May be a new technology will come :) the only drawback with bittorrent i see is the lack of privacy.
Printable View
May be a new technology will come :) the only drawback with bittorrent i see is the lack of privacy.
u can always get a private vpn proxy and seed through that ;)... privacy is no issue then (u can get vpn's that max out ur home connections speeds)Quote:
Originally Posted by crakin
u cant have everything though, u can eiher choose to distribute to a few very trusted peers (ftp), or u can choose to distribute to many not so trusted peers (bt) but with much greater bandwidth and reaching many more users... with the latter, u can mask the originators using various methodologies.. so really when u want to be anonymous, it is an option in bt regardless of the untrusted peer assumption that u make + the owners are almost always protected with the current legislations... in ftp, if u make one mistake, all ur anonymity effforts are destroyed (between the server and u offcourse - which is the most important anyhow; u wont be able to see other users though unless u have shell access as well, so i guess in that frame, ftp is more private... basically the owner gets the shit for it, not the users... but then again, the anti-piracy groups dont care that much about the users, bur rather the owners ;) )
demonoid is not a 0-day tracker. nice copying and pasting, i doubt you have most of the trackers you listed.
oMG! demonoid has the best pre-times of any tracker!!!Quote:
Originally Posted by Backslash
u r 100% right
/almost deleted as spam... still thinking about it.Quote:
Originally Posted by SIGMA-ZERO
Who is 100% right?
Thanx Jaits to giving best explanation to zalamo and others who wants ftpQuote:
Originally Posted by Jaitsu miseed the point though... ftp might be faster (which isnt entirely true if u look at how many ppl are getting the data and how the data is distributed in bt vs ftp), but the costs are greater as well... u have to be more tight about security, u serve a much smaller userbase, u need much greater bandwidth requirements, it is easier to trace unless the ftp is iptabled which thus goes back to the small userbase issue and also makes entrance requirements even tighter... also if u have one bad apple, the whole server can go down...Quote:
Originally Posted by zalamo
the point is to spread the data to as many users as u can as fast as u can... ftp doesnt allow u to do that.. take it this way, u could buy 10 100mb seedboxes or 10 100mb ftp servers (both are the same in terms of hardware and cost the same) but with the latter, u d serve (im just throwing numbers here) like what 100 uses at most at their full speed... with the former, u could easily seed to >10000 assuming the swarm doesnt fill up all at the same time since ur distributing the bandwidth and thus the load on the original 10 seedbox seeders gets diminished as more and more peers get more of the files.... so in other words, u have an exponential distribution of the files accross the peers, and furthermore, ur making use of the bandwidth of every peer to distribute the data... so in the same time u d take to seed to 100 users, bt would have given it to 10000 users :P (u can think of it as piplelining if u know smt about processor design - the output of one result might be slower because of the overheads and the time it takes to fill the pipeline, but the total bandwidth of data outputed is much greater once the pipeline is filled up) technologically, it is far more advanced than ftp.... + u dont need to be that secure about it as with ftp servers (since firstly the legal side of it is grey at the moment since ur not really hosting any files on the trackers that actually break the law and secondly cause if u use a few seedboxes, the true originator of the data is hidden - i guess u can emulate that behaviour with multiple ftp servers each sending to another.. but u cant deny the fact that bt is much more efficient as a protocol, which was my original point ;) )