Earlier quoted context omitted.
Wow that's a big huge dollop of nihilism, of why even bother. It's very unclear what your slam even means, what you are trying, technically, to express as the problem. Which makes your rejection even harder to handle with faith & respect. I also don't think it's accurate. Handshake is a cryptographically certified way of establishing identity . Since torrents are now mutable via handshake, it seems like webtorrents c…
You are assuming bad faith here. The project is marketed as unblockable, etc and yet we both conclude it is blockable from the start with existing network management tools that are deployed in places like Iran and China. I was asking a genuine question of use case.
Extremely polarizing language for something that is way more a scale to me, and I don't agree that this technology is blockable. I already elaborated some scenarios where hosting can respawn easily, with no coupling to any particular infrastructure. That to me is pretty unblockable. There's other resilliencies offered here.
The story keeps getting better, given all the resilience features at Bittorrent's core: webtorrent clients could connect to multiple trackers just fine. Since it's tracker based, there's no need for any specific host to stay online. We can all just use the existing tracker network.
Even if the entire tracker network is taken down- something that has never happened to bittorrent & which is beyond imagining to me- bittorrent still has a peer exchange network & allows for peers to manually be added. Whence peer exchange can kick in & keep resilliency going.
I'm sorry but I have no agreemenet whatsoever with you on blockability. This has multiple vast layers of resillience that are excellent, which have never seen active threat against them.
What would make you happy? Do we need a system able to resist long term nuclear winter to be unblockable? What's the goal here? You've still been extremely unclear what your technical complaints actually are, extremely specious, & aggressive. And now you are also putting words in my mouth.
> You are assuming bad faith here.
I think I've done quite well working around doing that, & worked hard to find something to discuss. In contrast, you have yet to specify a specific technical case at all, to explain what issue you actually have or what you think the problem or scenario you are imagining is. And you use aggressive position & hard words to double down on your argumentless snub, which to me reads like a bad faith follow-up, one I challenge you to do better on.
I mostly think you don't know the tech. Which is fine. Bittorrent is fairly complex & has a lot of layers to it. There aren't great primers to get filled in on it. Bittorrent is a great basis, one that countless millions have been spent trying to block & take down & combat, but the system has been extremely resillient. Magnet links "just work", fantastically well, and are super easy to share, to get started, over any medium one wants. The underpinnning distributed P2P technologies are broadly capable of taking over from there. I don't think your short, undetailed, savage doubt is contributive or accurate: you should better define your issues if you are going to throw such a hard heavy opinion down against great tech.