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

Japanese peer-to-peer (2008)

jmoiron.net

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

11–20 of 34 posts

Re: Japanese peer-to-peer (2008)

#11

Post by JulianMorrison »

antimatter15 wrote: post #6
creamyhorror wrote: post #2

It's no surprise that Japan has evolved these anonymous networks, considering the legal pressure its media companies applies to its filesharers. Even Perfect Dark's users have been arrested, implying its security has been broken.[1] Maybe we elsewhere can draw some lessons. Reposting a comment of mine: ----- I actually submitted the Perfect Dark wiki article to HN after reading about Isamu's passing: http://en.wikipe…

Why don't these P2P apps store the file chunks in your hard drive's free space? The fact that commands like `shred` exist means that you can readily read/write from it, and your OS will automatically overwrite the cache contents when you need to use space (and it doesn't matter because P2P networks are fault tolerant anyway). That way users don't have to face the idea of "giving up" their disk space to be part of the…

There is no generalized way to access the free space of a mounted and mutable file system.

What you'd be better off doing on Unix type OSes is creating a large empty file, deleting it but keeping the file handle, and reading/writing that. That's a traditional way to make a self erasing scratch file.

It doesn't work on Windows, though, because Windows won't let you delete a file that's open.

Re: Japanese peer-to-peer (2008)

#13

Post by proofofconcept »

antimatter15 wrote: post #6
creamyhorror wrote: post #2

It's no surprise that Japan has evolved these anonymous networks, considering the legal pressure its media companies applies to its filesharers. Even Perfect Dark's users have been arrested, implying its security has been broken.[1] Maybe we elsewhere can draw some lessons. Reposting a comment of mine: ----- I actually submitted the Perfect Dark wiki article to HN after reading about Isamu's passing: http://en.wikipe…

Why don't these P2P apps store the file chunks in your hard drive's free space? The fact that commands like `shred` exist means that you can readily read/write from it, and your OS will automatically overwrite the cache contents when you need to use space (and it doesn't matter because P2P networks are fault tolerant anyway). That way users don't have to face the idea of "giving up" their disk space to be part of the…

Storage is getting so cheap so quickly that this is a disappearing problem. Also, glossing over the barriers to implementation, your solution to the stated issue makes the overall fidelity of files on the network much less predictable, particularly for those with fewer up-votes. To compensate, the minimum number of copies of each part of each file that the network would have to cache to be reasonably certain of its ability to completely deliver to new downloaders the files riding the minimum up-vote threshold would have to go up. This would in turn push the minimum up-vote threshold up and make it more difficult for obscure content to survive on the network.

Re: Japanese peer-to-peer (2008)

#14

Post by sergers »

i was a raw capper of japanese TV from about 2000-2008.

article is pretty much spot on. we started out on winmx, with huge userlists. the fun thing about winmx it downloaded in order, it didnt grab multiple pieces of random parts of the file.

i could start a download, startup my FXP ftp client and start uploading immediately (would have to cap it so it didnt complete the upload before the download completed).

after a few years winmx started to die out, the familiar reputable uploaders we kept eyes are gone. (probably arrents and some people retiring).

then came winny, it was a little harder to use but then we figured out you can just search the hash for the uploader and started grabbing all their content with ease. it was pretty nice.

used share, didnt like it as much as winny.

winny eventually came to an end, well the uploaders were gone like winmx.

by the time perfect dark came out, we already invested in local japanese residents to cap the streams directly and we no longer needed to use japanese p2p software as a source of some of our caps as we could cap anything in hd.

Re: Japanese peer-to-peer (2008)

#15

Post by gwern »

creamyhorror wrote: post #2

It's no surprise that Japan has evolved these anonymous networks, considering the legal pressure its media companies applies to its filesharers. Even Perfect Dark's users have been arrested, implying its security has been broken.[1] Maybe we elsewhere can draw some lessons. Reposting a comment of mine: ----- I actually submitted the Perfect Dark wiki article to HN after reading about Isamu's passing: http://en.wikipe…

> Even Perfect Dark's users have been arrested, implying its security has been broken.[1]

What can one expect, with such closed software and flagrant violations of Kerckhoffs's principle?

The real question I'd like to see answered by these articles on Winny and Perfect Dark is why the Japanese are insane enough to use these when they're known to be broken - so they're less secure than alternatives like Freenet and less convenient than things like BitTorrent.

Re: Japanese peer-to-peer (2008)

#16

Post by kimlelly »

gwern wrote: post #15
creamyhorror wrote: post #2

It's no surprise that Japan has evolved these anonymous networks, considering the legal pressure its media companies applies to its filesharers. Even Perfect Dark's users have been arrested, implying its security has been broken.[1] Maybe we elsewhere can draw some lessons. Reposting a comment of mine: ----- I actually submitted the Perfect Dark wiki article to HN after reading about Isamu's passing: http://en.wikipe…

> Even Perfect Dark's users have been arrested, implying its security has been broken.[1] What can one expect, with such closed software and flagrant violations of Kerckhoffs's principle? The real question I'd like to see answered by these articles on Winny and Perfect Dark is why the Japanese are insane enough to use these when they're known to be broken - so they're less secure than alternatives like Freenet and le…

Japan, welcome to http://retroshare.sourceforge.net/

Re: Japanese peer-to-peer (2008)

#17

Post by Dylan16807 »

JulianMorrison wrote: post #11
antimatter15 wrote: post #6

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why don't these P2P apps store the file chunks in your hard drive's free space? The fact that commands like `shred` exist means that you can readily read/write from it, and your OS will automatically overwrite the cache contents when you need to use space (and it doesn't matter because P2P networks are fault tolerant anyway). That way users don't have to face the idea of "giving up" their disk space to be part of the…

There is no generalized way to access the free space of a mounted and mutable file system. What you'd be better off doing on Unix type OSes is creating a large empty file, deleting it but keeping the file handle, and reading/writing that. That's a traditional way to make a self erasing scratch file. It doesn't work on Windows, though, because Windows won't let you delete a file that's open.

If you do that the space is still occupied. And the file deletes itself whenever the service is restarted, which is also undesirable.

Re: Japanese peer-to-peer (2008)

#18

Post by badman_ting »

On the upside, western internet users mostly ignored Usenet in favor of BitTorrent, which made Usenet a real pleasure to download from for years. Copyright holders are starting to catch on, though, so this is going away.

Re: Japanese peer-to-peer (2008)

#19

Post by [deleted] »

gwern wrote: post #15
creamyhorror wrote: post #2

It's no surprise that Japan has evolved these anonymous networks, considering the legal pressure its media companies applies to its filesharers. Even Perfect Dark's users have been arrested, implying its security has been broken.[1] Maybe we elsewhere can draw some lessons. Reposting a comment of mine: ----- I actually submitted the Perfect Dark wiki article to HN after reading about Isamu's passing: http://en.wikipe…

> Even Perfect Dark's users have been arrested, implying its security has been broken.[1] What can one expect, with such closed software and flagrant violations of Kerckhoffs's principle? The real question I'd like to see answered by these articles on Winny and Perfect Dark is why the Japanese are insane enough to use these when they're known to be broken - so they're less secure than alternatives like Freenet and le…

[deleted]

Re: Japanese peer-to-peer (2008)

#20

Post by Scaevolus »

antimatter15 wrote: post #6
creamyhorror wrote: post #2

It's no surprise that Japan has evolved these anonymous networks, considering the legal pressure its media companies applies to its filesharers. Even Perfect Dark's users have been arrested, implying its security has been broken.[1] Maybe we elsewhere can draw some lessons. Reposting a comment of mine: ----- I actually submitted the Perfect Dark wiki article to HN after reading about Isamu's passing: http://en.wikipe…

Why don't these P2P apps store the file chunks in your hard drive's free space? The fact that commands like `shred` exist means that you can readily read/write from it, and your OS will automatically overwrite the cache contents when you need to use space (and it doesn't matter because P2P networks are fault tolerant anyway). That way users don't have to face the idea of "giving up" their disk space to be part of the…

Shred doesn't operate on free space at all. It overwrites the file, and assumes that the underlying filesystem will overwrite the data in place.

http://www.gnu.org/software/coreutils/manual/html_node/shred... "Please note that shred relies on a very important assumption: that the file system overwrites data in place. This is the traditional way to do things, but many modern file system designs do not satisfy this assumption. Exceptions include:

Log-structured or journaled file systems, such as those supplied with AIX and Solaris, and JFS, ReiserFS, XFS, Ext3 (in data=journal mode), BFS, NTFS, etc., when they are configured to journal data. File systems that write redundant data and carry on even if some writes fail, such as RAID-based file systems. File systems that make snapshots, such as Network Appliance's NFS server. File systems that cache in temporary locations, such as NFS version 3 clients. Compressed file systems."

Post reply on HN