You miss the point, no amount of scientific studies are going to convince believers that their belief system is false. That's the whole point of the disease of religion - it convinces people something that is demonstrably false. An appropriate quote:
"Faith is believing what you know ain't so" - Mark Twain
This is great, you'll have almost duplicated what Microsoft had 5 years ago, just in time for Vista to come out. Leave your parent's basements and go buy XP for $80
Hello, where the mention of ASP? the definitive scripting language of the Microsoft platform. Why would you use php or perl on win2k when ASP is already installed and has more components.
I'm not one to priase Shawn Fanning, who is obviously a punk kid, but the idea behind the protocol is very good and after studing Gnutella, Freenet, Blocks, and just about every front end out there, I've found they all have a long long way to go.
None of them are as fast, easy to use, or reach 1/10th the number of people that napster does. I believe the solution, at least for the short term is not to create new protocols from scatch, but rather to make the napster protocol itself more distributed.
Rather than having centralized napster servers which can easily be shut down, it would be ideal to have linked servers that not only can share the load, but will propogate the index of the other servers. Then we need some way to make the napster client aware of the servers and find one at random, possibly through a webpage with an index of registered servers, or by contacting other clients on the network similar to gnutellas node catcher.
The client would also need to automatically jump from one server to another if the server goes down because of connectivity or tragic law suits.
The server could even be built into the client so that you can check a box and start operating as a server which would publish your ip to others on the network. Once there are suffcient numbers of napster client/servers out there and changing every hour it will be very very difficult to shut down, and for the average user, they can just download the new client and it will work as it always did.
Napster should abandon their filtering direction and release this type of distributed, fail-over, server as open source along with the matching client. Once its in the wild they can shut down their own servers and just host the napster webpage. They can still enjoy millions of hits to their site, with no libability of running the napster servers.
I suspect even the RIAA won't be able to get a restraining order against a software company to make them stop creating software. Other wise netscape/ms/apache and any other software that allows computers to communicate is next.
So please, before we abandon the well known napster protocol, let's slightly change it to be more resistive to attack. Opennap may be headed in this direction but until i can visit their page and see 10,000 opennap servers all listed and linked together, they're just inviting themselves to another lawsuit.
Am I the only one who thinks that the obvious solution to this filename filtering is to use an encryption layer between the client and the server? Filenames could be posted to napster using a changable encryption and then searches could be conducted by encrypting the search pattern. Viola, napster has no way to check what the filenames are and could claim that they aboslutely can't monitor what the users are doing. Not only does the file not pass through napster, but the filenames don't either.
Although it was interesting, there is absolutely no focus on the science of the equation. The author would have you believe that the equation came about simply by a thought experiment in einstien's head. I got a more in-depth explaination in my freshman physics course.
If you're interested in a history lesson of all things leading up to and including the atom bomb in WW2. This book is for you.
Slashdot Mirror
Get one of these:
http://bluelounge.com/thesanctuary.php
Has adapters for most everything, looks great and works great, but does not work with iPhone 3G sadly.
You miss the point, no amount of scientific studies are going to convince believers that their belief system is false. That's the whole point of the disease of religion - it convinces people something that is demonstrably false. An appropriate quote:
"Faith is believing what you know ain't so" - Mark Twain
This is great, you'll have almost duplicated what Microsoft had 5 years ago, just in time for Vista to come out. Leave your parent's basements and go buy XP for $80
Hello, where the mention of ASP? the definitive scripting language of the Microsoft platform. Why would you use php or perl on win2k when ASP is already installed and has more components.
None of them are as fast, easy to use, or reach 1/10th the number of people that napster does. I believe the solution, at least for the short term is not to create new protocols from scatch, but rather to make the napster protocol itself more distributed.
Rather than having centralized napster servers which can easily be shut down, it would be ideal to have linked servers that not only can share the load, but will propogate the index of the other servers. Then we need some way to make the napster client aware of the servers and find one at random, possibly through a webpage with an index of registered servers, or by contacting other clients on the network similar to gnutellas node catcher.
The client would also need to automatically jump from one server to another if the server goes down because of connectivity or tragic law suits.
The server could even be built into the client so that you can check a box and start operating as a server which would publish your ip to others on the network. Once there are suffcient numbers of napster client/servers out there and changing every hour it will be very very difficult to shut down, and for the average user, they can just download the new client and it will work as it always did.
Napster should abandon their filtering direction and release this type of distributed, fail-over, server as open source along with the matching client. Once its in the wild they can shut down their own servers and just host the napster webpage. They can still enjoy millions of hits to their site, with no libability of running the napster servers.
I suspect even the RIAA won't be able to get a restraining order against a software company to make them stop creating software. Other wise netscape/ms/apache and any other software that allows computers to communicate is next.
So please, before we abandon the well known napster protocol, let's slightly change it to be more resistive to attack. Opennap may be headed in this direction but until i can visit their page and see 10,000 opennap servers all listed and linked together, they're just inviting themselves to another lawsuit.
Am I the only one who thinks that the obvious solution to this filename filtering is to use an encryption layer between the client and the server? Filenames could be posted to napster using a changable encryption and then searches could be conducted by encrypting the search pattern. Viola, napster has no way to check what the filenames are and could claim that they aboslutely can't monitor what the users are doing. Not only does the file not pass through napster, but the filenames don't either.
If you're interested in a history lesson of all things leading up to and including the atom bomb in WW2. This book is for you.
http://home.netscape.com/bookmark/4_08/cbsmarketwa tch.html