My BitTorrent First Steps
Tags:
God damn this BitTorrent shit is slow (compared to my previous forays into P2P — first Napster, then Kazaa lite).
Yeah, it's free, the concept is cool, and 12 hours to download a film is a lot faster than ordering from Amazon, but damn — waiting half a day for my files isn't what I associate with P2P.
Maybe I did something wrong (or picked too-obscure files to download) and need to play around with its configuration, but if it's this sluggish "out of the box", I can't believe anyone actually uses it. The literal lack of a GUI (I don't want a different window for each download's status) and absence of an integrated search (try Googling for BitTorrent; that's no way to discover TorrentSpy et al., never mind the actual files) also blow.
BitTorrent is a file transfer protocol, not a copyright infringement suite. That is on purpose.
In the conditions where BitTorrent is slow, other p2p applications would've been slower or simply made you wait in an extremely long queue before ANY of the file started downloading. With the same available resources, BitTorrent should be faster than a one-to-one protocol in every case.
Posted by: Bob Ippolito on December 27, 2004 12:45 AM | permalinkHeh, kind of late to the Bit Torrent scene, aren't you? It sounds like it is about to die, considering all the places that are being shut down.
Bit Torrent works best when something is freshly released and people are actively seeking it (because everyone, including you, the downloader, shares the file). If you happen to hit stuff at the right time, you can easily hit the max download possible for your connection.
Posted by: O'dell on December 27, 2004 3:32 AM | permalinkBob:
I guess it was just the file(s) I downloaded and not yet being good enought at searching for torrents.
O'dell:
Ooh, you're so 1337!
Posted by: Joe Grossberg on December 27, 2004 9:37 AM | permalinkBitTorrent's most common use is the illegal exchange of copyrighted materials. I would be surprised if the percentage of people who use it for legal purposes is even as much as 1%.
Don't want to pay $50 for the latest video game? Find it on BitTorrent. Don't want to pay $8.50 at the movie theater to see the latest movie? Find it on BitTorrent. etc. Even though it has legitimate uses, the program is banned from computers on our network here at work because people won't use it for legitimate purposes.
While the ostensible motive behind the development of BitTorrent -- distributing bandwidth among many computers to facilitate large file transfers -- may be technically a good idea, I have a hard time believing the authors didn't know it would be used for illegal file transfer.
I agree with everything Steve said. I actually have seen a few places using it to save bandwidth on their game demos or videos.
Bit Torrent is open source, btw, so it is a trivial matter to make an IP logger for any seed. Keep in mind that anything you download you will also upload (partially), and there is always a chance of the cease and desist letter appearing in your mailbox.
On the legal side, I imagine that it is probably appealing to companies that use a lot of bandwidth. They could write their own Bit Torrent application that only shares their legit files. That is probably the future for Bit Torrent, once the MPAA, RIAA, and US government come down hard.
Posted by: O'dell on December 27, 2004 1:06 PM | permalinkAnd I wasn't trying to sound 'l33t3r th4n th0u 4rt.'
My point is that this is probably a bad time to jump in.
You should do what I do - use Netflix. It's cheap, fast, and it keeps the MPAA off your back.
Posted by: O'dell on December 27, 2004 1:46 PM | permalink"""While the ostensible motive behind the development of BitTorrent -- distributing bandwidth among many computers to facilitate large file transfers -- may be technically a good idea, I have a hard time believing the authors didn't know it would be used for illegal file transfer."""
Technologies and techniques can be used for good or bad. BitTorrent was designed to distribute large *files*. Whether those files are legal or illegal is up to the user. There's a ton of FTP servers out there with illegal material, but that doesn't make the FTP protocol a bad idea, nor should its designers be held responsible. ("They should have known...")
Of course there are always (many) people who will (ab)use a technology like this for illegal distribution (although Bram Cohen, the creator of BitTorrent, explicitly mentioned that that would be a bad idea), but there are legitimate uses as well... for example, distribution of Linux distros and ISO images.
Posted by: Hans on December 27, 2004 3:52 PM | permalinkThe only problem I have with what you said, Hans, is that the reason BitTorrent was invented was to deal with huge files that are impractical to download from an FTP server.
Files like movies and video game ISO's.
Posted by: Steve Meister on December 27, 2004 3:58 PM | permalinkNetflix still doesn't meet my needs; it's too slow and too much of a commitment. I want a film and I want it now, like an OnDemand with a much larger catalogue. For people with more patience and a longer list of films to watch, it might be applicable; I'm not in that market segment.
I personally would not download pirated executables off a P2P network because I'm too paranoid about executing software that might have been packaged with some real nasty stuff.
I'm much more interested in media that I can't get though other means, such as out-of-print films, mp3s, etc.
That said, I don't think it's an ethical outrage when people share files like DVDs, music, games, etc. When I buy CDs or games used, the originators don't get any more royalties than if I'd downloaded a pirated copy.
I'm pleased that the reality of current technology is forcing a reevaluation of IP law and bullshit business practices. Without Napster, there wouldn't have been an iTunes; record labels would have laughed at the suggestion.
Posted by: Joe Grossberg on December 27, 2004 4:32 PM | permalink"When I buy CDs or games used, the originators don't get any more royalties than if I'd downloaded a pirated copy."
That may be the case, but you are still stealing from someone. If a used CD store loses a million in sales to piracy, that's a million less that the business has to pay bills, pay employees, buy new merchandise from the originators, etc.
"I'm much more interested in media that I can't get though other means, such as out-of-print films, mp3s, etc."
I didn't realize that P2P was a great source for such material. It always seemed to me that it was pretty much nothing but the latest stuff.
Posted by: O'dell on December 27, 2004 4:51 PM | permalinkNo more comments! Either someone has violated Godwin's Law, I'm tired of the discussion or, most likely, the ten-week window has closed. You can, however, contact me through email.