c2 95a98cc51ebd3b
310e98028e24de 092ffc76b79f44 0740a1ca2d4737 b9f38966257c99 a75afc7454abe4
a6dd815be8ccbf ec2cac2df0c675 41f7636aa4080f 30e87b712520fd d5dfdc6d3266ac
ee28f5479f836f 0bf8ee2112173f 43ae802fa8d52d 4e0dffd36c1eac 3cbda974bb7585
fb60a4700470e3 d9f6b6083ef13d 4a5840f02d0130 6c20ef5e35e2bf dad2f85c745b5b
61c5ddc65d3fc9 7f6ec395d4ae22 2b8906fb3996e2 e4110f59eb92ac 1cb212b44128bb
545afda80a4fd1 b1ffea547eab6b fac3d9166afce8 3fe35fe17586f2 9d082667026a4c
17ffaf1cb50145 24f27b316acfff b6bb758ec4ad60 995e8726359ef7 c44952cb424035
5ec53461dbd248 40a1586f04aee7 49ea3fa4474e52 c13e8f52c51562 30a1a70162cfb8
ccbada27b91c33 33661064d05759 3388bb6315b036 0380a6b43851fb 0228dadb44ad3d
b732565bc37841 993c0d383cfaae 0bea49476758ac accc69dbfcde8b f416ab0474f022
2b7dbcc3002502 20dc4e67289e50 0068424fde9515 64806d59eb0c18 9cf08fb2abc362
8d0ee78a6cace9 b6781bd504d105 af65fab8ee6252 64a8f8dd8e2d14 cb9d3354e06b5b
53082840d3c011 8e080bedab3c4c e30d722a455843 24955a20397c17 82495c1c5114e8
656e71c31d813d 1f0a6d291823a1 6327f9534353fa b89529c2f034fb 70e9b12205c7b3
a06c87969407a2 520bfa2fe80f90 da1efc3d345c65 313936ec023811 a8cc87128be2fa
4cd0e8645ee141 be7975519e2b63 9543d23113c2a8 3d87b0da033f22 df0464c704e9d4
7e1a30947e867e 014ae464b37935 5c4babf689fa4e c4aec0cb01cc35 328c0e4a0230e4
fdacb93b419594 26deefc8a553e6 6e75a2d790cb55 2c4554518f7396 94b77184cb145d
95f883f620a8bb edff42866a2783 7b4ee6304b711d ed56e077a4b9fb c4e60e687ff6c3
0cbf144b8f64d5 023dd10a35eddd beaa3323e999c6 d2e016b31c38c4 8d2917a888f799
18c3abd28e736b 8d38
These guys have no f'ing clue what they are talking about. If it's true, then I probably know all 100 people.
or else!
I would suggest they have actually found that a small group are responsible for a lot of seeding, not the initial upload (initial seed). Thus they have either (a) no fucking idea how this works and I'm right or (b) some really, really smart tracing software and I'm wrong.
You're only jealous cos the little penguins are talking to me.
Someone smart understands dumb humour, this is why TV targets the 80IQ demographic. Sure, you're ticking off the Einsteins at 130, but those at 100 are still laughing and you have now the big and easily led ~80IQ demographic who will believe any old guff.
However, target something to the IQ100 group and you lose those at 95 or less.
Aim low. It sells.
...that's exactly the way p2p it's supposed to work. For those who still don't have a clue, the big uploaders are mostly from "The Scene" http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Warez_scene
They get the leaks, rip, transcode, and post files for others to share.
The information appearing on the press conforms to a journalistic version of our scientific output and, as some of the comments here mention, part of the statements made by the press do not have the technical rigor that could be hoped for. However, it must also be understood that the non-specialized media are not bound to publish information in the same manner as scientific conferences such as those sponsored by the IEEE or ACM, in our field. The work that we have developed jointly three universities (UC3M, Darmstad and Oregon) and a research institute (Institute IMDEA Networks) conforms to the most rigorous scientific methodology. If you would like to view the actual results of our work, the publication is available at: http://conferences.sigcomm.org/co-next/2010/CoNEXT_papers/11-Cuevas.pdf. You will be able to establish the methodology and the data in which our research is based.
Regards,
Ruben Cuevas (Univ. Carlos III de Madrid), Michal Kryczka (Institute IMDEA Networks and
Univ. Carlos III de Madrid), Angel Cuevas (Univ. Carlos III de Madrid), Sebastian Kaune
(TU Darmstadt), Carmen Guerrero (Univ. Carlos III de Madrid), Reza Rejaie (University of Oregon)