101–110 of 231 posts
This tech has been developed several times but ultimately CDNs are now so cheap that P2P is pointless. You can't ignore development cost since it dominates all other costs in this case.
The real reason is centralised architecture gives them control and ability to extract rent.
IPv6 multicast is probably the way forward for livestreams but I haven't really been keeping up on recent developments. In theory there could be dynamic registrations of multicast addresses that ISPs could opt-in to subscribe to and route for their customers.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Shame it's being abused by crypto bros who want to treat it as money. There are other genuinely useful crypto projects (like Monero for privacy and I don't like the idea of smart contracts) I really want to tell you the fact that most crypto is scam. These guys first went into crypto and now I am seeing so much crypto + AI. As someone who genuinely is interested in crypto from a technology (decentralization perspecti…
> Shame it's being abused by crypto bros who want to treat it as money. Iroh contributor here. I don't know what you are referring to. Iroh is just a library to provide direct QUIC connections between devices, even if they are behind a NAT. We don't have any plans doing a blockchain or an ICO or anything like that. I am not aware of any project called Iroh that is a scam, but if there is, please provide a link here.…
My only gripe with iroh currently is that its browser wasm feels too much for me/ I don't want to learn rust.
So I actually wanted to build something that required connectivity and I used nostr because nostr is great for website and not gonna lie ,its awesome as well (but nostr is also riddled with crypto bros :( )
torrent PROTOCOL does not require to download random pieces, in random order.
ONLY bittorrent, inc. COMPANY which releases "Utorrent" and "Bittorent" NAMED APPLICATIONS/PROGRAMS does not want legal trouble from media/music companies. Because STREAMING is other legal category then downloading. There is no other reason for torrent PROTOCOL to not deliver file pieces in sequential order.
if you need instant nanosecond delayed stream, those does not exist anywhere, even radio, tv stations over the air are delayed so they all transmit synchronized. so 0 latency and synchronized can be mistaken for each other.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
what if everyone agrees on a 10s delay?
The issue is everyone is watching the same part of the file at the same time. Offsetting by 10 seconds does not change that.
This P2P stack was meant to allow for mass scaling of lowish latency video streaming, even in parts of the World with limited peer bandwidth to original content source servers. The VC-1 format got into a legal quagmire, as most video streaming protocols do, and it speaks volumes that by the time I turned up in ~2012-ish, the entire stack was RTMP, RTSP, HDS and HLS with zero evidence of that P2P tech stack in production.
My main role was to get the ingest stack out of a DC and into cloud, while also dealing with a myriad of poor design decisions that led to issues (yes, that 2013 outage in the first paragraph of the wiki article was on my watch).
At no point did anybody suggest to me that what we really needed to fix our attention back to was P2P streaming, beyond the fact the company built a version of Periscope (Twitter's first live streaming product), and launched it weeks/months before they did, and were pivoting towards a social media platform, at which point I decided to go do other things.
The technical and legal problems are real, and covered elsewhere here. People want reliable delivery. Even Spotify, YouTube and others who have licensed content and could save a pile by moving to DRM-ified P2P don't go near it, and that should tell you something about the challenges.
I'd love more widespread adoption of P2P tech, but not convinced we'll ever see it in AV any time soon, unfortunately.
It's hard to beat CDNs for streaming because the number of hops is low. Basically any p2p technology would have to mirror the way existing livestreams work; a local well-connected peer sucks down the livestream from farther away and rebroadcasts it to local peers. Anything else introduces latency or wastes WAN bandwidth. Peers are also rarely situated where they have moderate downstream and exceptional (local) upstre…
Such a shame that it failed, nothing after it ever came close.
It's hard to beat CDNs for streaming because the number of hops is low. Basically any p2p technology would have to mirror the way existing livestreams work; a local well-connected peer sucks down the livestream from farther away and rebroadcasts it to local peers. Anything else introduces latency or wastes WAN bandwidth. Peers are also rarely situated where they have moderate downstream and exceptional (local) upstre…
it is insane to me, for people to have need to watch toxic channels like LinusTechTips livestream, regurgitating weeks old toxic marketing disinformation and having need to have that 0ms latency... XD
why everyone needs low latency for one way stream? unnecessary hurdle just to have that hurdle. no benefit to anything.
but agree with you that if companies already forget existence of IPv4, internet will be simpler, faster and more usable. for less price for everyone.
The only entities that could use such a thing are major streaming platforms, and projects trying to stream copyrighted content without consent. The former don't want to use it as it degrades their control over the content, and the later don't want to make a new system cause systems that are built on torrents are good enough.
> degrades their control over the content Encryption (can work with sharing), signatures, fall back to CDN. Control is not an issue. > torrents are good enough. Torrents can't do the massive market of livestream, like sports or season finales or reality TV / news. This is the entire point of the question. > The only entities And everyone kicked off of YouTube or doesn't want to use big corporations on principal, like…
or very similar point - i had conversation with some big youtuber and person was confused why he is not more popular with certain demographic. reason was that said demographic was watching on big TV and content he was filming was big head directly in front of camera. so they do not like having 3 feet big head right in front of them... most young people watch things on mobile..