The programmers of these P2P apps, either brilliant jerks or unwitting fools (both equally dangerous), have made applications that are so irresponsible on networks that just opening them can bring networks to their knees -- intentionally so, as these apps were specifically designed to break college P2P filters.
Please choose one of those so I can be properly offended. I guess I prefer brilliant jerk, but I'll leave it up to you.
Now, no P2P application I know has been designed specifically to break college P2P filters. The fact P2P applications open tons of connections is because, well, they are P2P applications. Unless you plan on creating a network by connecting to one or two peers, the point of those applications is to connect to a lot of peers. This is akin to claiming that Facebook's social network could be achieved while keeping a user cap of 3 friends. That simply doesn't work.
On top of that, you seem to be extremely oblivious about the default values for connection limits on p2p applications like eMule, or most bittorrent clients. As someone mention bellow, p2p applications can't open by default tons of connections because home routers tend to have small routing tables, and in many cases those routers crash when exceeding that point. P2P programmers would be shooting themselves in the foot if they were to set such limits.
You are right in the fact that ISPs are to blame. Somehow you are able to see that selling unlimited bandwith means that people can't be to blame for using as much bandwith as they want, but you can't see how that applies to connections. Unless you can claim that ISPs sell *limited* connections, people are still totally in the right of opening as many connections as they want, and network congestion derived from it means it's the ISP's responsibility to maintain the health of the network, and to improve the infrastructure if needed.
Are you telling me that companies using the bittorrent protocol for distribution like Blizzard are also to blame?
Really, you have a very nice view about bandwidth caps, but it also seems that you are completely biased against P2P (and uninformed, too).
Slashdot Mirror
All recent MacBooks, from what I saw last time I browsed their features to buy one for my wife.
The programmers of these P2P apps, either brilliant jerks or unwitting fools (both equally dangerous), have made applications that are so irresponsible on networks that just opening them can bring networks to their knees -- intentionally so, as these apps were specifically designed to break college P2P filters.
Please choose one of those so I can be properly offended. I guess I prefer brilliant jerk, but I'll leave it up to you.
Now, no P2P application I know has been designed specifically to break college P2P filters. The fact P2P applications open tons of connections is because, well, they are P2P applications. Unless you plan on creating a network by connecting to one or two peers, the point of those applications is to connect to a lot of peers. This is akin to claiming that Facebook's social network could be achieved while keeping a user cap of 3 friends. That simply doesn't work.
On top of that, you seem to be extremely oblivious about the default values for connection limits on p2p applications like eMule, or most bittorrent clients. As someone mention bellow, p2p applications can't open by default tons of connections because home routers tend to have small routing tables, and in many cases those routers crash when exceeding that point. P2P programmers would be shooting themselves in the foot if they were to set such limits.
You are right in the fact that ISPs are to blame. Somehow you are able to see that selling unlimited bandwith means that people can't be to blame for using as much bandwith as they want, but you can't see how that applies to connections. Unless you can claim that ISPs sell *limited* connections, people are still totally in the right of opening as many connections as they want, and network congestion derived from it means it's the ISP's responsibility to maintain the health of the network, and to improve the infrastructure if needed.
Are you telling me that companies using the bittorrent protocol for distribution like Blizzard are also to blame?
Really, you have a very nice view about bandwidth caps, but it also seems that you are completely biased against P2P (and uninformed, too).