What is Digg?131 Comments
- twitmer, on 10/12/2007, -4/+100The real issue here is that for most of us, our ISPs cap our upload speeds. I'd love to be able to share more... but TimeWarner Cable caps my UL speed at 45 Kbps.
We should be spending less time trying to figure out how to game the system, and more time demanding faster UL speeds from our providers.
btw - people who don't share at all suck - lickmygiggle, on 10/12/2007, -13/+108"So you have to wait 20 minutes to download a file instead of 15 -- big deal."
Oh, I wish it were that simple. For me, it's the difference between 20 hours and 4 days.
I like getting my downloads fast...So much as to the point that while I'm downloading, I cripple my uploads. However I always make it a point to seed the ***** out of everything I download, which makes sense and I think is fair in the long run. - Necoras, on 10/12/2007, -6/+92Crippling your uploads saps your download speeds. The torrent protocol is designed to pick who to upload to (ie, what you can download) based on how much they are uploading. Thus, the faster you upload the more other clients will (theoretically) be willing to upload for you, giving you better download speeds. The whole idea behind bit-torrent is that the more someone is willing to share, the more they will get in return.
These clients just take it a step further and ONLY upload to people that are willing to provide high download speeds in return. The end result is that you'll have a small group of people trading very fast, and the rest of the swarm gets almost none of the torrent. THAT's where the problems come in. - merreborn, on 10/12/2007, -4/+59"Fair? I guess pirates even have a sense of moral."
Nah, you're right, we have no morals at all. Between downloading movies, we mainline heroine, kill babies, rape animals, and vote republican.
'cause moralitiy is all or nothing, you know? Either you're a choir boy, or you're osama bin laden. - armbar, on 10/12/2007, -1/+48Not everything downloaded through BitTorrent is pirated.
- mark101, on 10/12/2007, -4/+42maybe it IS sponsored by the RIAA?
- burtonbe, on 10/12/2007, -1/+35@Necoras
"These clients just take it a step further and ONLY upload to people that are willing to provide high download speeds in return. The end result is that you'll have a small group of people trading very fast, and the rest of the swarm gets almost none of the torrent. THAT's where the problems come in."
Well, that's what BitTyrant does. BitThief on the other hand repeatably lies to the swarm that it "just arrived" so it has nothing to upload. This gets it out of uploading anything. Pretty lame IMO; just consider what would happen if that client became popular--bittorrent would pretty much fall apart. - andydumi, on 10/12/2007, -1/+24Actually Tyrant makes a lot of sense. Prioritizing faster seeders will cause a lot more completion, thus a lot more seeds quicker. Once you are done downloading, then priorities don't much matter, as all seeds ought to disconnect.
I often manually block peers who are extremely slow or who leech without seeding, at least temporarily until my DL is done, then while seeding, I don't care who gets some. - troydoogle7, on 10/12/2007, -9/+31This will kill off bitorrent far better than the riaa ever could. I wonder how long it will take before the other clients start blocking this apps from downloading off them?
- inactive, on 10/12/2007, -2/+21Of course! Pirates were one of the first true democracies! The captain was voted for and they had a civilized society quite unlike the press ganged British Navy ships.
- korimickster, on 10/12/2007, -6/+24"This will kill off bitorrent far better than the riaa ever could."
Absolutely... and much, much faster. - Tweekster, on 10/12/2007, -3/+19Sensationalism at it's finest. These clients mean absolutely nothing.
They will be instantly banned on every halfway decent tracker within days.
Although I sometimes wish i could limit myself to downloading from the FAST seeds because I am usually uploading at ten times the rate i am downloading. - yanokwa, on 10/12/2007, -4/+19These clients are not the same thing.
BitThief downloads from everyone without uploading anything. It violates the spirit of BitTorrent.
BitTyrant rewards users whose upload allocations are fair and only allocates excess capacity to other users. It ensures the spirit of BitTorrent.
Cliffs: BitThief is an *****. BitTyrant isn't. - localzuk, on 10/12/2007, -3/+18"Crippling your uploads saps your download speeds. The torrent protocol is designed to pick who to upload to (ie, what you can download) based on how much they are uploading. Thus, the faster you upload the more other clients will (theoretically) be willing to upload for you, giving you better download speeds. The whole idea behind bit-torrent is that the more someone is willing to share, the more they will get in return. "
But that isn't how a DSL line works for most people. The more that is uploading, the less bandwidth you have for downloading. For example, if I let my upload speeds run at full, my download speeds will halve. So I halve my upload speeds and get about 3/4 of my max download speed whilst allowing some uploads. The protocol for bittorrent might be written in the way you describe, but ISP's don't provide lines that work in the same way... - Anpheus, on 10/12/2007, -5/+20BitTyrant rates leechers LOW. That's the point! Everything I've read about BitTyrant shows that if you seed, you should use it. Because it helps you seed more, faster. Leechers will be leechers no matter what client they use.
- briguymaine, on 10/12/2007, -2/+17correct me if I'm wrong but won't trackers just mistake Bityrant for Azureus making banning tough?
- Janus67, on 10/12/2007, -1/+14As others have said, any private forum/site will most likely ban these, just as they banned the Bitcomet client months ago
- banditski, on 10/12/2007, -1/+13This is taken from the comment section of the article. I take no credit for it. But I agree with it 100%.
- - - - -
Name: The Dude
"I still don't understand how you could have an illegal episode of Lost. Don't they already give it to you for free on their website and on TV?"
The real issue here is that old laws are not valid anymore. We can record shows that are broadcast. No one disputes this. What is the difference if the recording device is in another location than where it is played? That's like two VCRs in your house. Obviously doing this over the Internet is not the intent, but it is also not explicitly illegal. Either way, the problems are this: old laws based on old technologies, and the times have changed and we need to adapt, and by we I also mean the big media companies. The big media companies have made the majority of their money not on creating the art, but in distribution. That's why they are *claiming* huge losses due to illegal downloading on the Internet. When in reality they are waging war on the Internet through our policy makers because it threatens their cash cow portion of their industry.
Times change, and some industries go away because they are no longer relevant. The big media companies need to learn this and embrace it, or they will be replaced by someone that is willing to embrace new technology.
- - - - - - libertinette, on 10/12/2007, -1/+13The basic idea is that selfishness isn't always detrimental to the group. It means that people that can upload quickly will get the whole file faster. That's good for everyone. Am I missing something here?
- mookieXL, on 10/12/2007, -0/+12So what we have here:
BitThief pretending that it has nothing to share.
And BitTyrant disconnecting those who have nothing to share.
Tough luck fakers >:-] - chibigoku, on 10/12/2007, -0/+12I don't use either of these, but I don't really see the problem with BitTyrant. Your still uploading, and as far as I can tell from the articles, just as much as you normally would, but your just being more selective as to WHO you upload to. Whats the problem in rewarding the people who are giving you a lot of the file? I think its just as fair as "You scratch my back I'll scratch yours...."
@Necoras, thats true about shunning the others who arnt as fast, but only if those who use it are not seeding afterward..... - libertinette, on 10/12/2007, -0/+12I don't think that BitTyrant and BitThief should be painted with the same brush. BitThief makes it a goal to upload as little as possible, but BitTyrant explicitly doesn't do this, as stated in the FAQ. If anything, BitTyrant would provide a strong disincentive against clients like BitThief, by refusing to share with clients that don't upload.
- Scyth3, on 10/12/2007, -1/+13Being that I've designed several P2P networks, it's very very easy to detect rogue clients which are leeching. Simple share checks are all that is needed (send them a rare chunk, and see if you can download it within a certain time limit, or another peer -- if not, ban them). With that kind of simple logic, it'll easily defeat any of these "threats to BT". Btw, they aren't very threatening to the health of the network. Look at all the leech apps for networks like Gnutella (QTrax I believe is one of them), yet the network still lives on happily.
Also, banning a client by "clientid" doesn't do anything, since most of the names are user-configurable anyway. So don't get all up in arms about how it's going to kill BT, cause it definitely won't. It may in fact make the network faster, more efficient, and even more secure since it'll weed out those with poor share ratio's [after the dev's of the clients add a method for detection of leechers]. - inactive, on 10/12/2007, -18/+27It isn't clear that these clients cheat at all! It just groups high performers together and if your upload ratio sucks you will only experience the performance you deserve instead of leeching the charity of the high performers..
wtf.. how did my comment end up here? - shredomatic, on 10/12/2007, -3/+11Won't they just put in some sort of "client spoofing" thing? So the trackers think it is a different client?
- KnightMareInc, on 10/12/2007, -5/+13any quality site will ban these clients just as they do with other clients who use this kind of choking and other ill-tactics.So im not too worried.
- cbreaker, on 10/12/2007, -2/+10There's very large sites like demonoid that count ratios, so if you never upload anything and maintain a sane ratio, you'll be banned. That's one way to stop these people.
I don't see the big deal about uploading anyways. I mean, even if you have ***** comcast with their 300Kbit upload (STILL) you can upload at 10-15k a second without affecting much. Leave it running always. With Cox I can do 200K a second, so I keep it at around 75 - 100K a second. It's not a big deal.
It seems that a lot of people using these torrents at least understand that the whole system breaks down if you don't at least contribute back to a certain extent. - m0laria, on 10/12/2007, -1/+8Pirate's Code!
- po6ot, on 10/12/2007, -2/+9
BitTyrant is the nemisis of the filthy BitThief users. - PacoDG, on 10/12/2007, -2/+9This is why good sites have ratio rules to keep up with.
Public torrent sites are nice for an everyday joe. But sign up sites are where files originate from (not counting irc/usenet). - evilTak, on 10/12/2007, -1/+7"BitThief (a Swiss project, go figure)"
Wtf? - TheVirus, on 10/12/2007, -3/+8Yes, and they will. Private trackers don't ***** around. :)
- noseeme, on 10/12/2007, -2/+6Yeah, I have one torrent going right now. It's the DVD ISO for Sabayon Linux, which means I am using BitTorrent without doing anything illegal.
This is a really slow torrent, by the way. I can't seed too well on my current connection, but I'll be sure to seed it at 6 megabytes per second when I get back to college. - prkchpsndwiches, on 10/12/2007, -1/+5Well now that its on Digg, everyone who never heard about them will be using them. Way to go!
- Wolfie351, on 10/12/2007, -2/+6Before BitTorrent, before Kazaa and before Napster, people would trade files through FTP sites. You'd have to upload twice as much as you downloaded to make it fair and keep out the leechers. Worked for me. Uh, well...not me. It was a friend of mine...who I now forget.
- MrViklund, on 10/12/2007, -4/+7What's that lol? Serious. Really stupid comment. If you just seed as much as you downloaded BitTorrent is for any Internet-speed. I cap my upload at 20 KB/s when I download but when I got the file I seed it and increase my upload speed if I'm not doing anything else. If you just seed as much as you downloaded it won't hurt the Torrent. And yes, BitTorrentis for him...
- grevvvvvv, on 10/12/2007, -1/+4Nope, it's just everyone else hasn't read the ***** documentation or used either client.
- geezusfreeek, on 10/12/2007, -6/+9I hate to leech off the top post, but this really needs to be seen. BitTyrant is NOT going to kill Bittorrent. If anything, it will IMPROVE Bittorrent. Approach Bittorrent from an economic perspective (which is much closer to the truth than most people probably realize). The goal is for faster uploads to lead to faster downloads.
Let's say there is a seeder (S) and three downloaders (A, B, and C). The speed between S and A and between S and B is very fast, but between S and C is it very slow. However, C can download from B very quickly. C, in this case, will download from and upload to B instead of S. Does A get ripped off because C doesn't upload to him? Not really, since nothing is stopping him from getting some upload from B as well as S. What if the upload from B to A isn't that fast? A just downloads from S! Little harm is done anyway, since the benefit from that connection would be tiny, and it also frees things up around the board for the faster transfers.
In the long run, it should balance out in such a way that everybody gets the best download speeds they can attain based on the speeds they can upload! - bairy, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3Why would you want to limit yourself to only fast seeds. If you don't get anything off the fast seeds at first then several slow downloads beats nothing at all.
- inactive, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3Because the longer you sit there uploading the longer the MPAA or RIAA has to log your IP.
- rompom7, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3You have no idea how BitTorrent works do you?
- NetLogic, on 10/12/2007, -3/+6This won't be a problem really for private trackers which have ratio requirements.
- Mirag3, on 10/12/2007, -2/+5look, im sorry, maybe im selfish, but when im uploading at 200 Mbit/s and all I get down is fricken 120 KB/s TOTAL I get a little cranky. As of this very moment, my bandwidth for this month is 11.25 GB down, 149.90 GB up - a ratio of 13.319:1! Yet for some reason, all i get is 300 KB/s max. I'm trying BitTyrant tonight. Maybe I can finally max out my 15 Mbps down.
- msgyrd, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3lol. Private trackers are what RUN bittorrent. There, corrected that for you. Almost all major torrents you see on public trackers originate from private trackers.
- n00bst3r, on 10/12/2007, -2/+5Also its probably pretty easy to make other clients deny service to these clients.
- planetbeing, on 10/12/2007, -3/+6I've read the research paper written by the group that developed BitTyrant. What is important to realize is that the article unequivocally concludes that if BitTyrant were to be adopted universally, overall BitTorrent performance WILL decrease.
However, the reason that they give for this decrease is that the overwhelming majority of BitTorrent users are low-capacity users who are currently relying on the generosity of high-capacity users. If the high-capacity users adopted BitTyrant, they will certainly benefit, but they will become generous and low-capacity users will suffer. Since the majority of BitTorrent users are such low-capacity users, overall BitTorrent performance will decrease.
If you want to live in a more exclusivist file-sharing world, than the new world order would be an improvement. However, many users of P2P programs have professed a desire for more equal access to everyone, which is why protocols such as DC are frowned upon. For those who believe in equality, BitTyrant would be an unwelcome development. - bmwboy, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2BitTyrant isn't bad, it just allows those who can upload faster to download faster, just bug you isp a bit, and they might loosen up on the upload (or upgrade your plan), BitThief is outright awful, it just doesn't do BitTorrent right...
- geoffreyireland, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2I used BitTyrant during the week and noticed no increase in speed.
All the files went the same speed in and around. - inactive, on 10/12/2007, -1/+3BitThief = RIAAware?
-
Show 51 - 100 of 128 discussions
Digg is coming to a city (and computer) near you! Check out all the details on our 
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is