Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

BitTorrent v2

blog.libtorrent.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

511–520 of 576 posts

Re: BitTorrent v2

#511

Post by mmm_grayons »

masklinn wrote: post #486
Semaphor wrote: post #373

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> earlier people ripped their own CDs, DVDs, magazine scans, digitized their VHS, recorded shows with their TV card etc. and shared these files. For that, you want Direct Connect [0]. As a one sentence pitch: IRC for file sharing ;) [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Direct_Connect_(protocol)

Or just share magnet links over IRC….

There's still an XDCC warez scene, too. Most of the servers are hacked computers, though, and some people have ethical issues with that.

Re: BitTorrent v2

#512

Post by WorldMaker »

nadahalli wrote: post #449
nadaviv wrote: post #447

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I wouldn't consider merkle trees to be a core component of Bitcoin. Full nodes don't benefit from them, they're only relevant for light SPV clients, which didn't even exists for a few years after Bitcoin was released.

Merkle trees are everywhere in Bitcoin (full node or otherwise). The block header has the merkle root of all transactions that are a part of that block. The witness merkle root is stored in the coinbase transaction (if the miner is segwit enabled). And proof of work is done for the block header, which includes all these merkle roots.

I pretty strongly believe that "blockchain" is a misnomer given how much the structure relies on Merkle Trees. Forks aren't some aberration in the data structure, but a direct exploration of branches in the Merkle Tree. Most blockchain algorithms, Proof of Work especially, are just very rigorous "rebase operations" in git terms.

Re: BitTorrent v2

#513

Post by 0xffff2 »

hackinthebochs wrote: post #480
kuroguro wrote: post #407

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Went to look up the issue - the dev's response seems reasonable to me. https://github.com/qbittorrent/qBittorrent/issues/4965 The only difference between qbit's pause and uTorrent's stop is the check if files still exist.

The fact that users do not see the behavior as the same is the problem. When the users are telling you how they use your software and you respond by saying "that's bizarre, don't do that", then there's a serious disconnect. Developers should be responsive to user feedback, not dictate how their software should be used.

I think the serious disconnect is in user expectations. Developers of paid produces should be responsive to user feedback. Developers of open source software are free (legally, ethically and morally) to care or not about user feedback exactly as much as they wish.

Users of open source software are free to fork the software if the original developer isn't responsive to their particular needs. They're not entitled to demand that the original developers respond to their feedback. They're even less entitled to complain when the develop does respond with a specific reason why they won't act on their feedback.

Re: BitTorrent v2

#514

Post by miki123211 »

lebaux wrote: post #392
viktorelofsson wrote: post #126

If you want to try a client with v2 (and v1+v2 hybrid) support, I've just released PicoTorrent v0.20 [0] based on Rasterbar-libtorrent 2.0 :) [0] https://github.com/picotorrent/picotorrent/releases/tag/v0.2...

Nice. If anyone is wondering if they should try this, picotorrent is probably the most lightweight GUI torrent client for windows (no linux/mac version).

What are you using for the GUI layer, and what's your stance on accessibility? The fact it's Windows only gives me hope.

Re: BitTorrent v2

#515

Post by nicbou »

hutzlibu wrote: post #440
adwn wrote: post #404

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Check your privileges, sweet summer child. Please don't do this here. It is needlessly condescending and insulting..

It is, but maybe start telling op? "Does this hypothetical situation you describe exist anywhere outside of the hypothetical situation posited by a character in a Neal Stephenson novel"

That's a legitimate question

Re: BitTorrent v2

#516

Post by nicbou »

denkmoon wrote: post #346
nicbou wrote: post #257

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It has been a few years, and despite a few attempts, I still don't really understand bitcoin. Yes yes ledgers and proof of work and yada yada, but I still don't know what I would need to do to buy something with bitcoin right now. As I understand I need to do something that's pretty much exactly like opening a bank account, but transactions take forever, they cost money, and the currency is not accepted by any busine…

> I still don't know what I would need to do to buy something with bitcoin right now. but I think you do. You find a seller who is willing to accept the currency you're using, and you use whatever interface to the bitcoin network you've chosen to do "send x money to y identifier". No different to a regular EFT. You identified the exact problems. It's not that bitcoin transfers are some weird foreign concept, it's tha…

> You find a seller who is willing to accept the currency you're using

Well that's a non-starter. If I wanted to buy a beer with bitcoin right now, I'd probably end up drinking tap water.

Re: BitTorrent v2

#517

Post by sudosysgen »

inopinatus wrote: post #254
nemo1618 wrote: post #188

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> don't people always say exactly that? This is an understandable reaction, but the security margin on new crypto is way higher than old crypto. Roughly speaking, we went from "I guess if a state-level actor dedicated all their resources to this for a few decades, they could probably brute-force it" to "Even if you broke 9 out of 10 rounds in this algorithm, you'd still need to harness the energy of every star in the…

This isn't wholly unreasonable. At some point we will stop worrying about state actors and start worrying about the Xeelee.

If they have access to such power were toast anyways.

Re: BitTorrent v2

#518

Post by nadaviv »

nadahalli wrote: post #449
nadaviv wrote: post #447

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I wouldn't consider merkle trees to be a core component of Bitcoin. Full nodes don't benefit from them, they're only relevant for light SPV clients, which didn't even exists for a few years after Bitcoin was released.

Merkle trees are everywhere in Bitcoin (full node or otherwise). The block header has the merkle root of all transactions that are a part of that block. The witness merkle root is stored in the coinbase transaction (if the miner is segwit enabled). And proof of work is done for the block header, which includes all these merkle roots.

They are used in Bitcoin since day one in the full node implementation, but full nodes don't benefit from the merkle tree structure in any way. The first client that did benefit from it was bitcoinj, which was released several years after Satoshi birthed Bitcoin.

If light SPV clients weren't a consideration, we could just concatenate all txids together and use the hash of that in the block header instead of a merkle root, and get the same effect.

What merkle trees give you is an efficient way to prove that a certain txid is committed to within a block, without the verifier having to fetch the full list of txids. Instead, he just needs a valid merkle path from the txid to the root, which is much smaller to communicate and to store.

For a full node that has the full list of txids regardless, this is basically meaningless. Full nodes don't (ever) verify merkle inclusion proofs, only that the merkle root in the header matches the full list of block txids.

I would still consider Satoshi's invention to be an incredible breakthrough even if he didn't consider light SPV clients since day one and only described the full node operation mode, therefore I don't consider SPV to be a core component of the Bitcoin breakthrough.

(And also, we know today that SPV is not as great as it was once hoped to be. It puts users at the whims of the miners, with XT/Classic/Unlimited/S2X/BCash being marvelous examples of how that can go terribly wrong. The fraud proof concept that Satoshi described in the whitepaper as part of the SPV model (under the name "alerts") was discovered to not actually be workable due to the data withhold problem, giving this model much weaker security guarantees. And privacy is totally and utterly broken in traditional SPV -- though Neutrino is making good progress on that front.)

Re: BitTorrent v2

#519

Post by centimeter »

nicbou wrote: post #257
dchuk wrote: post #208

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is exactly the problem with all cryptocurrency currently. It’s a massive user experience issue, in the sense that users have to experience the technical bullshit of how the currencies work, completely missing the brilliant part of real money: it just works. I hand people money, they give me things. I swipe my credit card, I get things. I can’t remember who aid it originally, but there’s a great test you can give…

It has been a few years, and despite a few attempts, I still don't really understand bitcoin. Yes yes ledgers and proof of work and yada yada, but I still don't know what I would need to do to buy something with bitcoin right now. As I understand I need to do something that's pretty much exactly like opening a bank account, but transactions take forever, they cost money, and the currency is not accepted by any busine…

> pretty much exactly like opening a bank account

You don't have to go anywhere, you don't have to provide any kind of ID or documentation, you don't have to wait around for a free salesperson.

> but transactions take forever

Bitcoin transactions are instantaneous. Look up "settlement cycle" if you want to make a direct comparison. Bitcoin final settlement usually takes about an hour, compared to anywhere from several days to several months for traditional payment. Credit card settlement is usually 60-90 days.

> they cost money

It costs less than a dollar to move ~any amount of money anywhere in the world with ~1hr settlement. A credit card usually costs something like $0.25 + 3%.

> the currency is not accepted by any business I use... I have 55€ in my wallet and everyone on this continent knows what to do with it.

I have AU$80 in my wallet and I'm pretty sure no one on your continent would take it.

In fact, last time I traveled to SE Asia none of my debit cards worked for cash withdrawal and the only way I was able to get cash was with a Bitcoin ATM. So it worked very well for me!

Re: BitTorrent v2

#520

Post by oauea »

Hamuko wrote: post #364
oauea wrote: post #197

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You mean https://github.com/transmission-remote-gui/transgui or another gui? You should be able to connect remotely, that is pretty much the entire idea behind transmission. A torrent daemon with various UIs that use the API.

I mean the native Transmission Cocoa GUI.

No idea what that is and any searches for those terms yield transgui. In any case the only way the transmission daemon can be controlled is through an API, which by definition works remotely.
Post reply on HN