Follow Slashdot blog updates by subscribing to our blog RSS feed

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
Music Media

File Sharing: Decentralizing, Open-Source Fasttrack 204

Posted by timothy from the finding-obscurities dept.
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)."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

File Sharing: Decentralizing, Open-Source Fasttrack More

File Sharing: Decentralizing, Open-Source Fasttrack

Comments Filter:
  • The comparison seems to have left out a lot of good
    Opennap clients like lopster and gnapster.

    /Erik

  • swap nut (Score:2, Informative)

    by heliocentric ( 74613 )
    You forgot about looking into Swap Nut [swapnut.com]. I poked at it a few times while in windows and, although I have only ever used napster for file sharing, I liked its ease of use, and the multiple file searches at the same time. It also had other things I liked, like suspecting IPs in the 192.168.x.x range probably wouldn't get me the files I wanted.

    Oh, and I was sorta put off when a friend first recomended it by name only... Then I read on their site the idea is By "Going Nuts," users can search for and find almost any type of digital file (audio, video, photos etc.) through a secure [they said secure, not me, I think putting your IP all over creation isn't secure, but I digress] peer-to-peer network.
    • SwapNut is Limewire + new marketing.

      Limwire just a Gnutella client. there is nothing new here except a new logo.. even the app looks excactly the same.

      btw, I found the article amazing shallow incomplete and lacking in any technical merit, it appeared that the author copy and pasted the PR release then added a sentence or two about what his 30 second impression was.

      For one FreeNet was not mentioned, likely because the author was unable to install it (it takes a little more then double clicking on a icon). Second he seemed in the dark about the level of decentralization that many of the apps had, for instance eDonkey2000 *IS* decentralized, the servers are user run, eDonkey themselves do not list anything. He failed to mention that FastTrack (aka Morpheus, Kazza) also feature multiplexed downloads like eDonkey2000. No mention of the failings of the Gnutella network, the progress Bearshare and Limewire are making to improve it...

      Bah, the list goes on. The really dishearting part is interest in P2P (gaud i hate that term) has faded out when the rest of the internet boom; Very disappointing, The tech can be used for a lot more then sharing britney spears albums! It can be could also be used for file mirrors, (aka wolfinstien off eDonkey = fast fuckin download), instant messaging, web hosting and its approaching a way to get scalable bandwidth for any internet application, soon you'll see.

      -Jon
      • btw, I found the article amazing shallow incomplete and lacking in any technical merit, it appeared that the author copy and pasted the PR release then added a sentence or two about what his 30 second impression was.

        Incorrect, if you check my prior reviews, you will realize that I have tested these programs quite in-depth. The article was supposed to be a summary though, and not a repetition of what I have written earlier. Not a single sentence in my reviews is copied from a press release, feature list or any other statement by the developers.

        I have tested all public releases of Freenet and reported even about the most exotic client developments on infoanarchy. I am well aware of it and have talked about its shortcomings several times with the developers. Currently, content availability is unsatisfactory, so it is only mentioned in the review together with Mojo Nation.

        Second he seemed in the dark about the level of decentralization that many of the apps had

        Read the article. I write about different degrees of decentralization. eDonkey is a client-server based network, and I have pointed out that anyone can run the server (which is also possible in the case of Napster thanks to OpenNap, BTW) - the network is not as decentralized as Gnutella, where every client is also a network server that routes queries, pings, pongs and query results. In that respect, eDonkey etc. can only be called "semi-centralized".

        You're also incorrect in that I had not mentioned Fasttrack's multi-source downloading -- I have, but to my knowledge Fasttrack does not download files while they are still being downloaded by other users, because searches return only files that are completely available. Regarding Gnutella, I have discussed its history and the discussions to improve it in great deal elsewhere, that was not the point of that review.

        Please, if you want to criticize an article, at least try to understand it first.

  • It should be noted that over Morpheus you can share vorbis files. So if you want to share some vorbis lovin, just share vorbis files and nothing else. No wasted bandwidth, stickin it to the RIAA, and proliferating a pure standard, what could be better?

  • AudioGalaxy (Score:4, Informative)

    by epsalon ( 518482 ) <slash@alon.wox.org> on Wednesday September 19, 2001 @02:54AM (#2318882) Homepage Journal
    AudioGalaxy for Linux does not force you to install any spyware (I don't think there is something like that for Linux), and it's a really great MP3 sharing network.
    All hail AudioGalaxy [audiogalaxy.com]!

    • Re:AudioGalaxy (Score:2, Informative)

      by h0rus ( 451357 )
      The Windows version AG(audiogalaxy)satellite lets you opt out of the spyware. You can verify it by using ad-aware(http://www.lavasoftusa.com/).

      • It still installs spyware (Score:1, Informative)

        by Anonymous Coward
        I installed AudioGalaxy and it did ask me if I wanted their spyware crap installed on my machine. I said no on both counts (one was for Gator and I can't recall what the other one was).

        The next time I rebooted my computer I see the familiar "Please wait while Windows completes installing your software" while still in DOS. Sure enough, both pieces of spyware were installed. Thankfully I have Ad-Aware installed.
    • Yes, it's a nice client for linux.

      Although I love audiogalaxy (for millions of songs) - they've screwed me on a T-shirt.

    • Is there any info on what the spyware content of the Win32 Audiogalaxy client is? I'm curious.
      • The software installed is called WebHancer [webhancer.com] and the info about it's spyware nature is available here [cexx.org].

    • Re:AudioGalaxy (Score:2, Funny)

      by elgen ( 22169 )

      ...install any spyware (I don't think there is something like that for Linux)...


      Yes there is. One day I ran a program called XEyes. While I had that program running, I had a strange feeling that someone was watching me and my work...

    • I had AG working fine for ages on Linux, then a couple of months back it just stopped working. It's still not working for me either. Any tips? I couldn't see an upgraded client on their site.
      • try removing some of the files that you have shared/change your upload dir. Mine choked when I tried sharing ~500 files. I removed most and it worked again. clould be 'just one of those things'
    • Is there a working GUI client to Audiogalaxy for Linux? Or is it still CLI only?
      • No GUI in AG4Lin although there's an open interface if you wish to write one. However, there's no need as AG works via a web interface. Just run the server and start your favorite web browser.
    • Just in case, I run the linux AG client in chroot jail.
  • It's kind of neat and all, but a list of mostly windows clients doesn't really hold much interest for what is mostly a linux crowd.

    Not to be mean, but this list in particular doesn't even clearly distinguish between the way the client and the protocol it uses, and is rather incomplete(no filesharing client list is complete without Lopster [sourceforge.net]).

    The open source kazaa/morpheus client seems promising, but it looks a bit prerelease, not quite News for Nerds, Stuff That Matters grade material really.

    • ...no filesharing client list is complete without Lopster...

      Why not include IRC and FTP and e-mail. What filesharing list is complete without those too?

  • Linux? is that some new fangled hippie programming tool? does it run on windows?

  • And? (Score:2, Insightful)

    by mithrandir14 ( 91726 )
    I honestly don't understand how this is news for nerds, or even an interesting article, anyone that refers to every irc network known to man as mIRC ("since its chat functionality can easily compete with mIRC and the like") doesn't need to be writing a comparison of anything for one thing. What happened to slashdot? All that seems to be posted any more is Software releases and bad articles?! C'mon can't we get back to real news?

  • Wow (Score:5, Interesting)

    by drix ( 4602 ) on Wednesday September 19, 2001 @03:38AM (#2318938) Homepage
    I have to say I'm impressed. There is a reason that the only previous FastTrack clients were fr Windows: FastTrack is a closed source C++ based protocol stack that only exists for that operating system. FastTrack's livelihood is dependent upon licensing that stack to developers and hence keeping the protocol proprietary. That someone has reverse engineered it quite successfully is highly impressive and also a little worrisome if you're FastTrack. I'm surprised we haven't heard a lot more about this and FastTrack's response.
    • FastTrack is a closed source C++ based protocol

      Any care to tell me what a C++ based networking protocol is? Last time I checked you couldn't serialize a C++ object.
      • Last time I checked you couldn't serialize a C++ object.


        Well, I guess all those SOAP developers have wasted their time, then.

  • I've always thought that the main advantage is that noone can shut down a decentralised network. Sure, you can ban Napster servers but you're going to need a shitload more power to ban every gnutella server out there.

    I use Gnucleus here - the only real problem I've found with it is the thoughtless assholes that name files differently to confuse people.

  • P2P Is Crucial In Securing the Future of the Net (Score:4, Interesting)

    by Lethyos ( 408045 ) on Wednesday September 19, 2001 @03:53AM (#2318967) Journal
    The current model of the Internet is not something that is going to surive the rigors of foolish governments, panicky interest groups, and greedy corporations. As we've seen time after time again, having single points of failure knocked out (regulation, threats, lawsuits, etc), we lose SO much information. Thanks to recent terrorist activities, we're going to find our bastions of freedom online gradually removed by people who honestly don't know any better.

    Peer2Peer, I think, is a powerful solution for us to retain the freedoms we currently enjoy on the Net. Certainly P2P helps save us from Napster-like lawsuits regarding copyrighted material. However, can we take it further? Can we deliver web page content in the P2P model, for starters? Could we move all of our Internet services to this model? Consider a world where we start using technologies that prevent any central source of information/data/etc. from being stamped out by the ignorant.

    I'm basically describing a model where when a source, be it a group or an individual, publishes something, it is in the network forever. Regardless of what happens to that source, tens of thousands of other machines will always be carrying that forbidden data. It couldn't be stopped. Sure we'd gather up massive amounts of garbage and quickly antiquated material, but every piece of knowledge out there is bound to be of value to at least somebody.

    P2P could bring about the global consciousness that the Internet was meant to be. Lucky for us, you can't kill a brain by trashing a few neurons. :)
    • Have a look at freenet [sourceforge.net]. I think this might be what you are looking for.
    • Yeah, I've heard about something like that. Here at ID [id.com] we use a soft called Freenet [freenet.org] it runs as a Java client so it is really excruciatingly slow. But we disseminate our new releases to bete-testers this way.

      Much cheaper than FTP bandwidth. plus even the slimiest southeast asian software bandit can't get her grubby paws on it.

    • I used to call this usenet but I don't know what kids call it today.
    • Freenet people we know you are out there! But your system seems to be "comming along" for a long time now.

      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.
      • freenet:MSK@SSK@9BRxNPeBdBVvWUIJb7etC52nlUUQAgE/Co ntentOfEvil//Filez.htm

        (ok, I know it says "Filez", but they're mostly plain-text filez.)
      • What i want to know is what exactly is meant by "de-centralized network". I want to find the p2p file sharing client that if i take 4 computers and hook them up, not connected to the internet, in a local network, the file sharing will work like a charm. I say that because on the college campus where i reside, they've blocked morpheus. I want something that will use the local connection, even if the gateway has a filter on it.

        This to me was part of the beauty of napster - napster was never blocked on campus (i'd imagine they blocked morpheus because people were trading not only mp3's but movies, music videos, etc) but the best part of napster was you set your ping time to
        That's what i want in a client.
      • I know many people on gnutella, irc, kazaa and more who are lamers with 1.4Mhz machines

        They *are* lamers... 1.4MHz??
        • Sorry, I mean people whose mom's bought them that new dell or other such computer off of a commercial or the such.

          Three of my friends just bought computers with at least 1.4MHZ and one has 1GB of DDR ram! He doesn't even know what Ram is...
          ...imagine me trying to get him to install linux on his OTHER FREE hard drive....

          These people are lame, and we need a way to use them.... nuff said.
      • 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'.

        Yes. Although what you describe sounds something like what Akamai does, it would be really nice to see some Open Source packages that could do this. Particularly during last Tuesday's site-killing traffic surge, it would have been useful if anyone w/ bandwidth could have made their machine into a constantly-updated mirror, quickly and automatically.

        There would obviously have to be some mechanism for users to locate the mirrors, which could come and go with some frequency. I'm not sure if DNS is ideal for this, as it still has a single point of failure. Other issues have to do with interactivity, which might be all but impossible in such a distributed environment.

        • Locating the mirrors would be done by not only the client but other servers.

          When my client logs in, and I tell it to relay web sites (instead of hosting filez etc) it connects to others who do the same. If someone in my neighborhood logs on to 'browse' they will find me. The term mirror isn't what I want to use, I'd rather use relay.

          Major hubs that cache the content then trickle the content down to others. If you can't get on CNN then get on the network, and type the web page. Your client finds a relay and you get the page.

          All this is done by other relays cacheing pages that are frequently used/viewed. If I don't have the content someone is looking for my client can direct them to another relay. [or even get the page for the user]

          With the stats involved a smarter network of relays is set up - allowing regional access to sites instead of going straight to the page.

          Set aside so many MB of space that can be used to relay and voila!

          People with always-on connections at home like cable or DSL can use thier bandwidth for good and not evil after all.
          • It would be a virtual web server. For people who want to host something, but can't afford the bandwidth in case it gets hosed.

            In order to participate, you install the package on your machine and allow to to cache other people's stuff along with your own. If your stuff gets popular, it'll get cached by other servers. There are a few issues, like how do users find your content, how does it get distributed, and how do you avoid having a central point of failure.

            There are answers to most of these questions. None of them are particularly original... They borrow from Freenet, Gnutella, Akamai. But I've never any Open Source packages that perform this particular function (I suppose Freenet could, but doesn't update quickly enough.) Am I missing one?

    • Fat lotta good it does as ISPs crank down on TOS.

      This is more relevant for broadband connections, cable ISPs are downright broadcast-like in their TOS, and since Code Red have begun enforcing this at their head ends. I haven't had a single hit for W32.nimda yet because Port 80 is blocked. This may be a little worse than it first seems, since W32.nimda can also apparently spread through browsers. The complete lack of Port 80 scans may imply not only head end filtering, but also internal filtering. (No scans at all from a /511 subnet?)

      I'm still getting normal scans on other ports, so those haven't been blocked. But the TOS can be used to eliminate P2P, and I have no other high-bandwidth choices. For that matter, I could never get above V.34 on my phone line. How does P2P thrive in this situation?
      • By using random ports. Try edonk [edonkey2000.com].
        • Imagine for a moment if ISPs left NO ports open at all, incoming. For practical purposes, they'd probably have to keep IDENT and FTP-DATA open, but maybe not. IDENT conversations are very small, so a stateful filter could probably chop those to a very short exchange. Active ftp may not be going away, but it's getting less common as an exclusive means. I don't let active ftp (ftp-data incoming) through my firewall, and have seldom missed it. Nearly everyone accomodates passive ftp.

          So with the exception of clipped IDENT conversations, cutting off all incoming SYN packets seems feasible, unfortunately.

          I guess we're left encapsulating TCP over UDP, or something else silly and inefficient like that.

    • It couldn't be stopped.

      Well, I could easily imagine a nice P2P network application with all kinds of redundant encrypted floating data being established. Using open software with clear standards that anyone is free to implement.

      Then, when some appropriate knee-jerk cause of the day comes along (terrorism || pedophiles || endangerment of someone's large revenue stream), I can see government action requiring ISPs to put in place blocks on standard ports and handshaking attempts by the P2P application. Purely, because some individual could use it for nefarious purposes is sufficient to get the P2P application banned legally or banned de facto from burdensome heavy-handed indiscriminate restrictions.

      Then, in essence, your P2P application would become useless to the great large user base that it really needs in order to be effective. Sure the data is floating around on a few servers, but if no-one can connect to those servers, then it's as if the data did not exist.

      Is this what is happenning under more authoritarian regimes now? I would speculate that only the technically sophisticated Chinese citizens are able to routinely work around government-mandated restrictions on internet usage. It could happen here, too.

    • Speaking of P2P and terrorism, here is something to think about:

      A P2P network is MORE RESISTANT to terrorist attack, since there is NO CENTRAL POINT OF VULNERABILITY to attack.

      Distributed systems are more secure against such attacks.

    • I'm basically describing a model where when a source, be it a group or an individual, publishes something, it is in the network forever. Regardless of what happens to that source, tens of thousands of other machines will always be carrying that forbidden data. It couldn't be stopped. Sure we'd gather up massive amounts of garbage and quickly antiquated material, but every piece of knowledge out there is bound to be of value to at least somebody

      Isn't that FreeNET?

    • That is what the FreeNet [sourceforge.net] project is all about.

      [This line added to avoid the stupid "Lameness" filter.]

  • Don't blam Napster Blame the RIAA (Score:3, Insightful)

    by Jon Carmack ( 455158 ) on Wednesday September 19, 2001 @04:03AM (#2318983)
    A series of new studies of Napster users suggests everything you've been reading about music file-sharing systems is baloney. You're not thieves and pirates, it turns out, but marketing pioneers and music lovers quite willing to pay for music. These new stats suggest that file-sharing could have enormous implications for the selling of content, culture and information online, none grasped by dunder-headed corporations like the record labels. They are also a reminder not always to believe what you read. (Read more).

    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.

    • Funny, it seems to go the other way around for me: I see(hear) music adverts on TV and think "oh, thats cool, thanks for spending money advertising your new album to me, i think i'll go and download it for free. Even better, is that i can get the full _raw_ uncompressed track off p2p aswell, if i want it. The music companies should look on the bright side and make the most of p2p, 'cause they sure as hell can't do jack-shit about it. Face it, you just can't sell data, (unless its too big to download) people can copy it too easily.

    • Re:Don't blam Napster Blame the RIAA (Score:4, Insightful)

      by Rogerborg ( 306625 ) on Wednesday September 19, 2001 @06:18AM (#2319139) Homepage
      • recent figures prove that file-sharing services actually generate sales and put more money in artists' pockets.

      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.

    • recent figures prove that file-sharing services actually generate sales and put more money in artists' pockets.

      It occurs to me that there could be a new business model for music distribution out there. I don't know if anyone has come up with this before, but perhaps bands could give away their music, but sell related merchandise like a cool box to put your CD in or a nice, collectable dead-tree book to accompany the music. Just a thought...

    • sophisticated new digital marketing research ?

      Hmmm... does anyone else read this as a new euphemism for spam ?
  • Isn't the freenet not also a decentral file sharing network?

    I miss it in this comparison.

    • Re:freenet? (Score:1, Funny)

      by Anonymous Coward
      Freenet is to file sharing what Playboy is to pornography. Purely academic.
    • From the start of the article:

      "So which tools are most suitable to find and get files?"

      Freenet isn't particularly suitable as there isn't a great deal of accessable content there.

    • obligatory espra post (Score:1, Interesting)

      by Anonymous Coward
      Espra.net [espra.net] Music sharing over freenet.
  • eDonkey 2000 for Windows is bloated IMHO. Is there a Linux clone (GUI)?

  • Would it be too much to ask of you to review Jeremy Friesners lovely BeShare client? It's a really nice opensource client based on the MUSCLE system. It's currently only available for BeOS. But downloading and installing BeOS PE is a trivial task, so that's no excuse.
    It doesn't have a large userbase(yet), but I think the technology is what's most important here.
    The server compiles on pretty much any OS out of the box.

    Don't miss out on such a fun and original sharing client :)

    Here's a link: http://www.lcscanada.com/beshare/index.html

    Happy sharing!

  • There is also another younf decentralizezd system (Score:3, Interesting)

    by smkaribou ( 522852 ) on Wednesday September 19, 2001 @07:02AM (#2319189)
    It's called Netmess, (http://netmess.multimania.com).

    It works through HTTP proxy (at work), is able to resume downloads from clones on other nodes, share evrything, and works under linux too.
  • It has been done at my school. All they had to do was block the port that K/M uses, and voila, no more p2p. Supposedly, they dropped our bandwidth usage by over 90%.

    There is no way to tell K/M to use a different port, at least from what I saw. Whatever happened to the old goals of the Internet, sharing files freely from computer to computer?

  • if anything just due to the fact of all the damned SpyWare that gets installed with Morpheus/Kazaa.

    Sheesh

  • Score -99, Flamebait (Score:2, Insightful)

    by Anonymous Coward

    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.

  • Will we get our own Open Source spy software, complete with programs that break the file sharing program if uninstalled (a la Kazaa)?
  • Have any of you ever used fair share? I hear numerous good things about it, but have never tried it. Is there a linux client?

    garc

  • P2P and Bandwidth (Score:2, Interesting)

    by blueworm ( 425290 )
    As a student at the university of Maine, I've noticed this year that the ds3 pair coming out of portland up here has been so incredibly saturated since everyone has arrived, I can't get much better than 56k-like connections to most internet sites. I, like many many many other people up here right now blame P2P programs, specifically Kazaa, for this massive traffic increase this year. At this point I'm so frustrated with it that I'd rather just see the RIAA and the MPAA bring down P2P because the traffic it generates ultimately ruins everyone's connection. It doesn't really have a "useful" use anyhow. At least I have I2 connectivity up here, so I can get SOME things at a reasonable speed.
    • Don't worry, your NOC will probably block port 1214 in a couple of days, anyway...
    • If you aren't downloading any thing, what do you need more than 56k to access the web. if you are, or just streaming, what makes you more entitled to bandwidth than anyone else?

      That's not an argument I'd stand up for.
  • The music business puts out a product that you are expected to pay for, you can choose to buy the product or you can steal it and suffer the consequences should you be caught. That's fair. If you don't like the prices they charge, then you can choose not to buy. After a while they will be forced to lower the prices if no one is buying. So finding better ways to steal things is not the way to go in my opinion.. it's still just plain wrong. If people really don't want to pay anything for music they should just form free music communities, sort of like how Linux came about. Of course there are reasons why this hasn't happened yet, but I won't get into those here.

    • The music business puts out a product that you are expected to pay for, you can choose to buy the product or you can steal it and suffer the consequences should you be caught. That's fair.

      Usually I would agree with this. If you don't pay for something, someone somewhere is going to unfairly lose money. But what if an entire industry refuses to sell what consumers want? What if market forces fail and an industry attacks the public through legislation?

      Millions of people want downloadable music files just like they download software and most are willing to pay for it but can't because the music business doesn't sell online music. They should produce a product people want or get the hell out of the way.

      I write/sell software. Approximately 98% of customers choose to buy online and download immediately. Only 1% - 2% choose to buy the software on CD. I suggest they move up to 1990's technology and sell online. Distribute songs as .exe files, add a registration system to stop casual pirating and start collecting the much larger profits.

      Piracy is wrong. Doing nothing while an industry tries to stop the advancement of technology and forces people to buy bundled songs is even worse.

  • I'm involved in a project developing an open source Direct Connect client in Java. The project has just started and is hosted by Sourceforge. Check it out:
    http://sourceforge.net/projects/javadc/

    Direct Connect is a popular P2P file sharing program for Windows. There is also a free program that let's anyone start their own file sharing hub. Check out www.neo-modus.com for more info.

Slashdot Top Deals

Beware the new TTY code!

Close