31–40 of 99 posts
How long until this is built into a decentralized PopcornTime-like service?
"Torrenting has an incentivization problem. There is sometimes a real lack of incentive to seed a file, especially for obscure files where you may only find a single digit number of people that have it. Adding monetary incentives to the existing torrenting structure should prove to be extremely interesting." In my opinion, if torrenting meant one needs to pay for download, we would never have heard about torrents. Th…
I'd love something that took the incentive system that makes private torrent networks work, and made it possible to have that incentive system "accessible to the public" without destroying it. Then maybe I could finally get access to the collections that contain those weird old movies I watched once but almost nobody's ever heard of.
How long until this is built into a decentralized PopcornTime-like service?
This would become the ultimate streaming service. All titles, from everywhere, available on one service. Add in a revenue sharing model for copyright holders and you've got the ultimate entertainment platform.
Pretty soon some ISP is going to sell a bulk subscription to these streaming services alongside their internet package and we'll have truly come full circle.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
This has implications way beyond torrenting. This solves the incentivization of bandwidth in a decentralized way. If we now solve the closely related incentivization of long-term encrypted storage, we would be able to build a sustainable decentralized storage service unlike torrents that are powered by fame or Infura which is powered by corporate philanthropy (which never lasts unless we become the product). This mea…
How about distributed YouTube with micropayments instead of ads.
Everybody's doing it. Not clear if anybody cares.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
If you got paid for torrenting, a lot less people would torrent because of the much increased legal liability and massive increase in lawsuits.
As someone with no knowledge on the subject, why would accepting payment increase liability? As in, the target of the lawsuit would also be liable for the money they received, or something else?
For example, in Canada, the penalty for non-commercial infringement is generally about 100$, and it can go up to 5000$ maximum (repeat offenders and so on). For commercial infringement, the penalty is of 20 000$.
Furthermore, in Canada, seeding downloaded files via P2P service is of ambiguous legality, with some interpretations saying that as long as you don't advertise or try to share it with as much people as possible (positive action) required to make it illegal. Receiving payment for this would torpedo that defense, which means even higher liability. All in all, it's not a good idea.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
This would become the ultimate streaming service. All titles, from everywhere, available on one service. Add in a revenue sharing model for copyright holders and you've got the ultimate entertainment platform.
That was the original idea for Netflix, but the problem is that all the copyright holders decided that they wanted the profits that Netflix was pulling in and created their own streaming services. Pretty soon some ISP is going to sell a bulk subscription to these streaming services alongside their internet package and we'll have truly come full circle.
The fun thing about this service is that the copyright holders don't get a choice. Their content will be on the platform regardless of what they want so they have an incentive to join the profit sharing in order to better control their metadata on the service and provide better support for their users. Or they can sit and complain and lose out on any of the profits.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
This would become the ultimate streaming service. All titles, from everywhere, available on one service. Add in a revenue sharing model for copyright holders and you've got the ultimate entertainment platform.
That was the original idea for Netflix, but the problem is that all the copyright holders decided that they wanted the profits that Netflix was pulling in and created their own streaming services. Pretty soon some ISP is going to sell a bulk subscription to these streaming services alongside their internet package and we'll have truly come full circle.
The real question is why there isn't a Aereo-like service where users time-share a pool of streaming subscriptions on different streaming services.
"Torrenting has an incentivization problem. There is sometimes a real lack of incentive to seed a file, especially for obscure files where you may only find a single digit number of people that have it. Adding monetary incentives to the existing torrenting structure should prove to be extremely interesting." In my opinion, if torrenting meant one needs to pay for download, we would never have heard about torrents. Th…
Torrents don't run on altruism and they never did. You might be looking at one side of the equation, but what if you could earn cryptocurrency by using extra bandwidth on servers by seeding torrents? What if you could pay for a VPN or private server that has plenty of extra bandwidth? What if you could find something rare much easier or get it much faster?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I beg to differ. I used to have a Netflix subscription here in France (not anymore), my wife is from Latin America and wanted to use English subtitles instead of French ones (and so did I), funny thing is, English subtitles were not available in France, the only way to get English subtitles was to use a proxy and a US Netflix account (not possible anymore as many proxies are blocked) or just use torrent. There are ma…
If you got paid for torrenting, a lot less people would torrent because of the much increased legal liability and massive increase in lawsuits.
"Torrenting has an incentivization problem. There is sometimes a real lack of incentive to seed a file, especially for obscure files where you may only find a single digit number of people that have it. Adding monetary incentives to the existing torrenting structure should prove to be extremely interesting." In my opinion, if torrenting meant one needs to pay for download, we would never have heard about torrents. Th…
> To me it's the usual crypto thing - very cool from a technological perspective, not useful in real life. Indeed, the vast bulk of crypto technologies appear to be solutions out in search of problems.