File Sharing: Decentralizing, Open-Source Fasttrack 204
Eloquence writes: "I've written a comparison of current file sharing software; what's interesting is that the original centralized indexing concepts are losing ground because of filters, and most relevant file sharing systems by now use at least a server-network, or a completely decentralized architecture. Unfortunately, most networks are proprietary, but at least there is now an open-source client to access the most popular network, Fasttrack's Kazaa/Morpheus, which was originally only accessible under Windows (around 500,000 users online at any time)."
And? (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:Mac mp3 programs (Score:1, Insightful)
Linux users make fun of Windows users because windows is an inferior computing platform. Yet praise the Apple platform for it relative stupidity(ease of use).
Also, if you want software that is half decent use Windows, most of the good software can only be found there. Well, stuff that doesn't crash: see windows 2000(In 6 month's has not crashed on me once.)
Don't blam Napster Blame the RIAA (Score:3, Insightful)
According to the January issue of American Demographics, a magazine which hardly supports radical copyright-infringers, music sites like Napster have created "powerful new opportunities for music marketeers." Despite the best efforts of the greedy record companies and a few recording stars -- Metallica and Dr. Dre come readily to mind -- to alienate a new generation of music lovers, recent figures prove that file-sharing services actually generate sales and put more money in artists' pockets.
This has enormous implications for those making movies, publishing books, or creating any kind of saleable entertainment. It suggests that the Net may work best as a three-step process: first connecting customers with culture, then generating interest in cultural and informational offerings, then keeping track of their tastes through sophisticated new digital marketing research. Theoretically, file-sharing approaches could go beyond shopping to stimulate interest in education, business, even politics, if the music experience is any indicator. And it sure ought to be.
The relationship between new decentralized software programs -- Napster, Freenet, Gnutella, P2P -- and such issues as copyright infringement, artists rights and conventional retailing is complicated. Legal, political, educational and other institutions haven't begun to sort through them. But clearly the music industry's panicky and greedy overreaction will prove one of the most dunder-headed, short-sighted responses in recent business history. The industry couldn't have been more off-base, dishonest or greedy.
Nearly 75 percent of college students have downloaded music from the Net, 58 percent of them using Napster, according to a recent study by Greenfield Online, a Connecticut research firm, and YouthStream Media Networks. Nearly two-thirds of the 1,135 college students surveyed say they download music as a way to sample music before buying it. The proliferation of online music is introducing consumes to artists they don't know, in almost precisely the same way department stores offer samples of food, perfume and other retail items. A survey by Yankelovich Partners for the Digital Media Association found that about half the music fans in the U.S. turn to look for artists they can't or don't hear in other venues, like radio. Nearly two-thirds of those who downloaded music from the Web say that their search ended in a music purchase. Music labels should have been donating money to Napster users, not threatening to sue them and chase the site off of college campuses.
And the much-libeled Napster users are dedicated music buyers, quick to reach for their wallets. Jupiter Research says it found that 45 per cent of online music fans are more likely to have increased their music purchases than online fans who don't use Napster. The Jupiter study of Napster users found that 71 percent of users say they're willing to pay to download an entire album.
Interestingly, reports American Demographics, the Jupiter Study of Napster users found that 71 percent of those who use the site said they were willing to pay to download an entire album. But in a Greenfield Online survey of 5,200 online music shoppers, nearly 70 per cent say that they have not paid -- and will not pay -- for digital music downloads. This suggests that subscription-based services may be more likely and successful than a per-song fee system.
This potentially revolutionary model for marketing culture is about to be dismantled by the new partnership between Napster and Bertelsmann, which is giving the file-sharing site more than $50 million to develop software that will charge users for music. Bertelsmann says it will keep a part of Napster "free," but watch for yourself to see how quickly it shrinks.
These figures, remarkably, demonstrate that almost every assumption about the free music movement, reported in most media outlets and used as justification for a wave of new legislation and legal action like the Digital Millenium Copyright Act, is dead wrong:
Most music downloaders aren't thieves or pirates but music lovers willing to pay for music. Artists have made more money from this new generation of music lovers than they would have without them. The true significance of file-sharing wasn't an end to intellectual property, but an exciting new way to develop markets. Record companies and other corporations should be supporting file-sharing sites ratherthan hiring lobbyists and lawyers to intimidate, sue and enrage new and eager customers. College students have nearly universal access to broadband, and are tomorrow's mainstream consumers. The more information and culture they have access to, the likelier it is that they'll sample new venues, products and information.
Evidently, file-sharing isn't a dangerous menace but an effective new method of disseminating -- and selling -- content, and culture. Aside from these new findings, the Napster experience also suggests that when it comes to dealing with the Net, businesses often have no idea what's good for them.
And oh, yeah. Don't believe what you read about yourself.
Re:It should be noted (Score:4, Insightful)
This does not include the right to stream that content, for which you have to pay more. In contrast, to decode, encode, stream, store Vorbis you have to pay $0.
Getting away from licensing issues, a recent listening test [iwarp.com] concluded that at 128kbps Vorbis RC2 was right up there with LAME encoded MP3, and better than Xing encoded MP3 -- and RC2 still has a couple of minor issues that will be fixed before the release.
(okay, what the FUCK kind of lameness filter reason is 'Junk character post'? I had to get rid of some dollar signs to get it to post)
Re:P2P Is Crucial In Securing the Future of the Ne (Score:3, Insightful)
With that said: You are right. There are networks such as SafeWeb that help people surf with anonimity - but from what I know don't do much for mirroring pages.
P2P networks of today are built to share files: but not information. There is a difference (to me)between mp3's, mpgs, and plain old text. Even Quake 3 Arena[full registered version].zip isn't information. I know everyone loves the P2P model of 'file sharing' but what about 'information sharing'?
Two ideas: You control the files on your PC 100%. You can add files, you can remove files. You would ideally add web pages [with images and all - via an open source compression method-which your browser decompresses and opens] or plain text files. This system requires you to gather all the pages you would need - but you have complete control over your content.
[#2]Proxy style web cache-ing + #1! This system would save bandwidth for content providers, keep pages from being altered and keep the server from getting the 'slashdot sickness'.
This system is similar to freenet. The key factors in this system are: browser integration, open source, key relay points [edu's, cyber cafe...], checksum'n of pages, and open source.
The client could easily have either a mozilla based browser or IE since mozilla source is available and IE integration is a dime a dozen.
I like idea #2. I can host my own content, mirror other people's content even on low activity host web pages for my neighbors [i've got cable].
Structured like gnutella but with a mo'betta client structure. During heavy activity a web page could give me this error: Enter web address in your "gnuholla" client to view mirrored version. Wouldn't that be nice?
Give it a blah:// protocol if you'd like; but one simple thing a p2p network needs is stats! Don't simply extend another protocol. As computers come and go off-line keep track of how long they do, when, and what speed they used, how much content they carry, how many nodes they connect to. We need smart p2p.
Gnutella's limit is bandwidth right? If the clients were smarter, bandwidth consumption becomes a smaller problem because smarter connections. If I discover 3 local IP's that carry loads of content and are online for 10 hours a day on avg then my client likes him. If you are an edu site or on a Tx you can have the ability to only let clients who seem to be dedicated connect.
Computers of today are going to waste. I know many people on gnutella, irc, kazaa and more who are lamers with 1.4Mhz machines and close to a Gb of ram. No client out there puts real stress on their machines. A client that can be used as a mirror, a file sharing prog, traffic relay and more is a system I for one would support.
All these ideas remind me of http, gopher, archie, FTP, rolled into one. Maybe we need gnutella 5.0 the five golden rings or protocol upgrades.
Hopefully this idea isn't taken by someone writing propriety software.
Re:Don't blam Napster Blame the RIAA (Score:4, Insightful)
And there's the problem. If you're getting your music through KazaNapTella, and paying for it through FairTunes [fairtunes.com], where does that leave the corporate weasels at OmniGlobalMegaHyperLabel?
They don't care about the artists, they don't care about you or me. I honestly believe that they will buy as many politicians as it takes to ensure that the law keeps changing so that if you get music through any method other than by paying money to a big label, you will be made a criminal, and you will be threatened, harassed and denied access until you knuckle under.
Until then though, let's keep supporting FairTunes and highlighting that the "all sharing is piracy" argument is bunk.
Score -99, Flamebait (Score:2, Insightful)
For all practical purposes (and I mean that quite literally--there are few legitimately used practical purposes for these things), this is a "guide to intellectual property piracy."
Oh, I'm sorry. Are some of you still straight-facedly waving the "mp3s must be free" banner? even pr0n generally belongs to somebody.