Share Ratio

[mattman2340]

-matt '

[splintax]

.. 1 TB uploaded? Awesome

Anyone here remember that guy on EliteTorrents (he hangs out in #utorrent sometimes, I won't mention his name) who had 42 TB or something uploaded?

[1c3d0g]

I'll be damned!

[BlackLion]

w0w. 42 TB? TB? geez.....

[splintax]

yeah, he has a screenshot of it saved somewhere.. I'll see if I can dig it up.

[chaosblade]

---------------------------

µTorrent

---------------------------

Total Uploaded: 10.7 GB

Total Downloaded: 14.5 GB

Total Running Time: 431:32:42

Number of files added: 83

Program started: 56 times

# incoming conns since start: 6085

# outgoing conns since start: 1226

# handshake: 10597

Size of disk queue: 2

# connections: 27

# half-open: 1

Piece cache: 0 bytes (0 % effective)

---------------------------

OK

---------------------------

A week's worth of leaving uTorrent on 24 hours at 9kB/s :\

[Metzgerr]

well, i have to call myself a leecher than: not only because 1c3d0g defined the rank but it's the truth

im mp3 addicted, loading almost everything (okay: good stuff and good musicians have to be supported by buying their cd and go to concerts) and i have my lp/ed libary digitalized so that my ratio is 0,4 - not because im not willing to share but my connection simply doenst allow it: 6mbits down (about 770kB/s) and 0,7 mbits up - hell, even if my finished downloads reaches share ratios of 2.0+ im downloading too fast.

---------------------------

µTorrent

---------------------------

Total Uploaded: 359.7 GB

Total Downloaded: 1448 GB

Total Running Time: 1249:82:58

Number of files added: 843

Program started: 189 times

[chaosblade]

I'd say that you can probably keep up to 1:1 ratio easily with 700kbits upload, But im not about to start and argument ;]

---------------------------

µTorrent

---------------------------

Total Uploaded: 18.5 GB

Total Downloaded: 22.6 GB

Total Running Time: 699:07:56

Number of files added: 116

Program started: 77 times

# incoming conns since start: 12605

# outgoing conns since start: 4869

# handshake: 21444

Size of disk queue: 1

# connections: 75

# half-open: 4

Piece cache: 0 bytes (0 % effective)

---------------------------

OK

---------------------------

Im up to snuff myself ;p

[1c3d0g]

[stevvi]

For what it's worth, I'm with Moody on this one. Seed the buggery out of a torrent on a public tracker but, on privtae trackers, you should have some thought for the other members attempting to maintain a ratio. On private trackers I try to get a reasonable buffer when I first start there and then use my judgement as to whether my enormous (ahem) 256k upload is really needed. If it is, I stay on the torrent. If not, I'm out of there. I try to keep a ratio on 1:1.1 to 1:1.3

[nightshifted]

Stevvi, well, then there are private trackers, and there are private trackers.

On the one where I'm a moderator, the situation where people with high ratios are hogging all the opportunities to upload and forcibly keeping other users' ratios low just does not happen. There are so many suck-and-duck leeches, so many "my ISP doesn't let me upload as fast as it lets me download and no matter how many times you tell me I can stay in a torrent after my download completes I'm going to keep pretending either not to have understood or not to have heard" whiners, so many "that's all the uploading I can do" bleaters who can't grasp the idea that if that's true they could just download less.

Rather, we find that those who intentionally don't share create the opportunities for others to take up the slack and have astronomical ratios.

Our ratio requirement is only .25, but you should hear the wailing and gnashing of teeth over how unreasonably demanding a lot of our users consider that to be.

We have no quarrel with a user whose ratio is 1.1. A person like that is golden in our book. But so is a person whose ratio is 11, or 111, or 1111.

[StoicJester]

[Firon]

I see people complain on a certain private tracker all the time that it's too hard to seed, blah blah blah. If it wasn't for the 'overseeders', the speeds on the site would suck. I have no problems keeping a positive ratio with all these 100mbit "overseeders," and I only have 384kbit upload.

[nightshifted]

Firon: how would one achieve a negative ratio?

(I think Firon meant, "a ratio whose logarithm is positive.")

[Firon]

positive and negative in the BT context, positive being 1 or greater, negative being below 1

[nightshifted]

Exactly: you're talking about the sign of the logarithm of the ratio.

[jult]

The Ratio issue is so retarded and out of date.

It isn't part of a BitTorrent problem, it isn't even important really. The key to success for torrents is in the numbers of peers, not in what they upload AT ALL. You can calculate that too.

You shouldn't ask users to 'upload more', you should ask them to get more users interested in the same torrent!

And if more users are in the swarm, there will be more and more users who will end up with a ratio lower than 1:0.01 since the torrent is closed down after all million users have the file. That's just how it is. So what do you tell those millions then? To magically create ratio-boosters out of air?

Likewise, the naming morals related to ratio are totally out of place. It's an old philosophy, dating from the Kazaa and Napster times and before. BitTorrent is so not about that, it is for and by everyone, and it is totally irrelevant if someone is only downloading, because at the time they do download, they're always uploading as well, that was the entire point of BitTorrent, and got even more important with DHT and Peer Exchange, it's decentralizing the problem and making peer to peer available to everybody. BitTorrent is ideal for huge leeching audiences, that's what it was for, to extrapolate cost and load away from the source by forcing each user to upload WHILE downloading.

One seed is enough to have millions of what you refer to as 'scumbags' at one time and nobody wil suffer. It will not make much difference how much they upload, as long as there are enough of them. That's also why I'm promoting the allowance of DHT/PE. The more sites that allow DHT on their Private trackers, the better their content will spread. To close trackers down to be accessable to a small chosen few is nonsense;

Anyone can become a member of fatalbits or demonoid or whatever 'private flagged' trackers there are out there, so what is their community for? It is there to discuss releases and make the upload of them easier for users by offering a tracker-server and interface, and to limit the total tax on their tracker by allowing less than 50000 members or so. Well then; Why not allow DHT and PE, so load will go away from their tracker and allow public use of the torrents at the same time?

It's not as if 'private' tracked torrents are so much better or remain private. In fact, loads of them were 'stolen' from PUBLIC torrent trackers and then claimed to be exclusive, some will even charge for their membership. Ratio is then used as a smokescreen for making money off other people's work and torrents.

The moment a user downloaded a torrent from some private flagged tracker with ridiculous ratio-demands, this user can edit the torrent and start spreading it in the open. Those ratio-obsessed sites give a false sense of security to their members.

I would say 1:1 ratio is for idiots, 1:0.5 is more than enough, it was called ADSL for a reason. It's wasting the world's energy resources by keeping computers powered on, while the content wouldn't need extra seeding if only their trackers would allow DHT and wouldn't be private, because yeah, THEN you'd have more peers, right?

Two things are important for bittorrent: The amount of peers, and patience.

[Firon]

demonoid doesn't use or enforce the private flag, and in fact anyone can download their torrents. it's not a private community.

Anyway, even if you don't seed to 1:1, you have to seed at least SOME. Otherwise, you end up with all the dead torrents you commonly see on public trackers. if everyone just hits and run, then it doesn't work and the torrent will die.

[Ultima]

@jult: You don't seem to understand the BitTorrent philosophy very well. If we don't encourage people to share 1:1 (keyword: encourage), what's the point of BitTorrent? Was it not to offload bandwidth usage? If people hit and run, sharing 100MB out of 2GB, I wouldn't call that distributing much bandwidth. If that were the case, then BitTorrent might as well be a bunch of HTTP servers mirroring some file(s), and people just grab files off of them with multiple simultaneous connections. Sure, there will always be leechers, but no one likes 'em, and just because you might do that doesn't mean everyone should play "follow the leecher." Introducing new people to the swarm means nothing if they leech like you suggest that they do.

[jult]

You should encourage users to get more people interested in the same torrent, and MANY more, not just a few from some webbased forum, torrents should ALL be public. That's why suprnova was such a success, it didn't care much about ratio, it cared about as large a userbase as possible. I had a chat with Sloncek once, for a radioshow, this was way before exeem, and he totally got that:

You can never reach 1:1 when you have a million leechers!

The only problem in that case is the delivery of the links to the torrents (load on the webserver and its database). That's where smaller communities come in; They can limit certain tastes and types of media. But their torrents should all be wide open and using DHT & Peer Exchange i.m.o.

By the way, I have a 1337 ratio myself, but that's only because I'm on a couple of huge pipes here and the machines need to be on anyway (and uT is so incredibly low on resources!), and there's bw free for that, so I support a few sites when their seeds run out, due to the fact that so few support DHT now. But that does not change my mind about this, I want this to change!

[Ultima]

Yep, I know it's hard to get to 1:1 ratio for everyone, hence the word "encourage" =P

In the end, people should still try to share as much as they can, not just introduce more people and leave, which is what I got out of your previous post. And I mean as much as they can as in really (without going too much out of their way), not like, "oh this is as much as I feel like sharing..." If it weren't for the people who believed in sharing to 1:1 and beyond, torrents wouldn't last as long as they do (even though it's often not that long at all). Relying on the webseeder defeats the purpose of BitTorrent, and that's what would happen if people don't bother attempting to reciprocate their downloads.

I understand that ratios aren't necessarily the best, be-all-end-all way of measuring someone's contribution to the BitTorrent community, but that's the fundamental flaw I saw in your idea =T

[stevvi]

nightshifted,

I totally take your point and also can't stand the whining bastards I have a 2Mb/256k connection and have zero problem maintaining a 1:1+ ratio. I accept that "those who intentionally don't share create the opportunities for others to take up the slack and have astronomical ratios" but then, if I were running the site, would just ban the leeching bastards and be done with it, thus no-one would need that massive ratio in the first place.

Oh.. if I ruled world...

[jult]

I see people complain on a certain private tracker all the time that it's too hard to seed, blah blah blah.

Quite often it is impossible to reach a better ratio than 0.01 especially for short-term peaking torrents like HRHD episodes of hit tv-series. Trust me, I know ;-)

This has nothing to do with the max bw you set for upstream torrent traffic, but all to do with the high number of peers.

I think the blah blah blah whining about 'low ratios' is the retarded group. Make sure you have enough peers and you're done. Go whine at the fact that they're locked down for a chosen few, while they should be public. If you want more speed, you need more peers, so you need to open up access to them!

I'll give you a good example; Bandwidth cost isn't that high anymore. Try wholesale and know the right people. I can get 20 GBytes a day for less than 7 euros a month. Take the traffic generated just by delivering the small .torrent files and functioning tracker-data exchange. This example can give you redundant uptime of torrents for around 200000 connected users a day. Force the use of DHT and Peer exchange, stop using private flags on your trackers/torrents and you can earn double the cost from putting ads on a site running a forum and or database for 100000 members or so. Now WHO is whining? Not the users with a low ratio, not the users that generate popularity. It's the stupid admins that can't get this, and these are the ones whining.

[jult]

I totally take your point and also can't stand the whining bastards

...

but then, if I were running the site, would just ban the leeching bastards and be done with it, thus no-one would need that massive ratio in the first place.

This is the silliest idea ever and I see it mentioned everywhere: Why don't you try it? You'll find that ALL your torrents have too few peers, no seeds, no swarm, nothing. They'll die within a few days. Good luck with that! Nobody wants a site like that.

You want a site like suprnova. You want over 100000 unique hits a day from people loading and searching for content/media. You won't get them when you 'ban' low ratio users, because you know what? Newsflash: Consumers don't care, they've been uploading while they were downloading and maybe left them in their trays a little while longer. Ban them and they'll go to the next open tracker, where traffic will be much faster because the swarms are huge.

[shadek]

Anything above 0.75 is fine.