PeerFactor+utorrent?

[Firon]

Why don't you just use another client if you want other stuff so badly?

[tjobo]

Open source is great when it comes to p2p-clients, there are alot of creative people who are just waiting to "optimize" the client.

Just take a look at this screenshot, latest version of "Azureus FU mod":

With this shit it is nearly impossible to get caught if you use it right I don't say that closed-source clients are unhackable, but you are much more limited. In this case µTorrent beeing closed source is a great advantage.

[kerson]

PacoBell: Whats wrong with your brain, has it overheated or something...

By reading your posts I have come to the conclusion that you say Ludde must make µTorrent the way YOU want it or else he should not make µTorrent at all, in my book that's BS.

Ludde has the right to do what the hell he wants with his own vision/creation, if he wants to follow the hype with open source he can do it or if he wants to continue with closed source he can do that, NOT because you say he must.

[Ramius]

So Ludde doesn't have a right to his vision and his work?

He is entitled to his version of vision and his copy of work. Once it enters my machine' date=' all bets are off.[/quote']

Your machine? Suddenly the rules are made by the likes of you? And aren't you generous - "Write an app, give it to us, dismissed".

Again, you try to force your views on Ludde in a Bolshevik way... Fortunately, he has the option of not giving you a single line of code, if he feels like it.

Go hack utorrent in an act of protest or go use some open source client, maybe even that aforementioned version of Azureus that relieves the working masses from the cruel and unneccesary burden of uploading.

[Niceguy]

Yes, I know who Ludde is. And it intruigues me how both OpenTTD and ScummVM, no longer under the management of Ludde, can be open source and not �Torrent.

what is the mystery here? he made ScummVM and OpenTTD open source projects, he has not made utorrent an open source project.

But I guess desperate times call for desperate measures. He's gotta protect his precious intellectual property and make a buck just like every other joe. Just don't be under any false pretenses that this is anything but a testing ground for his commercial ventures.

well, if you say so, then it must be true. utorrent is currently free, should he choose to charge for it, then that is his right. although I would personally find it shoddy, I will either pay up or choose another client. he is in negotiations of selling functionality from utorrent's codebase (good for him!) and yet utorrent remains free and he has stated that it will continue to be, go figure. I must say that I trust his word above yours.

If you can live with that, then by all means continue to use �Torrent to your heart's content.

yes, I can live with that, I do not shun someone for wanting to make money with their own creations. many people actually make an honest living that way. I know, your head must be spinning, but it's really true, believe me.

And for the record, I did not mention "crook". You did.

lol, yes, my bad, you really didn't paint him as a bad guy...

We all need inspiration to create things.

working off someone else's code base is not inspiration. if you make a xerox copy of a painting and add a moustache you are not doing an inspired imitation, you are modifying it. now, if someone programmed his own client that behaved very much like utorrent, it would constitute as 'inspired'.

By attempting to deny me the freedom to tinker with the bits on my own machine, it has become a totalitarian act, a dictatorship. I will do with my bits as I please. And right now, I am using a hacked version of �Torrent that conforms to my vision.

again your arguments are so pathetic they're unbelievable. you yourself chose to download his program to your machine, for free! hell, even at the cost of his bandwidth. and now you demand that he gives you the source code, else he is denying you your rights. lol! you are deying him HIS rights by DEMANDING the source code.

indeed, you are exactly the reason why he should not open the source.

Ludde is, of course, entitled to his own. Just don't force it on me.

ridiculous, he isn't forcing utorrent upon you. if you want it, you download it and use it. you on the other hand are trying to force YOUR vision upon his.

So did the original devs for ScummVM. What's your point?

you brought up the original emule developers vision, I simply stated that the original developers have left since long, and thus it's no longer their 'vision'.

And how exactly have these "rogue mods" harmed the code base?

never said they harmed the code base. they simply harmed the network.

You see that as a failure of control and it is! Real creativity comes not from clutching tightly to your creation, but letting it go to take on a life of its own.

ahh, so now we have the definition of 'real' creativity. so unless it's open source, software cannot be 'real' creativity. I see... good thing Ludde never claimed utorrent to be a result of 'real' creativity, because then he'd be lying. lol. seriously.

It is rather simple, actually. We wrestle with these issues all the time with eMule's code. Unfortunately, it requires moving a lot of the intelligence from the trackers to the clients, which would defeat a lot of Bittorrent's efficiency. To curb private tracker abuse you would need to have a "spy" client connected to the tracker as well as the DHT network. The tracker would then update the client with all the other currently connected clients. The client then parses all the clients it sees in the DHT network for ones matching the tracker's list. It then reports back the results to the tracker, which summarily bans (temporarily or permanently, automated or otherwise) those IPs connected to it. This can all be done in real-time and costs the tracker very little bandwidth, considering only one client is needed to collect the reconnoissance data.

utorrent already respects the private flag, it's hacked utorrent clients (such as the one you are boasting about using) that perhaps do not.

As for manual banning, there really is not much you can do, since it is done client-side.

except not adding it to your client.

I suppose you could perform a statistical analysis over time on the tracker's end to create a composite profile of the types of clients it is rejecting. If all of them are, say, modem users or all clients not from a certain geographical area, then that might raise some red flags. When you understand yourself and you understand your enemy, then victory is assured.

lol, so this is what you meant with "many great minds would have been able to counter such actions with appropriate reactions in a matter of days." yes, thats a surefire solution, and very efficient... "many great minds" should be proud of this... I doubt Ludde has any intentions of doing anything against other clients using manual peer banning, since he isn't 'forcing' his ideals on others, instead he creates his own client that conforms to his.

this unlike the official Emule I might add, which on occasions HAVE forced their ideals upon the ed2k network. the biggest one was the reask time limit else ban, which they set in order to stave the insane reasking that was the result of edonkey hacks and mldonkey settings (I don't know if you were around Emule that long back, but maybe you can look it up) where these clients were trying to reconnect in a frenzy in order to hit the time that a 'slot' opened up. by adding a reask time limit and a queue emule prevented this slot-fishing tactic. lately Emule started banning known 'community' mods, again 'forcing' their ideals upon others. please note that I find both these actions justified, but they are prime examples of Emule 'forcing' it's ideals upon others, very much unlike Ludde, who you are pathetically accusing of denying you your freedom.

utorrent does not have manual peer ban, unlike 'open source' azareus. now, if everyone used the official utorrent client, there would be no problems with bans nor private tracker flags, again you are making truck-sized holes in your own arguments.

...that you totally missed mine. It's not just theoretically likely that there are hacked �Torrent clients, the do exist. I've got a few sitting on my hard drive right now (no, I don't actively use them).

wow! how amazing... and I'm still totally missing your point.

But that doesn't mean that the original developers are somehow obligated to incorporate every feature from every modification. That would just be ludicrious, even ignoring the many conflicting features from various mods! My point is that the mere existance of undesireable forks, whatever they may be, does not implicitly invalidate the original codebase. People may worry about "diluting mindshare", but that is the small price you pay for freedom of choice. It's all about options and not being imprisoned by another's ideals.

then they should program their own client, based upon their own ideals, just as Ludde made his based on his ideals, and if their ideals include open sourcing it, then they should.

if you don't like it, you don't use it. THAT is freedom of choice. All your argumentation fall down on this basic principle, he has the right to do what he wants with HIS code. he has chosen NOT to release the source code now, and he may very well not release it in the future either. Ludde could have chosen NOT to release utorrent at all, but I'm glad he did. either way, it was HIS choice.

you could not accept his right to control the functionality of his own program, even though he offer you to use it for free. and instead of simply using another client, which have open source, you have chosen to use a hacked version of his.

now, since you obviously think you have the 'right' to use a hacked version of his program, HOW can you ever begin to question his right not to give you the source code? you are simply the biggest hypocrite I've seen on these boards, and the fact that you are a Emule forum moderator really shows how bad things must be degrading over there.

[Ultima]

They're dead for a reason: because nobody has any interest in them, including the developers. So, no, they are not great in any sense of the word. The people have spoken.

...

Heh, it's interesting how you answered your first question so eloquently.

Like I said previously, it will never be "great" until it's open source because then it will appeal to everyone instead of just one side.

Gee, notice where I was getting at? Odium said opening the source would appeal to everyone, which obviously you disagree with, so I'm not sure what you're trying to get at.

The problem with treating "intellectual property" as physical property is that ideas cannot be constrained like a tangible good (and even those are being threatened by technologies like rapid prototypers).

Care to point out where ludde's trying to constrain his ideas? They're perfectly open for anyone to see. Just open µTorrent.

One doesn't even need to see the code in order to modify the client's behavior. Any schmuck with half a brain can Google for himself and find reverse engineered uTorrent clients on leecher boards all over the Internet.

I never said anything about modifying the client's behavior. I already know it's easy to modify behavior, with or without the source code, and has been discussed enough times on these forums already (I myself have already said that before). The point is, he wants control of µTorrent's development, and there's nothing wrong with that. You may disagree, with your bias towards open source and all, but not everyone might agree with the open source philosophy. That's right, it's a philosophy. Not a truth. And so ludde isn't obligated to release his code.

We must each have the courage to step out of our reclusive Dark Age into the light of a new Rennaissance.

Equating closed source to the Dark Age treats that philosophy unfairly. Dark Age carries negative connotations, which the closed source philosophy doesn't deserve to be placed under. Many great contributions have been made without source codes having been revealed.

The binaries are for the clueless masses who do not know/care about their security.

Yeah, and if the "clueless masses" downloading these binaries aren't the main group of people being served, whether open source or closed source, then who is? Do developers make up a majority of BitTorrent users?

[Game90]

this thread is becoming a useless flamed discussion. i suggest we just lock it up....

[PacoBell]

Go hack utorrent in an act of protest

I have, thank you very much.

working off someone else's code base is not inspiration.

Now this is interesting. So code-reuse, the basic tenent of OOP, automatically brands any project pedestrian? I know a lot of developers who would take offense at that remark. With one statement you single-handedly discounted all the innovative features to date that the many developers worldwide have implemented, not only into their own clients, but that have been merged back into the main source tree. Do you consider musicians who sample other's work for their own creations to be hopelessly derivative as well?

you yourself chose to download his program to your machine, for free! hell, even at the cost of his bandwidth. and now you demand that he gives you the source code, else he is denying you your rights. lol! you are deying him HIS rights by DEMANDING the source code.

If you must know, I downloaded �Torrent from within eMule. The bits were no longer his. Of course he has the right to keep the source to himself, but not for the reasons he mentioned in his interviews and on these forums. The modification of �Torrent is inevitable regardless of the source being readily available or not. Consider it forked.

if you want it, you download it and use it.

I do, but not restricted to its current form. We shall see who's vision ultimately wins the hearts and minds of the public.

you brought up the original emule developers vision, I simply stated that the original developers have left since long, and thus it's no longer their 'vision'.

The funny thing about "vision", or any meme for that matter, is that it is highly transmissible, contagious even. It cannot be locked down by any one person. Vision is given power because it is shared by many other people. Therefore, whether the founders are present becomes irrelevant because the project has already gained a momentum.

never said they harmed the code base. they simply harmed the network.

It is a necessary evil and one that is completely orthogonal to the open source nature of the project. Harm would have come from another vector sooner or later. But the innovation that has sprung from the project's collective intelligence has allowed us to rapidly formulate defenses against that harm. Now, do you have any more red herrings?

utorrent already respects the private flag, it's hacked utorrent clients (such as the one you are boasting about using) that perhaps do not.

Oh, right, circle the wagons. It doesn't matter what happens to the rest of the network as long as �Torrent is keeping the straight and narrow. Gotcha.

As for manual banning, there really is not much you can do, since it is done client-side.

except not adding it to your client.

This stance is myopic at best and evasive at worst. You're content to allow leechers to freely drain the network while you sit back and watch it all happen. I'm glad you're not responsible for the security of my system.

lol, so this is what you meant with "many great minds would have been able to counter such actions with appropriate reactions in a matter of days."

You really are good at spin, aren't you? No, this is not many minds, it is mine and mine alone. If others happen to adopt my methodology, so be it.

he isn't 'forcing' his ideals on others, instead he creates his own client that conforms to his.

Again, burying his head in the sand, but that's the road he's decided to walk down.

this unlike the official Emule I might add, which on occasions HAVE forced their ideals upon the ed2k network...they are prime examples of Emule 'forcing' it's ideals upon others, very much unlike Ludde, who you are pathetically accusing of denying you your freedom.

What are you talking about? Of course Ludde has has forced his ideals on the network. He agreed to incorporate the private flag, didn't he? It is akin to the television broadcast flag, in my opinion. Who is anyone tell me what I can or cannot do with the bits on my machine? Certainly not an artificial construct like a tracker. Now that we have the DHT network, everyone can be a tracker.

utorrent does not have manual peer ban, unlike 'open source' azareus. now, if everyone used the official utorrent client, there would be no problems with bans nor private tracker flags, again you are making truck-sized holes in your own arguments.

Fine, you don't like manual peer ban? CVS your own copy, take that feature out, and recompile. Nobody's forcing you to use their binary, just as I'm free to mod �Torrent should I not agree with its so-called features. You were saying something about holes?

I'm still totally missing your point.

Not surprising, since you don't seem to possess the attention span to required read past the first sentence of a paragraph before rendering judgement.

then they should program their own client, based upon their own ideals.

And we have. Yay for reverse engineering.

you could not accept his right to control the functionality of his own program, even though he offer you to use it for free. and instead of simply using another client, which have open source, you have chosen to use a hacked version of his.

Now you're catching on!

now, since you obviously think you have the 'right' to use a hacked version of his program, HOW can you ever begin to question his right not to give you the source code?

Simple, because the binary I have sitting on my HDD is mine to manipulate. I'm not questioning his right for propriety, but his motivations. And so far, none of his arguments have been very convincing. Somehow, "just because" doesn't cut it intellectually anymore.

Odium said opening the source would appeal to everyone, which obviously you disagree with, so I'm not sure what you're trying to get at.

The open source concept is sound. The creative works generated from that philosophy, however, are not guaranteed to succeed given the simply fact that to err is human.

Care to point out where ludde's trying to constrain his ideas? They're perfectly open for anyone to see.

Have you taken a look at this page recently? Now note all the features marked "Unlikely to be implemented" as well as the forum posts by Ludde pertaining to each of them. Clearly there is demand for them, but in the end, it's really in Ludde's power to ignore them all. Every creator has to constrain their imaginations due to practicality's sake, personal preference, etc. Ludde just has his own set of criteria.

The point is, he wants control of �Torrent's development, and there's nothing wrong with that.

And he cannot still do the same with an open methodology? I've already mentioned one project that's done that successfully. Or is he just afraid to compete with clones of his original. Oh, whoops, too late for that.

Many great contributions have been made without source codes having been revealed.

And how many more were stiffled for that very reason? I mean, look what happened when id Software finally released their code for Quake. Thanks to that decision, I can now play it even on my PocketPC. It's even been used in modern art in novel ways. None of this would have been possible had id left that franchise to rot in some dark corner. I cannot think of any closed source program that wasn't used primarily as a vehicle for commercial gain.

Do developers make up a majority of BitTorrent users?

No, but that's not really important. New developers offer choices which have not been addressed by the status quo. All users will be served, not only the ones that agree with Luddes vision. But then again, he probably values "control" over "choice".

[Firon]

blah blah blah, just another FOSS troll. go away and stop trying to force your ideals on others.