OpenSource P2P Debate, it's about choice
- Thread starter mandexlufc
- Start date
Damn it Adam, go read the thread and this one too
http://www.gnutellaforums.com/showthread.php?threadid=9434
We are using Gnucleus.
You are sucking CPU cycles and using our network resources to make a buck.
Again, we are not running LimeWire but yet you still use us to make a buck, get it?
You come to Gnutella hoping to make it rich.
Gnutella is not the place to make a buck. If we let this continue every company that has a programmer will come over here and SPAM us hoping to make a buck.
We don't want to provide corporations with a FREE backbone and network support for their profit motives!
What don't you understand about this? Is it sinking in yet? Are you just playing dumb because your company revolves around sucking off Gnutella?
UltraPeers is not your "gift" to Gnutella. It just happens to fit your model of how you want to cluster nodes together for your XML crap. The idea came from other people, not LimeWire.
At meetings at LimeWire corporate headquarters you plan and scheme ways to make LimeWire do things other client's can't to give you a $$$ edge over others.
You know open source clients won't do XML because it takes a team of programmers to get it to work, and another team of support people to keep it working.
So you do XML even though everyone else says it sucks. You jumped on it because it gives YOU a advantage. Why? GREED!
This is greed, this is profit motive and doesn't belong on Gnutella.
Now your client needs to cluster or you will look stupid for offering XML queries. And you flood the network with your long, lame query packets, using our network resources to pass them (again, we are not running LimeWire) so you look good and keep your profit "advantage".
You need your own private LimeWire network, so does BearShare, you need to support it with your own backbone that you pay for out of your pocket, not ours!
We don't need you, but you need us, otherwise you would have your own little network already.
Kazza got taken off of downloads.com because they were going to suck resources off of other people's computers, you should be banned from Gnutella for the same reasons.
Greed sucks! Your motivation to keep working there and keep on sucking off Gnutella sucks!
Corporations on Gnutella suck!
Greed steers you in ways you wouldn't normally go, and always towards profit at any cost.
Kazaa is a good example, and BearShare too. Just because your company isn't as bad as them now doesn't mean if we let this continue you won't do it later.
Gnucleus has Superpeers now, for free. We don't want yours if the price is supporting more greed.
Again, this is not just a "project" it's reality, people are blocking LimeWire, BearShare and Morpheus with the modified Gnucleus and other open source clients on Gnutella Net.
See http://opensourcep2p.sourceforge.net/
People have the power, and the software to do it.
That's another feature you would never add, because it may hurt your profit motives!
You are also the last weak point in the network for RIAA style attacks, they take you down and your users have to scramble to find a new client.
They can force you through your profit motives to add things like copyright filtering and who knows what else.
Block'em all!
http://www.gnutellaforums.com/showthread.php?threadid=9434
We are using Gnucleus.
You are sucking CPU cycles and using our network resources to make a buck.
Again, we are not running LimeWire but yet you still use us to make a buck, get it?
You come to Gnutella hoping to make it rich.
Gnutella is not the place to make a buck. If we let this continue every company that has a programmer will come over here and SPAM us hoping to make a buck.
We don't want to provide corporations with a FREE backbone and network support for their profit motives!
What don't you understand about this? Is it sinking in yet? Are you just playing dumb because your company revolves around sucking off Gnutella?
UltraPeers is not your "gift" to Gnutella. It just happens to fit your model of how you want to cluster nodes together for your XML crap. The idea came from other people, not LimeWire.
At meetings at LimeWire corporate headquarters you plan and scheme ways to make LimeWire do things other client's can't to give you a $$$ edge over others.
You know open source clients won't do XML because it takes a team of programmers to get it to work, and another team of support people to keep it working.
So you do XML even though everyone else says it sucks. You jumped on it because it gives YOU a advantage. Why? GREED!
This is greed, this is profit motive and doesn't belong on Gnutella.
Now your client needs to cluster or you will look stupid for offering XML queries. And you flood the network with your long, lame query packets, using our network resources to pass them (again, we are not running LimeWire) so you look good and keep your profit "advantage".
You need your own private LimeWire network, so does BearShare, you need to support it with your own backbone that you pay for out of your pocket, not ours!
We don't need you, but you need us, otherwise you would have your own little network already.
Kazza got taken off of downloads.com because they were going to suck resources off of other people's computers, you should be banned from Gnutella for the same reasons.
Greed sucks! Your motivation to keep working there and keep on sucking off Gnutella sucks!
Corporations on Gnutella suck!
Greed steers you in ways you wouldn't normally go, and always towards profit at any cost.
Kazaa is a good example, and BearShare too. Just because your company isn't as bad as them now doesn't mean if we let this continue you won't do it later.
Gnucleus has Superpeers now, for free. We don't want yours if the price is supporting more greed.
Again, this is not just a "project" it's reality, people are blocking LimeWire, BearShare and Morpheus with the modified Gnucleus and other open source clients on Gnutella Net.
See http://opensourcep2p.sourceforge.net/
People have the power, and the software to do it.
That's another feature you would never add, because it may hurt your profit motives!
You are also the last weak point in the network for RIAA style attacks, they take you down and your users have to scramble to find a new client.
They can force you through your profit motives to add things like copyright filtering and who knows what else.
Block'em all!
CYDOOR
from
http://www.cydoor.com/Cydoor/Company/CompanyPrivacy.htm
The small print:
"What Cydoor Technologies Does
Cydoor Technologies delivers content to software applications that use Cydoor's advertising technology. In the process of delivering this content, as well as performing online transactions, Cydoor will sometimes query you by means of a registration form for demographic data (gender, age, interests, marital status, salary, area code, country, and education). We will not collect personally identifiable information such as name, address, or telephone number. All of this information is aggregated for the purposes of reporting to advertisers and ad sales organizations the performance of their ad campaigns, and to deliver content targeted to your interests. Because Cydoor Technologies derives its revenue mainly from advertising, providing such aggregated demographic data is essential in keeping our service free to users.
Use of Unique Identifiers
Cydoor no longer assigns a unique user ID.
Use of Cookies
According to the standards of the Internet advertising industry, third-party ad servers associated with our technology make use of cookies. Cookies, by default, are enabled in the browser, and the user can turn them off via the cookies disabling menu.
Third Party Privacy
Please be aware that Cydoor advertisers or Web sites that have links in software on our network may utilize demographic information about you. This privacy statement does not cover the information practices of those Web sites linked from software on the Cydoor Network. From time to time, Cydoor works with third-party ad servers such as Valueclick, Commission Junction, Adventures, Advertising.com, RealMedia and BeFree and others to serve advertising to the Cydoor Network. Please visit these providers individually to learn more about how they handle privacy."
"Please be aware that Cydoor advertisers or Web sites that have links in software on our network may utilize demographic information about you."
What the h@ll does that mean? It says above there is no GUID, and also implies above that only aggregated data is collected .. so WTF is this disclaimer about web sites utilizing demographic information about me? What, they download the aggregated statistics when I visit, to figure out that I'm probably a white male in my teens-20s with a PC? OK, that doesn't sound too bad, but if there's no GUID and also if cookies are served 'according to the standards of the internet advertising industry', HTF do they know I'm a member of the aggregated data?
I'm guessing they get around the fact that cookies served 'according to the standards of the internet' are only sent back to the originating server by having say an ad on their page which is hosted by CyDoor's server somewhere, and also having a private link to CyDoor which tells them when one of their victims accesses the ad.
I call that spyware.
As they say, they have deployed their spamware to over 50 million users .. I wonder how many web sites they work with? Probably quite a significant number, I'd say. Quite a little network.
"Providing Cydoor with your email address will enable us to send Cydoor-specific technology updates, as well as special offers and promotions from our business partners. "
Gee, isn't that nice? 'Darling, look, a new technology update for our spam service has arrived, go tell the kids!'
"Security
This site has security measures in place to protect the loss, misuse and alteration of the information under our control. User demographic information is not kept on Cydoor's computer, but rather on the user's computer. Email addresses provided to us are kept on a secure server. Only authorized employees of Cydoor Technologies will have access to this information."
Gee, that's good security, using the users win98 PC to store their demographic data. How can this be so, if the only data they use is aggregated? Are they saying they store their aggregated data on our PCs? I don't think so. Any idea what the filenames are? I bet there's plenty shared out by those newbie windows users who share out their whole hard drives.
I think the truth has been dealt somewhat economically here...
TOPMOXIE
http://groups.google.com/groups?q=TopMoxie&hl=en&lr=lang_en&selm=9c6gtf%2412a%241%40newsg4.svr.pol.co.uk&rnum=6
"From: Tumbleweed ([email protected])
Subject: Re: Windows 98 dialling up for unknown reason... AHA!!
Newsgroups: alt.windows98
View: Complete Thread (3 articles) | Original Format
Date: 2001-04-25 06:14:04 PST
"Tumbleweed" wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
>
>
>
> "ByTor" wrote in message
> news:[email protected]...
> > In article ,
> > [email protected] says... while attaching C4
> > explosives to computer and foaming at the mouth!
> >
> > > My Win 98 PC has started trying to dial out (to my ISP) for no apparent
> > > reason. I have a fully up to date virus scanner operative all the time and
> > > don't appear to have viruses. How can I find out why its trying to dial?
> > > CTRL-ALT-DEL tasklist doesnt show anything.
> > >
> > > --
> > > Tumbleweed
> > >
> > > Remove 'spam' from email replies (but no email reply necessary to
> > > newsgroups)
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > Have you recently installed any programs? Check the settings in new progs
> > to see if they have some kind of auto check in them......If you are
> > familiar with firewalls than ZoneAlarm can show you what it is when it
> > tries to dial out because it will ask for your permission to let it go
> > through.....It's free and won't expire, you can get it here:
> >
> > http://www.zonelabs.com/
> >
> > Very popular and easy to use....
> >
> > Good Luck!
> >
>
> Thanks to you and Starbase. I now have a suspect, Getright (even though I
> have no outstanding files to download but I wonder if its checking for
> updates), but I'm going to try the apps you recommended to check for sure.
>
Seems its not Getright, Zone alarm caught a program called 'javarun.exe'
trying to dialout. Which is associated with something called 'topmoxie'.
Looks like some sort of advertising thing. I shall be having a strict words
with my kids later
and topmoxie is now toast.
Thanks
--
Tumbleweed
Remove 'spam' from email replies (but no email reply necessary to
newsgroups)"
AFisk, you're not telling me you actually believe what you're told by spamware salesmen???
Gee, I didn't know how bad this was. When people start saying 'that's it man, really' .. I start thinking like I'm a cop and you're a drug dealer ... 'that's it man, really'. Uh huh ... Joey, get the dogs.
I don't think I need to say anything more. In fact I can't. I'm speechless and dumbfounded. Sh*t.
Nos
from
http://www.cydoor.com/Cydoor/Company/CompanyPrivacy.htm
The small print:
"What Cydoor Technologies Does
Cydoor Technologies delivers content to software applications that use Cydoor's advertising technology. In the process of delivering this content, as well as performing online transactions, Cydoor will sometimes query you by means of a registration form for demographic data (gender, age, interests, marital status, salary, area code, country, and education). We will not collect personally identifiable information such as name, address, or telephone number. All of this information is aggregated for the purposes of reporting to advertisers and ad sales organizations the performance of their ad campaigns, and to deliver content targeted to your interests. Because Cydoor Technologies derives its revenue mainly from advertising, providing such aggregated demographic data is essential in keeping our service free to users.
Use of Unique Identifiers
Cydoor no longer assigns a unique user ID.
Use of Cookies
According to the standards of the Internet advertising industry, third-party ad servers associated with our technology make use of cookies. Cookies, by default, are enabled in the browser, and the user can turn them off via the cookies disabling menu.
Third Party Privacy
Please be aware that Cydoor advertisers or Web sites that have links in software on our network may utilize demographic information about you. This privacy statement does not cover the information practices of those Web sites linked from software on the Cydoor Network. From time to time, Cydoor works with third-party ad servers such as Valueclick, Commission Junction, Adventures, Advertising.com, RealMedia and BeFree and others to serve advertising to the Cydoor Network. Please visit these providers individually to learn more about how they handle privacy."
"Please be aware that Cydoor advertisers or Web sites that have links in software on our network may utilize demographic information about you."
What the h@ll does that mean? It says above there is no GUID, and also implies above that only aggregated data is collected .. so WTF is this disclaimer about web sites utilizing demographic information about me? What, they download the aggregated statistics when I visit, to figure out that I'm probably a white male in my teens-20s with a PC? OK, that doesn't sound too bad, but if there's no GUID and also if cookies are served 'according to the standards of the internet advertising industry', HTF do they know I'm a member of the aggregated data?
I'm guessing they get around the fact that cookies served 'according to the standards of the internet' are only sent back to the originating server by having say an ad on their page which is hosted by CyDoor's server somewhere, and also having a private link to CyDoor which tells them when one of their victims accesses the ad.
I call that spyware.
As they say, they have deployed their spamware to over 50 million users .. I wonder how many web sites they work with? Probably quite a significant number, I'd say. Quite a little network.
"Providing Cydoor with your email address will enable us to send Cydoor-specific technology updates, as well as special offers and promotions from our business partners. "
Gee, isn't that nice? 'Darling, look, a new technology update for our spam service has arrived, go tell the kids!'
"Security
This site has security measures in place to protect the loss, misuse and alteration of the information under our control. User demographic information is not kept on Cydoor's computer, but rather on the user's computer. Email addresses provided to us are kept on a secure server. Only authorized employees of Cydoor Technologies will have access to this information."
Gee, that's good security, using the users win98 PC to store their demographic data. How can this be so, if the only data they use is aggregated? Are they saying they store their aggregated data on our PCs? I don't think so. Any idea what the filenames are? I bet there's plenty shared out by those newbie windows users who share out their whole hard drives.
I think the truth has been dealt somewhat economically here...
TOPMOXIE
http://groups.google.com/groups?q=TopMoxie&hl=en&lr=lang_en&selm=9c6gtf%2412a%241%40newsg4.svr.pol.co.uk&rnum=6
"From: Tumbleweed ([email protected])
Subject: Re: Windows 98 dialling up for unknown reason... AHA!!
Newsgroups: alt.windows98
View: Complete Thread (3 articles) | Original Format
Date: 2001-04-25 06:14:04 PST
"Tumbleweed" wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
>
>
>
> "ByTor" wrote in message
> news:[email protected]...
> > In article ,
> > [email protected] says... while attaching C4
> > explosives to computer and foaming at the mouth!
> >
> > > My Win 98 PC has started trying to dial out (to my ISP) for no apparent
> > > reason. I have a fully up to date virus scanner operative all the time and
> > > don't appear to have viruses. How can I find out why its trying to dial?
> > > CTRL-ALT-DEL tasklist doesnt show anything.
> > >
> > > --
> > > Tumbleweed
> > >
> > > Remove 'spam' from email replies (but no email reply necessary to
> > > newsgroups)
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > Have you recently installed any programs? Check the settings in new progs
> > to see if they have some kind of auto check in them......If you are
> > familiar with firewalls than ZoneAlarm can show you what it is when it
> > tries to dial out because it will ask for your permission to let it go
> > through.....It's free and won't expire, you can get it here:
> >
> > http://www.zonelabs.com/
> >
> > Very popular and easy to use....
> >
> > Good Luck!
> >
>
> Thanks to you and Starbase. I now have a suspect, Getright (even though I
> have no outstanding files to download but I wonder if its checking for
> updates), but I'm going to try the apps you recommended to check for sure.
>
Seems its not Getright, Zone alarm caught a program called 'javarun.exe'
trying to dialout. Which is associated with something called 'topmoxie'.
Looks like some sort of advertising thing. I shall be having a strict words
with my kids later
and topmoxie is now toast.Thanks
--
Tumbleweed
Remove 'spam' from email replies (but no email reply necessary to
newsgroups)"
AFisk, you're not telling me you actually believe what you're told by spamware salesmen???
Gee, I didn't know how bad this was. When people start saying 'that's it man, really' .. I start thinking like I'm a cop and you're a drug dealer ... 'that's it man, really'. Uh huh ... Joey, get the dogs.
I don't think I need to say anything more. In fact I can't. I'm speechless and dumbfounded. Sh*t.
Nos
Adam,
I don't doubt your a friendly and sympathic person. Unfortunatly, the decisions of your company do not implify telling the truth and technical needed decisions. Limewire definitely did not tell the full truth about spyware, and somebody from your company called me "spreading X-cases" to make me silent. It wasn't easy to discover the truth about your Spyware - and it's still bundled (not everything is opt-out) and will infect hundreds of newbie users.
About clustering again, that sounds like an excuse. The clustering is not originated at your "Ultrapeer" only, it also comes from your hostcaches too. For both I see no technical reason, perhaps your superpeer model is not very reliable and shold be improved. Let's go into detail:
> 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
First, my horizon is much bigger than 80 or 500 peers now. Second, how will you improve your total accumulated horizon on that 6x size, without the other non-limewire clients involved? Your basic estimation must be wrong or will abuse other disadvantaged clients. It still sounds like a two class community for me.
> 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.
You described that a superpeer model is better, yes I highly agree that dynamic network structures are what we dream from today. But you did not describe how clustering will improve that superpeer model. As I told before we do not need a 100% staturation of superpeer in a horizon, of course a small percentage is far enough. Don't forget normal peers users act as links in networks too and many can be grouped/shielded behind superpeers. We have a decentral Gnutella network, if you want a centralized system full depending on clustered superpeers, I which you good luck against RIAA. Yeah, the outdated centralized eDonkey superpeer concept works much faster currently (it has even more features as your "Ultrapeer" concept AFAIK), unfortunatly a network structure based on central servers or client monoculture can be easily shut down or attacked.
Don't forget that clustering is not fair and will create a two class Gnutella. Don't create selfish advantages for yourself. This reminds me so much to Vinnie's politics, do you think your client will win the run (especially with that market share you have today)? What happens if Xolox comes back again, with more astonishing technoloy as last time? Or disadvantaged devlopers will not tolerate that unfair behaviour in future and hold back their own improvements.... what you do is causing as split of Gnutella.
Greets, Moak
I don't doubt your a friendly and sympathic person. Unfortunatly, the decisions of your company do not implify telling the truth and technical needed decisions. Limewire definitely did not tell the full truth about spyware, and somebody from your company called me "spreading X-cases" to make me silent. It wasn't easy to discover the truth about your Spyware - and it's still bundled (not everything is opt-out) and will infect hundreds of newbie users.
About clustering again, that sounds like an excuse. The clustering is not originated at your "Ultrapeer" only, it also comes from your hostcaches too. For both I see no technical reason, perhaps your superpeer model is not very reliable and shold be improved. Let's go into detail:
> 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
First, my horizon is much bigger than 80 or 500 peers now. Second, how will you improve your total accumulated horizon on that 6x size, without the other non-limewire clients involved? Your basic estimation must be wrong or will abuse other disadvantaged clients. It still sounds like a two class community for me.
> 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.
You described that a superpeer model is better, yes I highly agree that dynamic network structures are what we dream from today. But you did not describe how clustering will improve that superpeer model. As I told before we do not need a 100% staturation of superpeer in a horizon, of course a small percentage is far enough. Don't forget normal peers users act as links in networks too and many can be grouped/shielded behind superpeers. We have a decentral Gnutella network, if you want a centralized system full depending on clustered superpeers, I which you good luck against RIAA. Yeah, the outdated centralized eDonkey superpeer concept works much faster currently (it has even more features as your "Ultrapeer" concept AFAIK), unfortunatly a network structure based on central servers or client monoculture can be easily shut down or attacked.
Don't forget that clustering is not fair and will create a two class Gnutella. Don't create selfish advantages for yourself. This reminds me so much to Vinnie's politics, do you think your client will win the run (especially with that market share you have today)? What happens if Xolox comes back again, with more astonishing technoloy as last time? Or disadvantaged devlopers will not tolerate that unfair behaviour in future and hold back their own improvements.... what you do is causing as split of Gnutella.
Greets, Moak
Join the new network!
"OPENP2PNONPROFITONLYXOLOXROOLEZD0OD"
Thanks to Vinnie! He really hates XoloX doesn't he? Shows how slow the_gdf is, they just figured out this was going on?
> Originally posted by plasticparadox
> Why should they have to switch in the first place?
To be on OpenSource P2P Net, they need to use a open source free to use client.
On the regular Gnutella Net, they should choose a client that doesn't spy/spam/popup ad you to death because public opinion of that attitude will cause that client to get blocked off the network.
More and more people are downloading and using this client, so those who develop spyware enabled clients should think twice about being so greedy, in my opinion.
And now they have a reason to respect the "outsiders" a little bit more.
Look at what Kaza and Morpheus are doing now, people are worried about the spyware that is in there, and the corporations now want to use your CPU cycles and network resources to distribute their SPAM at no cost to them.
Stop this now before it happens on Gnutella!
This is the only way I see to stop this before it gets too far.
plasticparadox, if you have a better idea please let me know, and send some source code for it if you can.
> You think it's bad to do what to users; serve them advertising or block their clients?
Blocking them is a subtle way to do this. It doesn't completely cut them off (on Gnutella Net) but gets them to make a better choice of client vendor.
> Because Gnutella and politics should not mix.
Tell that to everyone on the_gdf. This is reality.
> You have termed the Network, not just the Client, as OpenSource.
It's just a name, I could have called it FREENET, or FREENOPOLITICS, or FREDS, or NONPROFIT. Feel free to make up your own name and network, it's fun! People do it at colleges everywhere with only 300 or so nodes and it works quite well.
The network is also defined on the home page, so it's not misleading anyone.
> But I didn't mention the term GPL.
Then don't quote the GPL license text in your post and claim it somehow regulates the OpenSource Network. Again, it only applies to the software's author.
> That doesn't mean you can use an OpenSource kiddy-hack script to shut down a store or businesses e-commerce server if you don't like what that business does.
Script "kiddies" do it all the time, and they don't care much about the GPL license.
> The argument you have just used entitles you to use your OpenSource word processor to create some Anti-Profit websites.
People can do that too if they want to. Now you aren't making sense.
I think we mostly agree on the Gnutella Net side of things.
I respectfully agree to disagree with you on the naming of this new network, it's just a name and I happen to like it.
Everyone knows my views on this, and they now know yours, anything we can move forward on constructively?
BTW: The host cache references on the home page are clearly labeled "OpenSource P2P Net" and "Gnutella Net", I don't know why people are confused about this, it's just a reference.
"OPENP2PNONPROFITONLYXOLOXROOLEZD0OD"
Thanks to Vinnie! He really hates XoloX doesn't he? Shows how slow the_gdf is, they just figured out this was going on?
> Originally posted by plasticparadox
> Why should they have to switch in the first place?
To be on OpenSource P2P Net, they need to use a open source free to use client.
On the regular Gnutella Net, they should choose a client that doesn't spy/spam/popup ad you to death because public opinion of that attitude will cause that client to get blocked off the network.
More and more people are downloading and using this client, so those who develop spyware enabled clients should think twice about being so greedy, in my opinion.
And now they have a reason to respect the "outsiders" a little bit more.
Look at what Kaza and Morpheus are doing now, people are worried about the spyware that is in there, and the corporations now want to use your CPU cycles and network resources to distribute their SPAM at no cost to them.
Stop this now before it happens on Gnutella!
This is the only way I see to stop this before it gets too far.
plasticparadox, if you have a better idea please let me know, and send some source code for it if you can.
> You think it's bad to do what to users; serve them advertising or block their clients?
Blocking them is a subtle way to do this. It doesn't completely cut them off (on Gnutella Net) but gets them to make a better choice of client vendor.
> Because Gnutella and politics should not mix.
Tell that to everyone on the_gdf. This is reality.
> You have termed the Network, not just the Client, as OpenSource.
It's just a name, I could have called it FREENET, or FREENOPOLITICS, or FREDS, or NONPROFIT. Feel free to make up your own name and network, it's fun! People do it at colleges everywhere with only 300 or so nodes and it works quite well.
The network is also defined on the home page, so it's not misleading anyone.
> But I didn't mention the term GPL.
Then don't quote the GPL license text in your post and claim it somehow regulates the OpenSource Network. Again, it only applies to the software's author.
> That doesn't mean you can use an OpenSource kiddy-hack script to shut down a store or businesses e-commerce server if you don't like what that business does.
Script "kiddies" do it all the time, and they don't care much about the GPL license.
> The argument you have just used entitles you to use your OpenSource word processor to create some Anti-Profit websites.
People can do that too if they want to. Now you aren't making sense.
I think we mostly agree on the Gnutella Net side of things.
I respectfully agree to disagree with you on the naming of this new network, it's just a name and I happen to like it.
Everyone knows my views on this, and they now know yours, anything we can move forward on constructively?
BTW: The host cache references on the home page are clearly labeled "OpenSource P2P Net" and "Gnutella Net", I don't know why people are confused about this, it's just a reference.
Next version:
THE BLASTER !
It BlAsTs it's way onto VinnieNet, connects to as many central BearShareBlackHole nodes as it can and then BlAsTs packets to the incoming sockets till that node goes down!
It BlAsTs over and over relentlessly until the BlackHole has EXPLODED!
Normal Gnutella operation resumes shortly after BS nodes are scattered all over, trying to re-form the BlackHole.
Rinse, repeat on a daily basis.
Buy it today at gnutella-blaster-ops.com only $89.95
Blow that black hole away! Order today!
THE BLASTER !
It BlAsTs it's way onto VinnieNet, connects to as many central BearShareBlackHole nodes as it can and then BlAsTs packets to the incoming sockets till that node goes down!
It BlAsTs over and over relentlessly until the BlackHole has EXPLODED!
Normal Gnutella operation resumes shortly after BS nodes are scattered all over, trying to re-form the BlackHole.
Rinse, repeat on a daily basis.
Buy it today at gnutella-blaster-ops.com only $89.95
Blow that black hole away! Order today!
Did you know that installing LimeWire leaves behind a program called "eTraffic" that spies on EVERYTHING you do on your computer? Uninstalling
LimeWire won't get rid of it, and it doesn't come with an uninstaller. It's disgusting that this is even legal.
Taken from http://www.zeropaid.com/news/articl...o/04212002a.php
Thx Afisk for your sincerity and integrity of information.
LimeWire won't get rid of it, and it doesn't come with an uninstaller. It's disgusting that this is even legal.
Taken from http://www.zeropaid.com/news/articl...o/04212002a.php
Thx Afisk for your sincerity and integrity of information.
So you basicly agree with Moak and [edit name-calling]. Only that they shoot against Limewire is something you disagree?
The high activity in this thread shows Gnutella has a true problem with greed. I do agree about Bearshare, but also Limewire has one foot on the greedy ground, they cooperate and call each other best friends; together with scumware and clustering (hostcaches and unnecesarry in a strange superpeer realisation) that is scarry.
The high activity in this thread shows Gnutella has a true problem with greed. I do agree about Bearshare, but also Limewire has one foot on the greedy ground, they cooperate and call each other best friends; together with scumware and clustering (hostcaches and unnecesarry in a strange superpeer realisation) that is scarry.
You bet your wife
New member
why dont you guys just sit down.. write a book to each other and send it via mail.. i think this would be easier
ChiC_pArIsIEnnE
New member
this guy definitely has humour Well, send me a high resolution picture, last one was taken from your homepage. Then I can prepare an artwork for printing... maybe with a Lime-borg-cube in back. Usually you can print t-shirts in every bigger city for a few bucks.
Umm Zekiya
New member
Im not a troll but you can shove it up yer... never mind.... tell us more about Moose
FellingLonely
New member
> * not all clients can act as superpeers, you will have a mixture.
Yes, not all clients will be unable to act as Ultrapeers. That's why a user can choose to be a shielded leaf node if they don't have the resources to act as an Ultrapeer.
> * give some statistics how high is the percentage of superpeer
> against nomal clients (leaves).
Honestly, I don't have those statistics. I don't see how those statistics would be beneficial to your arguement anyway.
> * you'll have a higher percentage of normal clients, this normal
> clients can also be any non-Limewire client
IF A CLIENT IS INCAPABLE AS ACTING AS AN ULTRAPEER, THE CLIENT CAN BECOME A SHIELDED LEAF NODE. Shielded leaf nodes connect to Ultrapeers and therefore benefit by having larger search horizons and lower bandwidth utilisation.
> Clustering of only Limewire clients brings less or no advantage,
> is unfair against others.
LimeWire clients are clustered together right now because LimeWire is the only client that supports ultrapeers! Geez, it's not like LimeWire is intentionally blocking other clients or anything.
> but the pictures shows not how clustering of Limewire clients
> will improve anything.
If you can't understand this simple concept, then there is seriously no reason to continue this discussion.
Yes, not all clients will be unable to act as Ultrapeers. That's why a user can choose to be a shielded leaf node if they don't have the resources to act as an Ultrapeer.
> * give some statistics how high is the percentage of superpeer
> against nomal clients (leaves).
Honestly, I don't have those statistics. I don't see how those statistics would be beneficial to your arguement anyway.
> * you'll have a higher percentage of normal clients, this normal
> clients can also be any non-Limewire client
IF A CLIENT IS INCAPABLE AS ACTING AS AN ULTRAPEER, THE CLIENT CAN BECOME A SHIELDED LEAF NODE. Shielded leaf nodes connect to Ultrapeers and therefore benefit by having larger search horizons and lower bandwidth utilisation.
> Clustering of only Limewire clients brings less or no advantage,
> is unfair against others.
LimeWire clients are clustered together right now because LimeWire is the only client that supports ultrapeers! Geez, it's not like LimeWire is intentionally blocking other clients or anything.
> but the pictures shows not how clustering of Limewire clients
> will improve anything.
If you can't understand this simple concept, then there is seriously no reason to continue this discussion.
McIntyre2K7
New member
You think you're the establishment, don't you? Did you realize you do not have the "best client", more programmers are outside the GDF, do not like your agressive politics, do not like your spyware, do not like your clustering, do not like your propaganda? You are not "working together", you are working against Gnutella idea and not even trying to change your high society behaviour. Shaking each other hands in the noble GDF and not listening to anyone else won't make yourself more atractive. Sorry, GDF was and is slow and closed minded. It is a demotiovating example how comercial vendors dominate a group of developers, inefficient and without remarkable steps forward into cool technology. Continue and you will lose more developers and users.
Ultrapeers grouping together loosely will increase the horizon as AFisk and others are trying to assert.
Ultrapeers grouping together tighly, ie ultrapeers 'preferring' ultrapeers over leaf nodes will have a decreased effect in increasing the horizon, plus will reduce the service that ultrapeers provide to leaf nodes.
This is easy to understand in terms of the physical property surface area - the surface area of a ball is small compared with the volume. Stuff inside the ball is not exposed at all to the outside world.
Ultrapeers should be like a loose mesh - interconnected but loosley.
I don't know how loosely/tightly they are connected in reality. I bet AFisk does.
There will be a mathematical description which will show the best balance of ultrapeers-to-leaf nodes to achieve the optimum horizon in terms of # files shared. It could be quite complex (like requiring supercomputers to solve) if all factors are taken into account, but an illustrative example should be possible.
I would suggest that in addition to this balance of ultrapeers to leaf nodes, there should additionally be a coded reserve of connections which can be used by non-ultrapeers-capable hosts, otherwise you will end up with a closed limewire ball, as it seems moak fears.
Can anyone give us a description of the ratios or algorithms used in selecting the connections? If they're wrong, then limewire should fix them - ultrapeers are only just launched, there is plenty of room for 'tuning' them.
It would be interesting to have information on gnucleus's superpeers too, and how the two interact, if at all.
Personally I think this ultrapeer stuff belongs in it's own thread, this is not the core issue.
Nos
Ultrapeers grouping together tighly, ie ultrapeers 'preferring' ultrapeers over leaf nodes will have a decreased effect in increasing the horizon, plus will reduce the service that ultrapeers provide to leaf nodes.
This is easy to understand in terms of the physical property surface area - the surface area of a ball is small compared with the volume. Stuff inside the ball is not exposed at all to the outside world.
Ultrapeers should be like a loose mesh - interconnected but loosley.
I don't know how loosely/tightly they are connected in reality. I bet AFisk does.
There will be a mathematical description which will show the best balance of ultrapeers-to-leaf nodes to achieve the optimum horizon in terms of # files shared. It could be quite complex (like requiring supercomputers to solve) if all factors are taken into account, but an illustrative example should be possible.
I would suggest that in addition to this balance of ultrapeers to leaf nodes, there should additionally be a coded reserve of connections which can be used by non-ultrapeers-capable hosts, otherwise you will end up with a closed limewire ball, as it seems moak fears.
Can anyone give us a description of the ratios or algorithms used in selecting the connections? If they're wrong, then limewire should fix them - ultrapeers are only just launched, there is plenty of room for 'tuning' them.
It would be interesting to have information on gnucleus's superpeers too, and how the two interact, if at all.
Personally I think this ultrapeer stuff belongs in it's own thread, this is not the core issue.
Nos
bye bye michael jackson
New member
Afisk, could you give an example please?
x Fall_Out_Boy x
New member
The RIAA loves these P2P corporations.
Here's the RIAA talking about a greedy P2P corp that is having a little problem with their spyware revenue.
"It's refreshing to see they're interested in fighting for intellectual property," said Amanda Collins, a spokeswoman for the Recording Industry Association of America.
You can see how these corps will turn coat in a minute if it means losing $$$.
You people have to pick sides, either you are for the corporations, RIAA/MPAA and greed or you are not.
http://news.com.com/2100-1023-891724.html
http://www.zeropaid.com/news/articles/auto/04252002d.php
Greed sucks!
Here's the RIAA talking about a greedy P2P corp that is having a little problem with their spyware revenue.
"It's refreshing to see they're interested in fighting for intellectual property," said Amanda Collins, a spokeswoman for the Recording Industry Association of America.
You can see how these corps will turn coat in a minute if it means losing $$$.
You people have to pick sides, either you are for the corporations, RIAA/MPAA and greed or you are not.
http://news.com.com/2100-1023-891724.html
http://www.zeropaid.com/news/articles/auto/04252002d.php
Greed sucks!