OpenSource P2P Debate, it's about choice

Thx for reply.
About lies from Limewire, really again? I refered to the old spyware story when users (including me and Morgwen) detect some so called Adware and that some spyware was installed always without asking the user... we were all gently told telling conspiracy theories. The spyware story could be found in the General Gnutella forum, more old posts should be still in the Limewire forum. Perhaps someone would like to search them and post the links again, I'm too tired to roll it up again, after all it was confirmed and is well documented.

About Superpeers, I'm glad that after over 6 months speaking for it, it's on the way into Gnutella. It's a little bit dissapointing it's now called Ultrapeers, came so late but with so much propaganda... without having it for general Gnutella. Ultrapeer hype reminds me to the second propaganda of Gnutella these days, swarming. There is no "swarming" in Gnutella, mostly not even an upload of unfinished files. For a developer it's a unaccapteble to see vendors throwing with empty words, while Gnutella technology in reality is still months/years behind (e.g. eDonkey, FastTrack).
Thx for the rumour that superpeer need clustering... that's one of the _best_ rumour I heared the last weeks. What makes you think a reliable supeerpeer concept does not work together with every client, please don't hesitate with technical details. May I help with one argument: when every peer is a superpeer, we don't need them anymore. A superpeer concept mainly balance load and reduce traffic between non superpeer capable clients (e.g. modem users), there is statistically no need to cluster away from non-superpeer peers in that amount and current network situation. Actually you try to advantage you own clients a little bit (how unfair), clustering because of Superpeer concept is technical nonsense and no need to do. Since you don't see yourself as one Gnutella client anymore, you see yourself as "LimeWire". Sorry, this is against (my) idea of Gnutella and an open protocol.

About the "stealing cycles" issue - that's Kazaa not Limewire.
 
What Pizzaman (me) is pointing out to you is that spyware paid companies do not care how they make money, they have no ethic guidelines and so do the programmers. But programmers do actually write the software, without them there would be no crap-ware and they should take the responsibility which companies don't want to take.

The point is clear, without programmers making spyware or using spyware in own products, there would be no spyware in the world. Computer technology is a step into our future and culture, a wrong use will harm us all. Isn't it time for a coder's oath? Ask yourself, would you need to get a honest job, are you proud on all your work?

You ARE responsible, not only your boss.
 
it's technical nonsens:
* not all clients can act as superpeers, you will have a mixture.
* give some statistics how high is the percentage of superpeer against nomal clients (leaves).
* you'll have a higher percentage of normal clients, this normal clients can also be any non-Limewire client

Clustering of only Limewire clients brings less or no advantage, is unfair against others.

Note: Yes, he showed a picture about our beloved superpeers (did you see the mixed topolgy of superpeers and normal clients), but the pictures shows not how clustering of Limewire clients will improve anything. My conclusion, I only waste my time fighting against Limewire propaganda. So long, Moak
 
Nah, I'll continue to use what I'm using now... it's free, and I don't have to contend with the possibility, however remote it might be, that my personal information is being collected for someone else's benefit.
 
Any client that won't take the responsibility to remove spyware they installed with their program needs to be blocked off the net. Why should you continue to profit from my resources if I just tried out your program and decided I didn't like it?
It just goes to show you how the company "front man" can say how happy and nice their company is, but the real guy in charge is only interested in $$.
These companies need to take the responsibility and remove everything they install.
Commercial interests don't belong on Gnutella in the first place, that's why they are having all these problems with ads.
Greed doesn't belong on Gnutella.
Even XoloX is trying to be "nice" about their advertising, and they still don't know how to do it correctly because the users still don't want ads shoved in their face but also don't want to pay for something they can get for free like Gnucleus.
Commercial companies should see the writing on the wall, STAY OFF GNUTELLA !
This isn't your profit center or your personal gold mine.
 
Please explain further the analogy you are trying to make. It eludes me. Are you talking about developers' choice? Users' choice? What choice are we trying to make, and for whom?

Are you saying we are trying to force people not to use BearShare? Did you know BearShare 2.5.0 does not support connections to/from 0.4 level clients? Would you like me to list the 0.4 clients available and in use?

Do you want to know the reason I am even here?

I was happily using gnut for about 3 months. Then I stopped getting searches and downloads with gnut.

Now I know why. LimeWire it seems is not a lot better (than BearShare) - they still allow 0.4 clients to connect - up to 4 of them to an ultranode, with UltraNodes making up 1 in 80 LimeWire clients .. so in fact you get up to one 0.4 connection to every 20 LimeWire clients on the network .. and that is if they can't fill up their slots with other LimeWire clients. (In fact, this goes for 0.6 clients as well, anything which doesn't yet have Ultrapeer support).

Why even design the 0.6 handshake to be backwards compatible? They could have saved the time and just launched a completely new network and let us get on with it. Instead my gnut client spends all its time hammering at the door of LimeWire and BearShare clients which won't let it connect.

Sorry, but we are forced into this position, not us forcing 'the users' to do something. I am a user. I don't think any of you 'developers' had heard of this guy who launched the opensourcep2p idea before had you? Because he is a user.

We just got the sh*ts with the existing 'developer "community"' and the way it is 'growing' the 'gnutella' network. Growing on the gnutella network is more like it.

Nos
 
Moak-

Thanks for getting back to me. The lying thing is, honestly, ridiculous. I've been here the whole time. I build the installers that bundle all of the spyware. So, if any lies were told, they would have been told by me, and there's nothing I've lied about.

Since we started bundling other programs, LimeWire has always bundled Cydoor without asking the user. We never lied about it. We just did it. It's an ad engine, and LimeWire serves ads.

As you know, we also install TopMoxie without allowing the user to opt out. We don't lie about this either. We tell you in the first screen in the installer what we're doing.

The only other thing I can imagine that you're referring to is the ClickTillUWin scandle. We really did think that the ClickTillUWin executable was just installing a desktop icon because that's what the resellers told us, just as they told BearShare, Kazaa, Grokster, etc. All of us removed it as soon as we realized that it was not doing what we had been told it would do.

That's it, man. Really. That last one's pretty bad. If we had been installing other crap on user's systems, I would honestly tell you.

Anyway, I'll try not to get so defensive. It's just that I haven't lied about anything and don't like people thinking that I have.

As far as UltraPeers, I assure you that LimeWire did not generate any of the propaganda that came with their arrival. We do not control what gets written on ZeroPaid, gnutella.com, etc.

On the UltraPeer issue in general, UltraPees do work seamlessly with every client, and every UltraPeer holds connections to older clients. The UltraPeers do, however, preference other UltraPeers simply because their trying to create the best network possible. If UltraPeers did not cluster, their impact would be reduced, and users would simply not get the increase in scalability that UltraPeers were meant to bring. The reason for preferencing them is basically just that in hitting one UltraPeer with a query, you're in fact hitting up to as many as 80 (and in the future up to perhaps 500) nodes on the network (the leaves of the UltaPeer), as opposed to just hitting one node with a normal connection. It's just a much better network model that improves Gnutella for everyone, and we're clustering them because otherwise you don't get nearly as much improvement.

God, I'm writing a lot today, huh? What's up with that? =) Take care.
 
You can try to justify this all you want, but the timing of it and your PUBLIC hate for XoloX at that time is too coincidental. Your "technical" rant has been the same from day one, maybe if you tell the story enough even you will believe it.
You could have left it working for a while longer, it's already written code and it wasn't like you had to write MORE code to keep supporting it for a little while longer, but you knew that it would put that last knife in the back of XoloX.
Hope it was "very therapeutic to lop off" XoloX.
Now XoloX is back along with Gnucleus with .6 handshake AND MORE, and you are eating dust. Hope your therapist can handle all your rage lately since you are losing your little "game" and all your little schemes and plans are blowing up in your face.
And yes, you have rubbed a whole lot of people the wrong way since you started this, it's your personality, and you can't go back and change that. It's not just the XoloX thing that makes people "dislike" you, it's a whole bunch of things you have done. Ask your therapist.
 
Unregistered, you don't really expect me to answer to a thread like that, do you? Yes, Ultrapeers are a very good thing to the network, and it seems even you understood that by now. Yet you are either not willing or not capable of changing your arrogant and ignorant behaviour.

as i understand your point of view, gnutella is fun. it is a network built by anarchists for anarchists and noone should use it to gain profit from it. therefore, the only clients allowed on this network should be open source ones.

i very much appreciate your marxist ideals, but you have to understand that you live in a capitalist world and nothing can change that. gnutella is an open network and that means open for everyone. If you want to improve opensource clients like gnucleus, do it, it's a good thing. but honestly, the most proposals for protocol extensions were created by corporations. For example, MetaData, Ultrapeer, QRP and Ping/Pong were all introduced by LimeWire LLC. These folks are working on Gnutella as a full time job, while opensource programmers do it in their spare time. we live in a capitalist world, therefore everyone must take money for his work. so either they earn the money by working on gnutella, or they work on something else and do gnutella in their spare time. that's reality.

When you call gnutella messages "spam" just because the servent who initially sent them displays ads in order to pay the bills, then you are either very stupid or ideologically blinded. i expect the letter one. adware is bad, but it is the decision of the lime users if they want it or not. it is not your decision to block those users. how many people chose to use the old morpheus? it had much more ads than lime, but it had the better features, so they chose it and that seems to be a good reason.

i tried to explain to you that limewire does in no way hurt the gnutella network. it is simply stupid to block them because your ideology tells you that noone should make profit from gnutella. if there are ads in Limewire, that is only of importance for the limewire developers and the limewire users. it doesn't effect the network at all. if you want to block every capitalist influence off your world, than you should first go and create a private noncapitalist internet, fo more than half of TCP/IP is used for commercial purposes.

it is you who hurts gnutella, not corporations.

PS: once again, this post is in no way about the politics of Bearshare. i cannot recommend to use Bear, for this program does cluster by vendor and not by feature, and as its encrypted packages are suspicious to me too.
 
I think we're agreeing, just not saying it the same way.


I think LimeWire also charges their fee for Pro under the guise of warranty rather than based on the lack of adware.
 
We are agreeing.... yup. I think it ****** us both off, but it's part and parcel of the gpl, so it has to be accepted.

Would there be any point to an ad-free gpl?

Still, it can be argued that even if the morpheus/gnucleus thing was slightly unexpected (and mildly underhand) it has increased the user-base of gnutella hugely.

Personally I believe we may have problems with the lack of updates for it though. Gnucleus has been updated with ultrapeer support, but I can't use it properly since none of the morpheus/gnucleus 1.6.0.0 clients will become child-nodes to me. Very annoying; I hope they actively contribute to gnucleus rather than forking.
 
> Originally posted by plasticparadox
> It is a totally different story to block Buddy from the north end of town because he uses LimeWire. See where I'm going with this?
People have been known to cancel uploads and block a IP of other users they don't like for one reason or another. This isn't that much different.

> your CPU is contributing to the wealth of those who would manipulate the Gnutella network for their self-benefit.
Very well said.

> your CPU is also contributing to the growth of Gnutella and the freedom to share information. And isn't that what it's all about?
And we can do that without the negative effects greed causes on the network. I want to know that my files and CPU cycles are only going to support ad free clients and not "the wealth of those who would manipulate the Gnutella network for their self-benefit", that's my choice and made possible by this software.

> How do they spam, spy, and use you? You use Gnucleus, am I right in presuming this?
They use us as support for their users, and thus we are supporting their spam. I don't support spyware or spammers. You should read some older threads about spyware, adware and so on.

> My strongest argument on this topic is on the definition of OpenSource.
The GPL license doesn't allow a author to restrict what user "type" uses open source programs, like business vs. personal use. It also makes sure the source code is open to all to modify.
I don't think it applies to what we are talking about.
 
Here's a posting of the GDF on that matter:

From: "Greg Bildson"
Date: Sun Mar 10, 2002 2:37 am
Subject: Gnucleus and the future of Morpheus

One thing that developers should keep in mind is that it appears that Gnucleus is an interim solution for Morpheus. From all the information that I have, it appears that Streamcast will be switching to their own proprietary code base in 3 weeks or likely (much) more. I expect that Streamcast really doesn't want to maintain their client as open-source for the ongoing future. Now, they may have changed their mind but I doubt it. They are likely content for the time being to stick with Gnucleus because it works very well for them given the effort involved in customizing it. I also assume that Gnucleus will continue to have a large user base going forward.

Streamcast claims to be implementing all the basic Gnutella features as well as metadata searches and some other more recent proposals. One slight concern that I have is that they claim to be using slightly different metadata that includes some of their old fields from FastTrack but any improvement in the metadata area is probably worth it. I believe that they will be working on UltraPeers as well. Actually getting all this code right will be tricky for them. It is a big question mark as to how this will all fit into the Gnutella network in the future.

I think it would be very wise for them to release early betas to the GDF so that we can validate their implementation. They can probably get a lot of free work out of some of us.

Thanks
-greg
 
Ridicoulos! You first cluster away non-Limewire leafs, so your Limewire leafs will have a higher horizon? what??? You fallen deep into propaganda and mix up clustering and grouping of superpeers and non superpeers = one superpeer has many leafes (which could be any vendor not only Limewire to get the advantage). Clustering of only Limewire clients is a technical non-issue and unfair against any other client.

Serious answers please.
 
How many spyware paid companies do you know? Most companies have a business model, make money from customers which agree to pay money and don't need to steal money. If your product isn't worth to be paid, then it's not worth to be used!

But instead of following western business rules, you publicise a modern way of stealing money from customers: bundling sypware/hijackware/crapware! In another thread, Afisk, you didn't even know how many hijackware your company has bundled so far. It's a shame that this isn't illegal. You lost on the free market. Your company's reputation needs to be ashamed and your fooled customers need to be educated not to use your product.
 
That's how I understand it as well.

However, not that it's going to make much difference. My guess is that within a week or so of Moose's release, there will be a "FreeMoose" floating around anyway as long as the major part of the source is released. Someone is bound to do it.
 
Back
Top