Has P2P Become a Passing Fad? 393
plasticmillion asks: "As the RIAA launches increasingly rabid attacks against P2P networks and users, pundits continue to debate the future of P2P. On the one hand, some argue that P2P is just a clever way to escape detection from copyright owners, like in this recent Slashdot story. Others, like Clay Shirky, make a strong case that processing is destined to move to the 'edges' of the network. I'm curious to know what Slashdot readers think: is P2P the start of a major new trend that is just getting started, or is it a passing fad that will fade once legal client/server systems for media distribution finally take hold? If the former, which of the supposed advantages of P2P over client/server systems are really significant?"
no passing fad (Score:5, Insightful)
(As an example, I'd like to see P2P used to maintain collaborative anti-spam blacklists, so that there wouldn't be single-point-of-failure central repositories.)
Re:no passing fad (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:no passing fad (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:no passing fad (Score:2)
Got my latest Palm Desktop software with it. I'm still debating whether to allow it to stay (Secure Download by Kontiki. Notorious for spyware in the past, they claim it spyware free, but I'm not sure.)
Re:no passing fad (Score:2, Insightful)
what we really need is BT sharing of individual
Re:no passing fad (Score:2, Funny)
This is Slashdot; remember to whom you are making your point. Most of us still maintain gopher sites.
Re:no passing fad (Score:2)
Gopher?! (Score:5, Funny)
Information via plain ol' text. I like it. No Flash ads in Gopher.
Re:Gopher?! (Score:4, Funny)
Sure, there are plenty of people on modems. A great many of these people have some sort of high speed internet access available but choose not to get it. The other folks, well, progression.. We can't keep tailoring to the least common denominator.
A lot of people want to see cool looking web sites with animations. I think a little flash is just fine. I pay for broadband, might as well make use of it.
Besides, most web sites that aren't flash-oriented have either little flash, no flash, or the option to use no flash. And you can disable the plugin.
"For whom the 400kb flash crapplet is a serious burden (that's about 8 minutes at 14.4, folks)."
Who gives a crap. Sorry that Mr. Cell Phone modem guy won't be able to view "high bandwidth" pages, but 14.4 speeds are not normal. 28.8 modems showed up
"And that flash itself may need to be downloaded in the first place (someone who considers flash a burden may not have it installed until he absolutely NEEDS it)."
You aren't required to use flash at all. If you want to use Flash, then that's the price you pay.
"Then there's minor annoyances like "homestarrunner". I have no fucking clue what that is (a cartoon done in flash?)"
You do have a clue then.
" I go to the site... Flash only."
No shit. It's a fucking flash-based cartoon series.
"The stupid fuck who works on the site can't even be bothered to write three sentences in plaintext to explain what the fuck the non-Flash-using (let's just shorten that to "good") people are missing. "
So he should tailor to the people like you that don't like flash? Then don't watch it. It's flash only, it's a cartoon. I don't see how this is an issue.
If you dispise Flash so much, don't use it. If you want to enjoy some of the better flash animations out there and don't want to use flash, well, sorry but you can't have your cake and eat it too.
" I run into sites like that all the time, some of them informational in nature (homestar was just the first thing I could think of)."
I don't. Unless I'm looking for them. Most commercial sites that have flash-only versions of their sites give you the option to use a non-flash version of the site.
So okay let me get this straight. You're bitching that you need flash for a FLASH CARTOON? You're bitching because the author didn't write a message saying "Flash Only, this is a very funny cartoon. I know only 1 in 1,000,000 don't install flash, so this message is for you four guys."
Classic.
Re:no passing fad (Score:5, Insightful)
It just so happens, though, that the features that would make P2P useful for fighting represive regimes are also useful for fighting the major media companies.
Which, when I think about it, is a redundant statement.
Re:no passing fad (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:no passing fad (Score:5, Insightful)
The original asker of the question is short-sighted to assume that the RIAA will end peer-to-peer as a concept. Bottom line: Peer-to-peer is just a method for dividing a workload amongst several machines, not a gateway to piracy. Please don't let the RIAA or anyone clueless argue that peer-to-peer is anything more than what is clearly is.
P2P is *NOT NEW*. Therefore, it is not a 'fad'. (Score:3, Interesting)
P2P, as a technology and as an infrastructure design, is not new. There have been p2p apps in use and around the 'net since before UUCP.
The press treatment of 'p2p technology as fad', though, is something which has been extremely useful to the RIAA propagandists. True p2p users, however, know that there will *ALWAYS* be p2p apps out there, for as long as it is legal to write your own network protocol implementation, anyway.
As long as people continue to believe that there is 'always something new around
Re:no passing fad (Score:2)
The RIAA can actually win the definition game about what meaning you lay in copyright, property, stealing/piracy vs. copyright infringement. They can do this through media.
As late as today I read t
No, but like any fad (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:No, but like any fad (Score:2)
Ahhh, optimism.
killer app (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:killer app (Score:2, Funny)
I'm afraid you haven't been keeping up...
The era of malls is over -- what next? [sunspot.net]
-1 Offtopic...
Re:killer app (Score:5, Insightful)
But, as all monopolies and oligopolies inevitably do, they have become fat and lazy and will eventually alienate or destroy (through overpricing) their market. Technology is just helping that process along. One day's they'll wake up and make a mint.
Meanwhile p2p and such tech will grow and flourish.
Re:killer app (Score:2)
Distribution costs are not zero. Go to a web hosting site and price out the difference between 1 Gigabyte per month (10,000 hits on a 100KB jpeg) versus 1 Terabyte a month (10,000 hits on a 100MB mpeg). There will be a big difference. And 1 TB/month wouldn't be anywhere near enough to distribute millions of copies of HDT
Re:killer app (Score:3, Insightful)
Here's a little model of how it might work so you don't have to tax your imagination:
- Record companies release compressed (using some asymmetrical, lossless, compression scheme), DRM'ed movies, albums and songs. These can be freely copied and distributed by anyone (eg using p2p)
- In order to read the file, you have to pay, say, less than 50c US per song, and $2 per movie. The file gets uncompressed to it's full size
Re:killer app (Score:2)
The internet is nothing short of COMMUNICATION. P2P is just one type of communication. The killer app will be when someone figures out how to tie all the various communication protocols into one system, email, voice, video, audio, visual etc.
p2p is NOT DEAD... (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:p2p is NOT DEAD... (Score:3, Interesting)
However, when it comes to more questionable material, I see the whole mp3/file movement going back underground (I
Re:p2p is NOT DEAD... (Score:2)
Everybody and his mother would be routing through a proxy server.
Re:p2p is NOT DEAD... (Score:2)
It's not a passing fad (Score:5, Interesting)
P2P is eternal. (Score:5, Insightful)
P2P will be around forever, in whatever form it takes through the future's unimaginable technology, for one simple reason:
It's free.
Legal systems for digital media distribution will always cost money. Why pay money when you can get something almost as good -- or as good, with a little know-how -- for free?
Re:P2P is eternal. (Score:2, Insightful)
Yes, until the government starts taxing bandwidth because of file sharing... god forbid
P2P as we know it (Score:3, Informative)
Re:P2P as we know it (Score:2)
Sue everyone and let the courts sort em out... (Score:2)
Banwidth hogging (Score:2)
The big question is... (Score:5, Insightful)
On the other hand, there's a certain case to be made for the vast majority of those sixty million P2P users being ignorant sheep who can only use P2P in the first place because it's so easy to install the app--and who may not even be aware that they're uploading songs at the same time as they're downloading them, strange as that would seem to a Slashdot reader. And so, even if someone comes up with a totally "safe" method of filesharing, it could lose many of its prospective users if it is even slightly nontrivial to get working properly. (As an example, consider what happened to the mp3 websites after the RIAA's last legal crackdowns...they retreated behind a web of spawning browser windows, porn ads, top ten lists, and so on, until you have to be a hacker just to find where the MP3s actually are.)
So balancing the two questions...I think peer to peer will always be with us, but depending on how easy it is to use, it may lose a lot of its users--and, thus, a lot of potential sources for files.
It could have great uses in certain contexts (Score:2)
As a matter of innovation.... (Score:4, Interesting)
So of course P2P is here to stay, but the RIAA, that' a different story, one of the old fighting to not move out of the way of then new and innovative.
P2P allows for more than just sharing of "media" (Score:2, Interesting)
I suppose the same could apply to Linux scripts if not for concerns over security.
William
all major technological advances (Score:2)
the telephone, the automobile (highways), the printing press, etc.
p2p is never going away, it's just revving up
"illegal" will not be beaten, it's just a giant game of technological whack-a-mole
napster was centralized, so they beheaded it
kazaa was transparent, so they went after the nodes
the next killer p2p filesharing app will hide user identities, and the monopolies and cartels of intellectual property will wage war against these systems via other means
ad naus
yes.... (Score:5, Funny)
For instance, there is something new out there called the INTRA-web. Rather than connect to the OUTSIDE world in an attempt to get information, you simply search your own hard drive.
Analysts predict that someday in the future, people will have no further need to ever be connected again, and people will live in isolated padded cells, not talking or communicating to anything at all, simply staring at the ceiling.
You don't entirely joke here... (Score:2)
Although you may have meant your comments sarcastically, what you write does have both merit and truth.
The phenomena of small physically-close groups of people sharing resources over a private LAN has grown rapidly, particularly thanks to 802.11. Apartment-wide LANs, private wireless subnets in dorms, even connections betw
I said it back when (Score:5, Interesting)
P2P vs. Commercial File Sharing (Score:5, Insightful)
My answer is that the best reason to use these right now is to share ideas, music, pictures, etc. with other people, including strangers: things that you own and have the right to redistribute, either because you created it, or you have permission from the creator. Email is used heavily in this fashion, but it has the limit of most providers attempting to make attachments a no-no: either for cost considerations (size); or for the fear of viruses. So, is there a legitimate use? Yes.
Next question would be: what are the usage numbers for these legitimate uses? Well, that one I can't answer too well. My first guess would be that it is a relatively small percentage of the current traffic, with a VERY high figure being around 40%. So, is that enough to keep these things around? Yep.
Okay, so, my conclusion is that P2P serves a useful purpose, outside of the illegal ones. So, the next question becomes, can a commercial solution replace these P2P solutions? That one is really easy - no! There is no way that any organization can afford the freedom that is required in moving these files back in forth. Anyone in IT is quite aware of all the potential dangers to the network, and anyone involved in the whole law side can see how heavily exposed these companies would be if they were allowing viruses, etc. to be damaging customer's systems.
So, ultimate conclusion? Unless they are outlawed, P2P networks are useful, and are likely to remain in existance for a long time.
File Sharing != P2P (Score:5, Informative)
History (Score:3, Insightful)
Since the beginning of the Internet people have wanted an easy and anonymous way of trading files. As each technology was foiled by the industry or upgraded by newer technology, one thing had remained constant - The sharing of files online.
That is not a fad - only the technologies supporting it.
Next on slashdot. (Score:2, Funny)
Are the days of gravity over?
Is the sun about to cool?
it's here to stay in some form (Score:2, Interesting)
Still early (Score:5, Informative)
The various bits are there scattered across different p2p networks. IMNSHO, all p2p networks/clients ought to have:
-Swarming (as defined/used in BitTorrent)
-Privacy/anonymity (perhaps as much as in Freenet)
-Good searching (Kazaa, Napster, those types. With room for improvement all around)
-Open-source clients with no ads/spyware
-Decentralized/self-organizing networks (no central point of failure, or at least minimal)
-Browser/web server hooks to autoswarm web content (there ought to be bittorrent:// links)
Pardon my BitTorrent bias. I moderate the bittorrent_help mailing list, so I have more exposure to that.
All these features should someday be pushed into numerous language libraries, so that they become ubiquitous.
Re:Still early (Score:2)
Then the caching would be on the gateway machine letting all the machines behind the proxy enjoy the benefits without all the usability/firewall problems you run into setting up bittorrent.
p2p not going anywhere (Score:2, Interesting)
Since the P2P acronymn has been improperly linked to illegal activities (copyrighted materials sharing). Maybe we should get a new one (Colabarative Resource Sharing CRS, or maybe computer resources Co-op CRC)
Definition (Score:2, Informative)
In academic environments, P2P is commonly defined as having one or more of these characteristics:
1. Peers should be able to freely offer services to other peers.
2. The addressing system should be independent of lower layer network addressing systems.
3. Peers should be assumed to be of variable connectivity.
Yes, this means that even some partly centralized systems are peer-to-peer. Like distributed computing and instant messag
p2p not just filesharing ... (Score:2, Interesting)
p2p filesharing may yet be squashed by the RIAA's evil henchmen - this is an argument that will probably, in the short term at least, be settled by cash. However, it seems that p2p itself - the move away from the little client, great big server, towards lots of modestly proportioned servents - is unavoidable. Fact is, most people have more computing power/storage space/network bandwidth than they really need; p2p
p2p nothing new. (Score:2)
Now, *distributed* filesharing, like bitTorrent and or Kazaa/Morpheus... that's new. And *that* is here to stay; it's equivalent to switching from circuit-switched networking to packet-switched networking, only with files rather than messages.
just getting started.. (Score:2)
passing fad?! Yeah right! (Score:5, Funny)
Pigeonhole (Score:2)
I use P2P every day, whether it be ftp, SAMBA, Gnutella, or some other concoction. And I don't ever use it to download RIAA crap.
Neither a Fad nor a New Trend (Score:5, Interesting)
What pundits fail to realize is that P2P is not a class of applications; it is simply a form of distributed computing architecture in which nodes act as both client and server.
The term P2P is, however, a passing fad. It is a label for this architecture whose greatest association is with a class of applications designed to steal intellectual property from others. It is unfortunate that this association has come about. However, the architecture will outlive the fad.
The Future of P2P is political action (Score:2)
p2p is just getting started (Score:2)
We should *thank* the RIAA... (Score:5, Insightful)
First, let me say that I don't particularly support massive stealing of music - A bit of sharing between friends, sure, but the wholesale infringements we see thanks to the likes of Kazaa, no. That said...
As with virus/worm authors, the RIAA has served a useful purpose, if by reprehensible means. They have demonstrated that P2P has a major flaw that most people do not know about - The model itself does NOT automatically mean anonymity. It just means that no central server exists to shut down, thereby making it all but impossible for any legal action to completely kill. People (can) still have accountability for their actions on a P2P network. Aside from the RIAA's abuse of this fact, we should worry quite a lot more about government use.
So my prediction - P2P services such as Kazaa, that try to track users and transactions, will fade into oblivion. At the same time, those that make every effort to prevent logging, to give plausible deniability, and that use encryption to hide the actual data going over the weak links (anywhere between the first "P" and the second "P"), will gain in popularity. As an obvious current choice, the open-source Freenet does this already, though it has serious problems as far as actually finding what you want goes.
Someone will eventually find a way to make Freenet (or a similar app) more useable, however, without compromising the benefits I mention above. That will replace the current generation of P2P programs, but will itself still count as P2P.
So no, the idea won't die, nor will its use. Implementations will simply become far more sophisticated, and while at each step in the free-information arms race a few people will suffer (as has held true throughout all of history), the rest of us will benefit from their sacrifice.
Yes, until it becomes more reliable and merges.. (Score:2)
a brief P2p example (Score:2)
what is it? No matter if its called free source or open source its the same power to edgge amoung many peers tha tproduces more power than the whole of its sum of its parts
Bittorrent (Score:5, Informative)
On the other hand we see how the traditional client/server system can break down [penny-arcade.com] if it has a significant user base and not enough bandwidth. The new Steam client hasn't allowed me to connect to a game since I installed it six hours ago. Who knows how much more data could have been transferred if all the Steam users were connected to each other and sharing their cache through a P2P network?
The next step in P2P would be to combine the swarm downloading of Bittorrent with a persistent P2P network like Edonkey2000. The Achilles Heel of Bittorrent is that it can only transfer one file at a time, and the only way to download multiple files is to open multiple instances of Bittorrent, which drains upload speed, a precious commodity among home broadband users. Some work [kefro.st] is being done towards this goal but it currently deals with upload rates for individual downloads, and doesn't manage multiple downloads.
P2P is definitely the future, and I predict its popularity will continue to rise as more consumers sign up for broadband and start sucking down large media files like full albums and movies from corporate sites who aren't prepared for the broadband explosion.
Re:Bittorrent (Score:3, Informative)
There's still the issue that multiple torrents will trample on each other's bandwidth, but that's a problem that faces all P2P apps. eMule's solution is to change the priority of shared files dynamically based on the number of requests for each file. The more a file is requested, the lower the priority gets so all its requests don'
The Internet... (Score:3, Funny)
P2P will always still around (Score:2)
Anonymous network possible & easy (Score:5, Interesting)
someone wants to download a file from you, your computer doesn't send
it directly to theirs. Instead your computer sends the file to a proxy
machine which then sends the file to the rceipient. Both connections
are encrypted with public-key cryptography, and the proxy machine
stores nothing that is not encrypted. Congratulations, you have just
send a file to anyone (maybe even an RIAA spy) without then
interacting with you and finding out what your IP address is or who
you are.
Now imagine that in addition to super-peers, Kazaa maintains a list of
proxy servers whose sole job is to upload stuff from users and
download stuff to other users. You can run such a 'data peer' yourself
legelly since all the data is encrypted so you don't know what your
computer is storing.
Of course this network is less efficient than Kazaa, since each file
gets copied twice whenever it is downloaded. I guess that's why
nothing like this network exists yet. But if Kazaa dies due to its
users being sued off the network, I'll bet this 'proxy'-based network
takes over. Let the RIAA try to sue users on this proxy network!
Anyone interested in helping build this?
Re:Anonymous network possible & easy (Score:2)
The Freenet [sourceforge.net] project with a client like Frost [sourceforge.net] is pretty close to what you are describing.
Re:Anonymous network possible & easy (Score:2)
anyways, the basic idea for such a network that is feasibly(enough) mangled to offer good enough fog is so simple that there will be other programs too, and it makes the whole fighting of uncrypted p2p
Re:Anonymous network possible & easy (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:Anonymous network possible & easy (Score:3, Interesting)
Take it one step further, and add some chain remailer technology. Have a % chance that , instead of the file going directly from the proxy to the recipient, the proxy sends to another proxy. This way, traceability becomes increasingly impossible, an
And now imagine an RIAA sponsored Honeypot.. (Score:3, Informative)
I'm not a fan of copyright law or really any of this legislation or the prosecution of the individuals involved. But we need an agreement, not an arms race. The harder we make it to track the harder 'they' will work to prosecute/legislate/etc.
And its understandable. P2P and file sharing in general is too important to let it get eclipsed in this battle and that's why we *need* DRM. At least that w
Re:And now imagine an RIAA sponsored Honeypot.. (Score:3, Insightful)
There is a fundamental right acknowledged by the First Amendemnt to speek and be heard by willing listeners. This is the only fundamental right involved here at all. All the other rights are at best a limited commercial right.
Now, please tell me how to distingush a file which is someone's free speech from a file which is someone's copyright protected work.
Mind you, I'm not inter
Re:And now imagine an RIAA sponsored Honeypot.. (Score:4, Interesting)
You are looking at the matter from completely the wrong viewpoint despite the fact that I told you I was not interested my my rights as a listener. Forget about the filesharer's rights. Concentrate upon the competing rights of the file's creator. The filesharer is merely a hapless bystander who has been caught-up in a legal quagmire.
Now, try again...
There is music out there which the artist wants downloaded. There is music out there which the artist does not care whether it is downloaded or not. There is music out there which the artist wants protected by copyright. The problem is that there is no way to tell which music is which.
What's a poor filesharer to do? If it is assumed that the file is protected by copyright then the free speech rights of the artist who wants it downloaded are infringed. If it is assumed that the file is free speech then the RIAA is going to harrass you.
I say that free speech is fundamental. The copyright interests just have to come up with a solution which doe not infringe fundamental free speech rights -- or not, and get swept away. It's not even my responsibility to care whether copyright survives or not, and it certainly ought not be my responsibility to figure out whether a file represents free speech or copyright.
p2p only needed for Illegal stuff! (Score:3, Insightful)
The other use of p2p is for mirroring large OSS type files [isos, src, etc] This helps keeping any one server from bearing the brunt of bandwidth. Here though, I think p2p tech could help out if we could get ISPs on board to mirror legal stuff automatically for their users. If I have a 1000 users that all want something , why shouldn't ISP's be caching it to save their own external bandwidth? The problem with that is most content providers still don't "get" caching and mirroring on a local level yet so they scream DMCA everyone tries someting like that, but p2p tech could allow your first local connection to mirror something and still give the originating site credit for ads, hits, etc..
If Kazza or BitTorrent could clean up their act, they could have a really viable business instead of this shady stuff. Perhaps ISPs could have a "check-in" system to verify who's posting and that they can, and host the servers themselves for thier own local users. Once one legal mirror was in the system, everyone could mirror it honestly. It would be all server-side [business people] so that would eliminate much of the illegal activity right there. Sure things might take a day extra to get thru, but hosting for projects would be cheaper. There would be reduced bandwith costs because every iso after the first would be local for the ISP. A Kazza type system could still track all the hits though and scale back the mirrors after the initial "rush".
P2P was never a fad... (Score:3, Interesting)
Bah! (Score:5, Interesting)
Now, I've gone off the searchable networked P2P, and on to sending secret web links to people I meet over IRC. Napster, Kazaa, they just simplify and dehumanize the interaction. The ways that used to work -- hunting down generous people with loose morals and begging them for files -- still work just as well. As does sneakernet and a stack of discs. I've had file sharing "parties" in the past year...grandiose events where three friends come over with a couple cool CDs and we trade them.
Ironically, I don't trade files much at all. Not because I am afraid of the RIAA, but because most of what I want to listen to nowadays is off the major lables that are members of the RIAA and I want to support them. I had to seriously hunt for CDs from bands like Jiker, Valis, Edan (the humble magnificent) and the Black Keys. These same bands are all over the P2P networks. When your music distribution system is so screwed up that it is EASY to steal music but nearly impossible to BUY it...you've got big problems. Maybe an answer is to shut down p2p. Maybe a better answer is finding some way to reach the millions of listeners who don't want to hear Madonna's robotic warbling.
Doesn't P2P stands for (Score:2, Funny)
I believe W.A.S.T.E.-like clones are the future (Score:5, Insightful)
Justin Frankel knew what he was doing when he made WASTE [sourceforge.net]: On big, open P2P-networks, you never can be sure if happysunshine84 downloading a MP3 from you isn't someone preparing a lawsuit. A closed, WASTE-like network is therefore a better solution, also redusing the noise (spam, renames, clients modified to not upload, etc) you usually see from the typical P2P networks.
I never tried WASTE, as I never got the thing to work under Linux, but as I understand it, I can have e.g. have one network with 10 co-workers and another one with my friends. If I share the files I download from both groups, I will be a link between those two networks. Now, if also my co-workers and friends are on more than one network, fresh files will always be pouring in (If these guys are nice and share what they download).
Quality-filtered content where no-one from the outside can know what you are doing, what else can you wish for?That is, besides a Linux client
No Way to Pay (Score:2)
Now that the internet is beginning to show the usual signs of capitalism it's becoming more of a less free zone than thre free zone everyone once enjoyed.
If I'm going to pay to use things on the internet then I want a low fee that covers everything so I can go where I wi
duh (Score:2)
either way.. (Score:2)
When I used p2p, I had a reasonable purpos
Karma Scharma, obligatory quote: (Score:2)
Anyway, let's just state the obvious: (IMHO
P2P will never die. It is NOT a passing fad.
(I don't use it, but that's another story
P2P is forcing (or going to force) some companies to change the way they do business. There is no way around it. Adapt or die.
(And yes, some rights/things/bands/products will be lost along the way - I can see why some companies are keen on palladium and DRM and god knows what else)
I cannot even begin to predict how this will affe
There is a middle ground... (Score:2, Insightful)
The client/server model is inefficient for media distribution. Trusting consumer nodes for distribution is relatively insecure, but more importantly, consumers won't want to pay the bandwidth fees that ISPs will likely charge if cons
The p2p end is near.. (Score:2)
There is always a place for P2P... (Score:2, Insightful)
I do not expect porn companies to sue individual users for IP material.
Speaking for the rest of the world... (Score:2)
DISCLAIMER: I'm not trying to be flamebait here, but most of the comments I've read on this article are very US-centric. I'm just trying to state the facts, no
I vote for passing fad... (Score:5, Insightful)
Oh, and compact discs. I mean, 650 MB of read-only data? C'mon, that's more worthless than 8-track tapes!
Or maybe it is a fad like bell-bottoms. They go out for a while, then come back in the 24th century as part of Starfleet uniforms! Quick, everyone go check the ST Encyclopedia and see if it mentions P2P!
All joking aside, to use a trite but true statement, I think the genie is out of the bottle, cat's out of the bag, etc. The only people that think P2P is a fad are probably the people that want it to be a fad.
P2P will likely usher in new business models, and new ways of getting entertainment. The RIAA/MPAA clinging to the old ways would be, as some have pointed out, not unlike the makers of horse-drawn carriages trying to stop the production of the automobile.
Change happens. People don't usually like it, but are capable of adjusting. Corporations are not people (despite what the law may say) and simply refuse to adjust to change unless they can see an obvious, and instant, financial gain.
Technology often makes current systems obsolete. For example, gunpowder pretty much made the feudal system of government obsolete. In the future, an invention like matter transporters (beam me up!) would probably make our current governments obsolete.
P2P is making the way we purchase, oh I'm sorry, "consume" entertainment obsolete. I highly doubt the RIAA/MPAA can cripple technology enough to keep us all in the old days.
No fads here... (Score:2)
"P2P" is for identity hiding only... (Score:3, Insightful)
High traffic websites have been doing mirroring for a long time, and Alakami's business is based on putting mirroring servers exactly where they belong... as close to upstream of the users as possible for the content that will be repeatedly requested. Caching proxy servers can also be used on the corperate/ISP side of things to get the same effect.
The only real use of the mainstream P2P clients is to obsficate the originator of a file by creating thousands of sites offering that file... basically an "I am Spartacus... I am Spartacus... I am Spartacus... I am Spartacus... " scene for anybody trying to figure out where the file started. As we've seen in today's other P2P thread [slashdot.org], the most popular P2P content is done in a way where the "leaker" doesn't wish to be identified.
BitTorrent is the only major P2P protocol that ensures what you're getting is what you meant it to be... basically that the content has been "signed" by its originator who needs some help on the bandwidth costs and many supporters of the sender are working together to provide it. For other content that's meant to be distributed, you have to step outside of the protocol to get the MD5 hash to make sure you got what you thought you got and not a virus... which effectively does the same thing. When somebody tries to distrubute a virus-tainted Linux on a website, they're sure to get shutdown by their ISP if not worse, because to run a website you've gotta tell other people who you are and stand behind the content you post. Not so on P2P, which is why it's such a popular way to send out viruses.
P2P as a distribution model has some limited merits, but "P2P" as an avoid-paying-"the man" system is a fad that'll die out has soon as "the man" reminds people that crime doesn't pay. The correct way to use P2P, which I'm sure will come out in time, is as too to beat "the man" at his own game. It'd be nice if a site with large-ammounts of open source fans (such as this one) would hold a musical talent contest where instead of locking the winner into an RIAA-label deal, the winner is given access to a recording studio and experts to help them to record their music, a personally-promotional infomercial (even if it has to be on TechTV) with which they introduce themselves, sing a few songs, and pitch tickets for a multi-city upcoming tour, and a high-bandwidth site from OSDN where they must post unprotected Ogg Vorbis and MP3 files of the songs they recorded with the prize. Their share of the ticket sales from the tour is the only prize money they get, but that should be more than enough for them.
Yep... (Score:2)
Yes, just like music, movies, and pr0n...
p2p is the future (Score:5, Insightful)
I believe p2p is the future. Copyright issues aside, I doubt I'm the only one that's noticed that there are some downloads that are getting extremely large. Maybe it's a game demo, a movie trailer, or a software upgrade. How often has it happened that some thing comes out like, say, a Matrix trailer or a new game mod and people swamp the main server and mirrors alike to download it? Why else would recent Slashdot articles on popular downloads be linking
The problem is further escalated by the fact that the ranks of broadband users are growning every day. I hear that Verizon is wanting to dump somewhere around 11 billion dollars into their network to ensure that all of their customers are able to get DSL, and they have lowered their prices across the board...You can now get 1.5 down/128 up for a flat $30/mo, similar to what SBC's been offering. With all this broadband around, popular web sites will not be able to keep up, expecially if they have downloadable goodies. The answer is distributed computing. p2p represents the infancy of the inevitibility of distributed storage, processing, and bandwidth.
Has the internet become a passing fad? (Score:3, Interesting)
My family doesn't care if they ever get broadband, and now I'm finally starting to agree with them. Our society just ain't smart enough to know what to do with this technology, so we police it, tax it and commercialize it. Its almost forced monopolization of an extremely valuable service. Bra vo. Watch us turn the internet into the next cable TV network or telephone system. Watch us repeat our historical examples over and over and over again. Just watch us.
An idea... (Score:3, Interesting)
This is just an idea which I'm not more able to think through tonight (it's very later here), but what about a UDP approach to a file sharing system. Everybody sending something to you could definitely be anonymous (UDP does not require a valid source IP). The tricky thing would be how to actually _find_ stuff, because that would need the IP of the potential source to be known. Hmmm...
Any bright ideas?
Depends on Content, Not Technology (Score:3, Informative)
The question posed is a bit like asking, 500 years ago, if the printing press will survive. Well...it depends on what's printed.
If p2p is the only way to get something people want, then it will surviv e. If p2p offers nothing people want, it will fade.
P2P is here to stay (Score:4, Insightful)
Now, give people free content without restrictions and you have something that everyone wants. Why are search engines the most popular websites? because the user types in what they want and gets it. From a users point of view, kazaa is the same as google except you can get everything that you cant get on google - its like the too hot for google channel. Are you seriously telling me that people dont want to be able to download all the music, films, porn, software, games, books and southpark they want for free!?!?! get real!
The only things that might kill p2p filesharing as we know it are:
Governments (well in the UK anyway) are pushing broadband for all sorts of PHB reasons like "education" and obviously the ISPs - AOL etc are gonna try and sell it. Sen. Hollings is even for it. The absolute irony here is that the very same people who are pushing broadband so they can sell content are the same ones who will be fucked out of their money by filesharing! its brilliant, serves them right for their evil DRM plans.
read current CS research (Score:3, Interesting)
They provide amazingly scalable (i.e. - theoretically internet wide) network topologies for things like multicasting, distributed file systems, and network monitoring.
Great stuff, and generations ahead of anything Kazaa/Napster/Gnutella did.
P2P can improve Freedom of Speech (Score:3, Insightful)
Today every surfer *could* be tracked, every download *could* be traced back, every chat *could* be deanonymized.
The industry and the government is more and more making use of this fact, so it is - to my mind - very important to move to technologies where everyone can stay in anonymity.
Please, don't tell me "I have nothing to hide". This 12 year old girl that now has to pay $2000.- for sharing songs also thought she had nothing to hide. People who linked to "FTP-Explorer" in their homepages also thought they had nothing to hide. In todays world a single person without a company backing him up can never know what's copyrighted and what not.
Moreover privacy is a basic right of every human being. Hopefully people will recognize this right.
Technologies that do not rely on single controllable servers seem to be the only solution; P2P is such software. Still, anonymity is missing because no one bothers. Hopefully these subpoenas of the RIAA will push secure technology like freenet or gnunet.
We will see.
Re:Maybe Yes, Maybe No (Score:2)
Invisible, undetectable. And you can't interact with it. But, you can ask it all the questions you want. We'll all feel better just by thinking that we know it's there.
Re:p2p is lame to begin with (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:I hope so. (Score:5, Interesting)
The real issue here is the fact that thier business model was forced to change due to technological developments, and they don't want to change at all. They feel that they should continue to mass produce the same style songs as they have been for the last 10-12 years and still have people eat up everything they lay on the plate. Well, P2P and Napsture has changed that. No more can they just place 1 or 2 decent songs on an album and expect everyone to go out and purchase that album for $20 just for those 2 songs. The music industry needs to actually redesign the way they produce and sell their music now. They can no longer expect people to buy the $20 album for those 2 songs with another 7-8 of pure filler. P2P has caused this problem, and that, I will concede.
No more will customers continually overpay for the product, as they know that CD's are easily created (physically created), and they also know how easy it is to mix songs that they (the customers) like to listen to. They want to be able to purchase a "custom" CD with the tracks that they select, not what they are told they "must" buy. People will no longer stand for purchasing something at full price for only wanting to listen to 16% of the product.
Now that is only the start of the problem that the music industry is facing. The other problem is the fact that they have been signing fewer and fewer new bands and creating less and less new music. There was a great study posted here before (sorry, too lazy to look it up), which delt with compairing the number of new bands signed (and their respective new songs produced) with the overall sales generated that year for the music industry. The study showed that there was a very high correlation between the number of new bands to the number of sales. Over the past 3 years, there has been approximately 30-40% decline in the number of new bands being signed. According to the numbers in that study, at least 20% of the "lost" sales over the last 3 years should be attributed to the fact that there are 30-40% less new bands being singed and thus less "new" styles of music out there that people might sample.
You can also chalk up a minumum of 10% more of the "lost" sales to the major economic troubles being faced in this country as well. You yourself should be able to realise this, especially with your wife lossing her job. Well, she isn't the only one out of work, or working in a job that pays far less then the prievious one. What is the first thing that you stop purchasing when you suddenly loose a major part of your income? Well you cut out non-essential purchases, i.e. anything that is not related to shelter, food, and health. Well, guess what doesn't fall under any of those 3 categories, $20 music CDs. With so many fresh-out-of-college students unable to find a job in the industry they just spent upwards of $100,000 over the last 4-5 years, and can only get work in the same summer job industries they could be imployed BEFORE they got that degree, you seriously think they will have the extra cash to purchase music CD's for $15-20 a pop?
The RIAA needs to seriously look at the above problem. They want to blame P2P and piracy for everything. Well, it isn't the real cause. The problem is and always has been their business model. P2P in a sense could be blamed, but only because it showed people that they should have to be forced purchase 100% of a product for only wanting to use 8% of that product.
I won't even get into the issue of P2P actually helping sales by introducing people to music that they never