OpenSource P2P Debate, it's about choice

[I wanna know]

OK, apart from those bearshares that are too many hops from the edge of the bearshare cloud. But I take your point.

Well, there are too different things going on in that opensourcep2p gnucleus client.

I haven't seen it, but I understand that one option is to stay on gnutella and just block on an ID basis, eg user can choose just bearshare, or as Anonnn urges on the web page, block all commercial vendors, or whatever they like. I believe the user types in the string.

The other option is use the other 'network' or 'opensource' which should be enough to block any non-configured client, but in practice I don't think this is proven. So in addition the gnucleus client blocks all the known commercial clietns based on vendor id.

I think that option 1 is a side-effect of the lack of certainty about the effectiveness of the strategy of changing the connect string header. And since it needed to be implemented to block fully on the opensource network, the 'extra benefit' is that it can be employed on the gnutella network as well with no extra programming effort. So he let the user decide.



So now you are arguing against the second network - the second network doesn't block anyone from using the original gnutella network. It leaves the original gnutella network intact, save for the loss of users, who maybe would leave anyway. It is arguable.



Well, in one case, the gnutella network, it is up to the user, could be any number. I think probably only BS, MRPH, LW at the most, mainly just BS.



On the new opensourcep2p network, at the moment, probably right. I doubt that there are that many users on that network anyway. [wildly speculative mode]Interestingly the graph at limewire.com does show a drop around the 20th March when Anonnn launched the idea, of around 50k users .. but I think this must be coisncidence - gnutellaforums didn't get 50k readers that day. There is already a decline evident preceding that date, I'd say about 40k users over half a week immediately before his announcement. This is followed by the sharp drop of another ~50k at 20th March, and it has been more or less stable since then.[/wildly speculative mode]

Maybe the decline of 40k users in half a week would have continued had Anonnn not made his interesting announcement? Who can say?
[QUOTE] for what reason?
[/QUOTE
Reasons covered earlier in debate and on website.

Yes, I can download from BS using non-BS clients, it's good. On the other hand, some clients have such little success now (read '0.4') that I don't bother using them. And that was a sudden change. I think perhaps driven as much by limewire as BS the date corresponds more with the introduction of ultrapeers AFAICT. I don't really know.

So I don't know, it seems to me a good many of the older clients are blocked from the gnutella network. I think if the opensourcep2p idea isn't killed quickly that people will alter a lot of the older clients to use that network - after all the older and simpler the client is the easier it would be to change. Maybe more clients will work successfully on the opensource network than work successfully on the gnutella network.


OK, I didn't mean you specifically, I meant the gnutella community in general should at least take some comfort from the fact that we want to keep improving the (opensource) gnutella clients and protocol, even though we don't want to connect to the existing commercial clients any more.

Nos

[Oh Laura!]

Feature creep is one of the main problems with commercial clients in a highly competitive field such as gnutella, where we have dozens of clients.



Each commercial vendor want to be able to say 'we have x and y and z' and also 'we were first with w!'.



Better to have well thought out features that have definite, measurable benefits.



Nos

[Umar Kazmi]

> Oh btw Unregistered, the Limewire's superpeer concept is
> unnecesarry complicated in my eyes (so is the 3 step
> handshake).

Can the Ultrapeer proposal be tweaked or simplified? Certainly!

> Anything else you want to badmouth about my technical
> background? *yawn*

Nope, i've said what i've wanted.

[JP C]

On GDF (commercial Gnutella Developer Forum) Vinnie wrote:

[Akramul]

I'm not yet convinced that BearShare clustering is an abuse of the network. That's what the big "if" was at the beginning of my statement. Pay attention.

[Currency]

better to not reinvent/rewrite code for each client too
would be nice to see more features and UI interface improvements than protocol enhancements
we need 30 clients with 30 different base codes for interfacing to the network, real stupid and a total (collective) waste of time

[Statue Of]

>Bearshare has contributed mightily
to the lowest of lows in spyware.
People had to pull his teeth to get him to put a notice and option to not install the spamware.
The people on gnutella "contributed mightily" to keeping it free.
People had to jump all over him to stop spewing his spy packets all over the network. He finally was pressured into sending them TTL 1 or 2 only.
Again, the people on gnutella fought to keep it free.
Now again the people have to put pressure on him to stop. Why does he keep doing this?

The almighty buck $$$$

New strange headers, new encrypted messages to only BS clients, what's next?

>Views like this should really be taken with a grain of salt unless they come from within the developer community itself
There are more than the_gdf group of developers. And the other group doesn't seem to like the idea of greed on Gnutella.

Greed sucks. You can bet the other $$ clients will be thinking up new stuff to make a buck off of all this. Stop them now before it gets worse.

[Small Fry]

You should read this post...

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/the_gdf/message/6631

I think it explains a lot!

Morgwen

P.S.:

Somebody should explain Vinnie that Xolox is no part of this open source net...

[Robinson Aimee]

Only for you? highly improbably! Without complains you still would distribute various scumware and call it Adware. You're responsible for what you do.


Of course, Limewire never had or will distribute spyware. I wonder so many websites report about spyware in Bearshare and Limewire. Of course everyone lies and Limewire is totally inocent.

How stupid do you think we are?

[TMol56]

How do you expect the guy to make a buck so he can continue development? He should be able to make a buck on his work. I like the idea of a good no adware client. How do you explain how Red Hat charges when it's GPL?