Paranoia? Maybe!

[crawler_nt]

Seen a few threads recently which talk about companies taking measures to stop or slow down p2p networking.

For a little while now i have been thinking of this one;

When downloading certain files, even though connected to 10 hosts, i only download at 1kbs or so. This seems especially so, when downloading 'movie' files.

I was wondering maybe companies log on to a p2p network, pretend to have the file (or maybe actually have it) but limit their upload speed making your download slow.

Maybe they do this with a number of machines and they manage to halt or slow down your download to such an extent that you personaly quit the download. Thus ending the spread of a particular file.

As i said it only seems to be certain types of files.

Is it just me being a little paranoid?

[Lord of the Rings]

Possibly yes. lol I've heard of dud UP's out there. That's one reason some people have difficulty connecting. Answer I guess is to close LW & relaunch.

Be aware that a large % of video files out there are shared by other gnutella clients. And one of the most common of these for videos is Shareaza (RAZA). Raza is a multi-network program. Probably 3/4 or more of these users are connected to more than one network whilst on the gnutella network (what they refer to as G1.) But most of their upload bandwidth goes to the other networks. One in particular they can only downld as fast as they upload so ... they don't have much left over for gnutella. It's been argued time & time again they shouldn't be allowed to connect to Gnutella & others simultaneously or should have a minimum speed to offer if doing so (my idea! lol) Raza is not the only one but it's the most reknown.

Right-click the top of the column of the downld window & choose to show client/version & that will help you to know.

I suspect for large files, it may also be an issue with the gnutella network. Perhaps maintaining the speed since the dynamics of the network change all the time. People connecting & disconnecting, & net traffic at sections between you & them. Peak periods for cable users can result in drops in speeds. I'm not sure but it does seem that way. But then again, I've downlded 500 MB -> over 1 GB files at very healthy rates many times.

[ukbobboy01]

You know LOTR

I seem to be experiencing the same problem as Crawler_nt, one moment I can download a large file at a health rate and the next it has slowed down to between 0KB - 1KB, even with 10 hosts and my internet connection is Turbo Charged.

However, I am aware that during peak periods the system will slow down but, as LW has a world wide audience, peak times now seem to be most of the time.

Still, I am not griping about that, I would hope that something can be done about being bumped off rare files. For example, there may be only one host/source for a particular rare file, and you have waited days in the queue to download it, just as you start to download this file along comes (I believe) a Sharaza client, bumps you off your download and puts you back into the queue.

Of all the things that happen while I am using LW Pro, self disconnect, java crashing, internal errors, etc. that is the one thing I hate the most.

LOTR, you are a man of considerable influence in the upper echelons of the LW Org., is there anyway you can convince them to squeeze in an anti-bumping facility.

I know there is nothing anyone can do if the PC or server you are downloading from is switched off but to be bumped of a download is adding insult to injury.


Hoping it can be done.




UK Bob

[Lord of the Rings]

I'm not so sure I have that much influence lol But I doubt even they can influence the other networks that much. If that's what you're asking, to stop those using 2 or more nets for their own users to stop Gnutella users being bumped off into a queue. It's certainly a nice concept & would be a mighty happy community if all p2p shared networks could work together. Unfortunately, AFAIK some of them (devs) don't give a ... about their effect upon some of the networks.

I just take it as a fact of life with raza users. I've recently finished very large files I downlded bit by bit over half a year or more. lol Despite sometimes being connected to them several times a week & queueing on & off over many hrs on those days or other days just at slow speeds. (Or always at slow speeds! )

As far as bumping people off a queue on the gnutella network, it's something I noticed about a year ago. Morpheous, Raza & I think another were guilty of that at the time. Watching my uploads, they would start at the bottom of the queue. Then each LW user above them would be bumped off the list & these other greedy clients would move up quite quickly. I know the gnutella community was very strong in voice against & to these clients. I believe those clients' newer versions since have been less aggressive & a little more community spirited. I haven't seen that type of issue happen in a long time over this year.

[et voilà]

The network is faster than ever despite some obstacles. Any mutlinet proggy as RAZA, Morphie and all slow down the network. This is a fact. The only thing they could say in their defense is that they introduce new files to the network and I find that highly arguable. In fact they are mostly self centric users that are trying to justify their preferred app in a non objective way.

Now let's talk about the biggest problem, the companies.

First, there are the ISP. They are interested into making profits (which is understandable and they have the right to) and not being sued in court.
We all know that P2P is responsible for at least 60% of the bandwidth consumed and hence at least 60% of their bandwidth cost (they pay for bandwidth), so clearly some are tempted by limiting either download or upload speed or even both. They often have very sophisticated hardware that can determine if you are using P2P and which protocol of P2P it is (Gnutella, BT et al) and they can limit every user connexion P2P activities based on that "sniffing". Now, people who are knowledge-full can counter attack that trend in ISP by switching to other ISPs that don't limit P2P activities so in fact the previous ISP understands that users should do what they want for THEIR service and that limiting P2P would in fact decrease user base and so profits.
The fear of being sued by supporting all activities for ISP is also something that might push them to spy on users and limit P2P too. ISPs should understand that what the user do is NONE of their business. They provide a service, the user is the ONLY responsible for what he does with it. As an analogy just look at P2P apps. They are legal because they provide the service, they are in no way liable of what the user does...
There is also the privacy issue, if the ISP are spying on their users to know what they do, they should be threaten. This is none of their business. If they spy you over your online activies without even doubting you could do something illegal at the basis, they are over their rights. That's why an ISP should never disclosed users activities to simple companies like the RIAA or MPAA. If they do, switch ISP, only the police should be able to do so upon illegal proofs.

Then there is the companies who own the copyrights of things share over the networks. Normally the only thing they would be allowed to do is inform the police over suspicious activities by certain IP addresses. What they do right now (RIAA MPAA et al) is to talk directly to ISPs, threatening non collaborative ISPs and users. This is NONE of their business to do so by theirselves. It is unacceptable they pass over the police to make the law be respected. Not only that, they pay firms good money to place spoof files on networks, viruses and spam... This is ILLEGAL. They are trying in a wrong way to discourage users to dl thing on P2P networks. Often, they will also share corrupted files and also by many techniques slow down the download speed of certain files.

In my mind, before trying to sue people, governments should sue these cartels over fraudulous internet activities. This is not the way they'll regain people confidence... They lost mine long ago and there is no way I'm gonna pay for a TOP40 artist... I'm only paying for underground artists and indie labels. Everybody should do the same to dismantle those cartels and encourage innovative new artists.

Besides, anybody not shocked about CDs being priced the same now while bands can record themselves for near nothing at home with computer and that producing a CD and a pochette cost lest than 1,50$???

Ciao

[crawler_nt]

Originally posted by et voilà
Besides, anybody not shocked about CDs being priced the same now while bands can record themselves for near nothing at home with computer and that producing a CD and a pochette cost lest than 1,50$???

Thanks et voilà, that made a very interesting and enlightening read.

regarding the price of cd's, in 'Rip Off Britain' (that's what the english call the UK nowadays!) We can often pay upwards of £4.99 for a chart single!

Thats 8.65 USD

Ridiculous!