Women in Technology

Hear us Roar



Article:
  It Doesn't Pay to be Popular
Subject:   Yes, but the problem is not specific to BitTorrent
Date:   2003-06-02 14:34:09
From:   anonymous2
Response to: Yes, but the problem is not specific to BitTorrent

I think you're missing something. BitTorrent implements the solution you describe.


You as the author create the (small) .torrent file with the checksums in it. You host this on your webserver and link to it. The first step of a BitTorrent session is for the user to download these checksums directly from you.


Then BitTorrent does its peer to peer magic and retrieves the actual file (your pdf). The client checks the pdf against the .torrent file to ensure that what the user gets is exactly what you created.


If you still disagree, please read about the BitTorrent protocol. It's a very different beast than the Kazaas and Gnutellas of this world. For example.. there is no search engine built in. A user doesn't search inside BitTorrent for your book to obtain it. She goes directly to your website and clicks the BitTorrent link that you have set up. Thus her client can guarentee that she gets exactly what you want to give her.


Of course, as you mention, there is still a stigma against peer-to-peer programs in general. This is probably because most of these programs are really designed to make it easy to illegally share copywrited work.


BitTorrent is different. It's designed from the ground up to solve the very problem that you are having. As people get more comfortable using it, I think the stigma will begin to fade.

Full Threads Oldest First

Showing messages 1 through 4 of 4.

  • Yes, but the problem is not specific to BitTorrent
    2004-02-01 02:41:56  susy_miller [View]

    Acctually, nothing is missed. It works, look closelly. If you find out the best documentation ever written in the matter, you might conclude that everything works fine.




    __________________________________________________
    Translated by Mail-Translator
  • Yes, but the problem is not specific to BitTorrent
    2004-02-01 02:38:39  susy_miller [View]

    Accctually, nothing is missed. It works, look closelly.



    ----------------------
    Translated by Mail-Translator
  • Yes, but the problem is not specific to BitTorrent
    2003-06-13 05:58:22  anonymous2 [View]

    Late to the party, but just wanted to chime in that as a content author I consider BitTorrent a perfect distribution channel - specifically because it counters the issues you raised.

    1. File Integrity - As long as I host the .torrent file (which as mentioned is a small file containing tracker information and checksums) my audience knows they are getting *exactly* the file I created and intended to download. I suppose someone could create a similarly named file, create a torrent for it, and post it somewhere else - but my audience knows as long as they download the .torrent from my site it is as secure as a direct download.

    2. Using "peer to peer" at work. Because bittorrent works off standard web links, there is less concern to employers that it's being misused. It's not like there is a client sitting in the background that may be downloading mp3's on the sly - standard web logging shows exactly what files were downloaded. Essentially BT creates a unique P2P network for a single file that distributes ONLY that information - there's no temptation to "go browsing" or stray into non work-related issues as there is no other content on that particular network.

    2.5 Legitimacy. As a distributor of legitimate content, I don't want my users to feel they're involved in any kind of shady "warez/mp3/filering" nonsense. There's no exposure to other BT users (or whatever content they may choose to distribute using BT.

    3. Dramatically faster D/L times. Instead of having to serve 100's of large video files concurrently (and in a short period of time) my audience base can actually experience *faster* connection times with the more people who download.

    4. Ease of use. I don't service a particularly technically knowledigible clientelle, I doubt they would adopt new clients or media viewers. With BT all they need to do is download and run the installer. After that they can just ignore it and continue downloading from the web just like they always have.

    5. Reduced Bandwidth Cost - The "file swarm" concept works very well for product, like mine, that has an anticipated "release date". After the first few downloads the downloading community services their own replication and distribution, and I just have to serve the small .torrent content.

    I have to agree with some of the other responders that it's tough to see that an innovative system that is hugely benificial to both users (increased d/l speeds and availability) and providers (lowered bandwith, faster delivery) the (admittedly deserved) stigma of "THE DREADED P2P" can hinder it.

    - Brad
  • Yes, but the problem is not specific to BitTorrent
    2003-06-13 05:55:53  anonymous2 [View]

    Late to the party, but just wanted to chime in that as a content author I consider BitTorrent a perfect distribution channel - specifically because it counters the issues you raised.

    1. File Integrity - As long as I host the .torrent file (which as mentioned is a small file containing tracker information and checksums) my audience knows they are getting *exactly* the file I created and intended to download. I suppose someone could create a similarly named file, create a torrent for it, and post it somewhere else - but my audience knows as long as they download the .torrent from my site it is as secure as a direct download.

    2. Using "peer to peer" at work. Because bittorrent works off standard web links, there is less concern to employers that it's being misused. It's not like there is a client sitting in the background that may be downloading mp3's on the sly - standard web logging shows exactly what files were downloaded. Essentially BT creates a unique P2P network for a single file that distributes ONLY that information - there's no temptation to "go browsing" or stray into non work-related issues as there is no other content on that particular network.

    2.5 Legitimacy. As a distributor of legitimate content, I don't want my users to feel they're involved in any kind of shady "warez/mp3/filering" nonsense. There's no exposure to other BT users (or whatever content they may choose to distribute using BT.

    3. Dramatically faster D/L times. Instead of having to serve 100's of large video files concurrently (and in a short period of time) my audience base can actually experience *faster* connection times with the more people who download.

    4. Ease of use. I don't service a particularly technically knowledigible clientelle, I doubt they would adopt new clients or media viewers. With BT all they need to do is download and run the installer. After that they can just ignore it and continue downloading from the web just like they always have.

    5. Reduced Bandwidth Cost - The "file swarm" concept works very well for product, like mine, that has an anticipated "release date". After the first few downloads the downloading community services their own replication and distribution, and I just have to serve the small .torrent content.

    I have to agree with some of the other responders that it's tough to see that an innovative system that is hugely benificial to both users (increased d/l speeds and availability) and providers (lowered bandwith, faster delivery) the (admittedly deserved) stigma of "THE DREADED P2P" can hinder it.

    - Brad