What is Digg?106 Comments
- inactive, on 11/04/2008, -17/+211
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . _________
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ./ It’s a trap!
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . _,,,--~~~~~~~~--,_ . . . . ._________/
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . ,-‘ : : : :::: :::: :: : : : : :º ‘-, . . /. . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . .,-‘ :: : : :::: :::: :::: :::: : : :o : ‘-, . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . ,-‘ :: ::: :: : : :: :::: :::: :: : : : : :O ‘-, . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . .,-‘ : :: :: :: :: :: : : : : : , : : :º :::: :::: ::’; . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . .,-‘ / / : :: :: :: :: : : :::: :::-, ;; ;; ;; ;; ;; ;; ; . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . /,-‘,’ :: : : : : : : : : :: :: :: : ‘-, ;; ;; ;; ;; ;; ;;| . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . /,’,-‘ :: :: :: :: :: :: :: : ::_,-~~,_’-, ;; ;; ;; ;; | . . . . . . .
. . . . . _/ :,’ :/ :: :: :: : : :: :: _,-‘/ : ,-‘;’-‘’’’’~-, ;; ;; ;;,’ . . . . . . . .
. . . ,-‘ / : : : : : : ,-‘’’ : : :,--‘’ :|| /,-‘-‘--‘’’__,’’’ ;; ;,-‘ . . . . . . . .
. . . :/,, : : : _,-‘ --,,_ : : : ||/ /,-‘-‘x### :: ;;/ . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . / /---‘’’’ : # : : : : : | | : (O##º : :/ /-‘’ . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . /,’____ : : ‘-# : , : : : : ‘-,___,-‘,-`-,, . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . ‘ ) : : : :’’’’--,,--,,,,,,¯ :: ::--,,_’’-,,’’’¯ :’- :’-, . . . . . . . . .
. . . . .) : : : : : : ,, : ‘’’’~~~~’ :: :: :: :’’’’’¯ :: ,-‘ :,/ . . . . . . . . .
. . . . .,/ /|| | :/ / : : : : : : : ,’-, :: :: :: :: ::,--‘’ :,-‘ . . . . . . . .
. . . . .’| |/ ‘/ / :: :_--,, : , | )’; :: :: :: :,-‘’ : ,-‘ : : : , . . . . . . .
. . . ./¯ :| | : |/ :: ::----, :/ :|/ :: :: ,-‘’ : :,-‘ : : : : : : ‘’-,,_ . . . .
. . ..| : : :/ ‘’-(, :: :: :: ‘’’’’~,,,,,’’ :: ,-‘’ : :,-‘ : : : : : : : : :,-‘’’ . . . .
. ,-‘ : : : | : : ‘’) : : :¯’’’’~-,: : ,--‘’’ : :,-‘’ : : : : : : : : : ,-‘ :¯’’’’’-,_ .
./ : : : : :’-, :: | :: :: :: _,,-‘’’’¯ : ,--‘’ : : : : : : : : : : : / : : : : : : :’’-,
/ : : : : : -, :¯’’’’’’’’’’’¯ : : _,,-~’’ : : : : : : : : : : : : : :| : : : : : : : : :
: : : : : : :¯’’~~~~~~’’’ : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : | : : : : : : : : : - ElBeh, on 11/04/2008, -2/+98Wait... /Comcast/ developed technology that's good for P2P? I don't get it...
- dajuggernaut, on 11/04/2008, -1/+60now you can get screwed by the RIAA 80% sooner...
- fadingsignal, on 11/04/2008, -1/+58I need to read up on this more, but aren't ISPs trying to crack down on Torrent traffic?
- Fastmedic, on 11/04/2008, -0/+43anything with "tracker" it in from Comcast scares me.
- BoneheadFarker, on 11/04/2008, -1/+33No...they developed a protocol that they can control and make money...
- iSamurai, on 11/04/2008, -2/+31I'm confused as hell too.
- Aerynvala, on 11/04/2008, -1/+29My one concern, that the article doesn't give enough detail about, is that with this iTracker stuff the ISP would potentially be able to definitively peg which users are using P2P software. And while that wouldn't necessarily tell them that someone was sharing 'illegal' content, it would make it MUCH easier for them to identify who to look at more closely.
- inactive, on 11/04/2008, -0/+27Yes, that's where P4P comes in.
The problem with p2p traffic for ISPs is the load and costs associated with the load.
P4P solves this by localizing peer downloads. So the load is greatly reduced, which reduces costs and improves performance.
If this is implemented, no more throttling required, better p2p transfer performance. - Suricou, on 11/04/2008, -0/+22Unfortunatly, p4p is dead before it starts. It's a simple problem - it requires ISP cooperation for the torrents. That's great for legal stuff, but I think we all know legal torrents arn't what's straining the networks - and no ISP would work to *improve* copyright infringement, for fear of being held liable.
- Rockkybox, on 11/04/2008, -0/+22You see? A well placed ACSII can be wonderful, now if people would just learn to save them for special occasions, the world (well digg) would be a better place
- yor1001, on 11/04/2008, -0/+17It...it's as if someone divided by zero...then added 2.
- Haysoos, on 11/04/2008, -0/+17Um, comcast can figure out what you are doing right now if they really wanted to. I think this is seriously just a way to keep customers happy and lower operating costs.
- diggzoid, on 11/04/2008, -0/+12Time to upgrade to a multi Terabyte HD.
- inactive, on 11/04/2008, -0/+12The problem there is the relation ISPs have with legal institutions like the RIAA, not the technology.
ISPs don't give a crap about copyright infringement. Bodies like the RIAA do and impede on privacy rights to enforce the law.
So the solution would be to limit the RIAA's power. - TimDigg, on 11/04/2008, -0/+11http://torrentfreak.com/uncovering-the-dark-side-o ...
It most certainly is a trap.... - MarkOfTheDead, on 11/04/2008, -0/+11Even still, for legal torrents this could be amazing.
Linux distro Iso's and freeware open source software-packed Iso's downloaded 80% faster? Now THAT is technical evolution.
Would be fantastic for legal software update patches too for more popular commercial games and apps too.
Just being optimistic :) - airwalkery2k, on 11/04/2008, -0/+11What's the catch?
- vtnerd, on 11/04/2008, -0/+10Comcast: Doing everything in its power to make sure you can burn through the 250GB limit.
I can't wait until I can switch to FIOS. - abajaj2280, on 11/04/2008, -4/+13it most definitely is.
- FlyCO, on 11/04/2008, -2/+10***** COMCAS- oh, wait
- twiztidsinz, on 11/04/2008, -2/+10"Data source: Comcast"
New source please. - feliks2, on 11/04/2008, -2/+8Comcast, go ***** yourself.
- omnibahumut, on 11/04/2008, -1/+7Digg: Doing everthing in its power to find evil wherever it goes.
- Murdats, on 11/04/2008, -2/+8the version numbers are done in 2ⁿ
- thealsir, on 11/04/2008, -1/+7Well, this could help other p2p-style protocols and content distribution systems, not just bittorrent.
- DeathfireD, on 11/04/2008, -0/+6Did you even read the ***** article? P4P, if enabled, first attempts to find local peers using free or cheap lines your ISP owns. If it cant find any then it uses more expensive lines that it may or may not own and then it eventually finds peers outside the ISP's control. No one's getting isolated. If you're from another country and you download a torrent and the tracker tells you someone in US has the file, P4P wont stop you from connecting to that person. However if you have a client that supports P4P it will first attempt to find local connections before attempting to connect to anyone outside the ISP's control. This saves ISPs money and also dramatically lowers latency and stress put on the backbone and pipelines.
- adriaaan, on 11/04/2008, -4/+10P4P... What happened to P3P? :(
- djbon2112, on 11/04/2008, -0/+6It doesn't PREVENT external access, it just favours internal access. So if there are no seeds in the network, it WILL go elsewhere, however, if there are some inside the network, it'll use them more.
- 4degrees, on 11/04/2008, -0/+6Ding ding ding! give this man a prize!
- vtnerd, on 11/04/2008, -0/+5I'm sure they still count it against your 250GB of bandwidth though.
- KirbyMeister, on 11/04/2008, -0/+5I'm wondering why this has to be done as a server. Why not just have clients prefer connections to hosts inside their own network?
I'm assuming that you can already do that. Would you need the BGP data for that? - fwertz, on 11/04/2008, -0/+5You wont go to jail like the rest of us.
- clsslc, on 11/04/2008, -0/+5What happened to Web 1.0? Or Slackware 5? Or Java 1.2? Or Mac OS 3.1 or 4.2? Or Microsoft Access 3.0? Or Solaris 2.8?
- LocalDocal, on 11/04/2008, -0/+5I've actually read about this previously. From what I remember, P4P was designed in order to implement the benefits of P2P sans the problems of P2P (we all know what that is).
EDIT: Not the article I read, but a similar one in which Verizon states that P4P is supposed to help the whole piracy problem with P2P: http://arstechnica.com/news.ars/post/20080314-veri ... - BigglesPiP, on 11/04/2008, -1/+5This means 80% more speed for the same network load, not 80% more speed for us.
- minorgods, on 11/04/2008, -0/+4ugh.. there I go again.. assuming people know how comcast's infrastructure differs from other isp's...
- trogdor282, on 11/04/2008, -0/+4Suricou, any improvement they make to your internets connection necessarily improves p2p performance along with it. If they implement it as a "dumb" protocol that just routes p2p more efficiently without inspecting the content for legality, they can still claim that they're a common carrier that's just exchanging messages for people. Then it's still the end user's asses that are on the line when the subpoenas come around. Plus they can claim they're improving legit use by keeping p2p off the backbones.
I wouldn't put it past Craptastic to be total douches about it at every turn, but they still could be on to something here. - Ozenbac, on 11/04/2008, -1/+5No, its a compromise. We still get to download torrents and Comcast doesn't have to worry about their network getting hammered. They save money, we get to keep doing what were doing. Hopefully this encourages more companies, (ahem MPAA RIAA), to think outside the box.
- tchynerd, on 11/04/2008, -0/+4Seems like this ought to alieviate a lot of the arguments that ISPs have against peer to peer. Improvments in this type of technology means less overhead for them and more profit. If they put this through (and don't discriminate) maybe everyone can win!
Or so I can dream - PhailQuail, on 11/04/2008, -0/+3Or Ubuntu 1.04 through to 4.04 and Xbox 2 to 359
- 4degrees, on 11/04/2008, -0/+3skipped P2.0P too
- kr0n0s82, on 11/04/2008, -0/+3This sounds great and i will be happy for it but there appears to be further strategy on Comcast's part so users can hit your 250GB limit faster and PAY PAY PAY.
- Suricou, on 11/04/2008, -0/+3Kirby: Some clients do exactly that. Prefer to upload to clients with as many bits of the IP matching as possible. It's better than noe trying to manage the network at all, but not as power as p4p's technique because p4p can know the actual physical layout of the network. Bitmatching only goes on what the network is likely to look like.
Robo: There is a very good reason for an ISP to side with copyright holders. It comes in the form of a large army of lawyers. - kinerry, on 11/04/2008, -3/+6it saves them money on bandwidth (not on power though), so everyone wins
- Jlaw09, on 11/04/2008, -0/+2Irony?
- RoboDonut, on 11/04/2008, -0/+2They will if it makes them money.
There's really no reason for an ISP to side with the MPAA/RIAA if it's going to kill their profits. The real reason that ISPs like to throttle P2P traffic is because it taxes their wimpy infrastructure. - clsslc, on 11/04/2008, -0/+2Actually, the versioning for TeX _is_ based on pi.
"Since version 3, TeX has used an idiosyncratic version numbering system, where updates have been indicated by adding an extra digit at the end of the decimal, so that the version number asymptotically approaches π. This is a reflection of the fact that TeX is now very stable, and only minor updates are anticipated. The current version of TeX is 3.1415926; it was last updated in March 2008."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/TeX#History - MarkOfTheDead, on 11/04/2008, -0/+2Ex Cable Guy here, and you're correct, Everything is locally meshed, But the idea is the same as a small home network on a much larger scale (why a file will transer faster over a shared drive than if you were copying the file across the internet)
What I can gather from this is is that it's a smarter protocol that could seek seeds geographically closer to the leech for better speeds rather than taking the network strain of downloading from across the u.s. and instead patching in your seeds from your neighborhood, city, state or whatever, which bit torrent doesn't do, it just goes off of servers that seeds connect to. - inchrnt, on 11/04/2008, -0/+2ISP-proprietary P2P backed by MPAA
FAIL -
Show 51 - 100 of 107 discussions
Browsing Digg on your phone just got easier with our enhancements to the 
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is