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

291–300 of 576 posts

Re: BitTorrent v2

#291

Post by doomrobo »

sbierwagen wrote: post #280
Thorentis wrote: post #248

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This right here is the biggest new feature in my opinion, and should have been discussed in more depth in the announcement. I also think they should have pursued this avenue further before releasing v2. Content addressing is one of the big advantages of p2p applications, and IPFS has been pushing it for a long time. Just imagine if this was done all the way down to the piece level. You have two different torrents (sa…

>Just imagine if this was done all the way down to the piece level. I don't know about that. With a reasonably large number of users, wouldn't you start seeing hash collisions via birthday paradox? Might be better off keeping it at the file level. (Though this does incentivize malicious users to find hash collisions of particular files they want to defend, and seeding the swarm with garbage files)

Hashes are now 256 bits. In order to get a collision with probability 1% you need to produce about 4e37 hashes. For comparison, if you had a 5GHz computer that did a SHA-256 hash every cycle and gave 100 of these computers to every human on Earth, it'd take over 300 million years to produce 4e37 hashes.

Re: BitTorrent v2

#292

Post by fomine3 »

sbierwagen wrote: post #280
Thorentis wrote: post #248

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This right here is the biggest new feature in my opinion, and should have been discussed in more depth in the announcement. I also think they should have pursued this avenue further before releasing v2. Content addressing is one of the big advantages of p2p applications, and IPFS has been pushing it for a long time. Just imagine if this was done all the way down to the piece level. You have two different torrents (sa…

>Just imagine if this was done all the way down to the piece level. I don't know about that. With a reasonably large number of users, wouldn't you start seeing hash collisions via birthday paradox? Might be better off keeping it at the file level. (Though this does incentivize malicious users to find hash collisions of particular files they want to defend, and seeding the swarm with garbage files)

All git objects on GitHub has unique hash in 2017 even though git uses relatively weak SHA-1. SHA-256 should be safe.

https://github.blog/2017-03-20-sha-1-collision-detection-on-...

Re: BitTorrent v2

#293

Post by AndrewUnmuted »

bonoboTP wrote: post #273
dane-pgp wrote: post #266

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It was good design to decouple the transfer protocol from the search protocol, to allow different technologies to be explored, but in practice people ended up relying on the "good enough" solution of using the web for search. Setting the precedent that media companies can seize domain names and force ISPs to block access to search engines if they don't like some of the search results (while ruining the lives of the p…

Yes. For all the P2P distributed praise ITT, torrent as a whole, as it is used in the real world, is very centralized. If the Pirate Bay is shut down, that stuff is gone. Uploading became a privilege, something that normal average people don't do. Earlier people ripped their own CDs, DVDs, magazine scans, digitized their VHS, recorded shows with their TV card etc. and shared these files. I don't know anybody who has…

It's fairly uncontroversial that the success of decentralized protocols can promote - and sometimes, even rely upon - centralized points of engagement.

But your experiences sound like what goes on in the public trackers. It's reasonable that folks who go to Pirate Bay to get their TV shows are not going to be as engaged as those who go to TVV, MS, or MTV. There's also the security risks of letting untrusted users upload files that may get consumed by thousands of people in the first hour.

In private trackers, I have often found that uploading is encouraged, going so far as to provide very detailed guides in their wikis showing how to rip the media, prepare the torrent, and upload it to the tracker. If a better quality version can be uploaded to trump the previous version, that is also encouraged. Learning, quality, and appreciation are cornerstones of the private tracker ecosystem, in my experience.

Re: BitTorrent v2

#294

Post by sedatk »

Thorentis wrote: post #248
tomxor wrote: post #215

> not only uses a hash tree, but it forms a hash tree for every file in the torrent [...] > Files that are identical can also more easily be identified across different swarms, since their root hash only depends on the content of the file. Wait, content addressed blobs across swarms... does that mean torrents made by completely different people at different times that happen to contain one or more identical files can…

This right here is the biggest new feature in my opinion, and should have been discussed in more depth in the announcement. I also think they should have pursued this avenue further before releasing v2. Content addressing is one of the big advantages of p2p applications, and IPFS has been pushing it for a long time. Just imagine if this was done all the way down to the piece level. You have two different torrents (sa…

Only if blocks have the same offset in the same binary and if they align with the block boundaries. Otherwise, different hashes would be generated. I don't expect that to happen a lot.

Re: BitTorrent v2

#295

Post by crest »

proverbialbunny wrote: post #25

It feels like this isn't a large enough leap forward. It would be nice if BitTorrent v2 made it harder for ISPs to identify what is bit torrent traffic. AT&T artificially slows down upload speeds.

Switch ISP or retire its management by any means necessary.

Re: BitTorrent v2

#296

Post by meowface »

hkt wrote: post #284
int_19h wrote: post #277

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's also fairly successful as a way to transfer money.

And until recently, a highly successful way to _launder_ it.

Some other cryptocurrencies designed around anonymity are still very effective for that purpose. The only weaknesses are at the spots where the funds enter and exit the "laundry". (Converting to/from fiat or a less anonymous cryptocurrency.)

Re: BitTorrent v2

#298

Post by Daishiman »

dane-pgp wrote: post #251
empthought wrote: post #240

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> victim of central banks diluting their dollars with printing. So, nobody in the EU or North America, then.

Perhaps a better threat scenario would have been "victim of banks confiscating their deposits", which is a much more realistic risk for people in the EU: https://www.cbc.ca/news/business/cyprus-bank-account-tax-put... (Also, the grandparent post perhaps should have given some context to the statement "Lightning made scaling possible", such as the fact that Bitcoin originally supported 32 MB blocks of transactions, be…

The probability of a bank run is null when compared to the probability of a BTC provider tanking/getting hacked/actually being a fraudulent criminal scheme.

Re: BitTorrent v2

#299

Post by fomine3 »

Dahoon wrote: post #128
tyfon wrote: post #59

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That kind of depends on the price pr gb. To use the power analogy, when I was young the price of power was relatively high but in recent times it has now dropped to 0.6 NOK / kWh so even charging the car from 10-80% (~61 kWh) cost 40 NOK or $4. I do not get mad at the kids leaving the light on like my mother did to me. I (or rather my job) currently pays about 1000 NOK/ month for unlimited 500 MBit synchronous fiber…

I thought internet in Norway was cheaper than in Denmark. Interesting. For comparison I pay 449 DKR/month for 1000/1000 unlimited fiber with a guaranteed bandwidth of minimum 950 (they are upgrading the network atm. hence not a guarantee on the full 1000 yet as some customers equipment is too old). Is it a normal connection or a business connection perhaps?

> guaranteed bandwidth of minimum 950

Wow really interesting to see such high (assume Mbps) bandwidth guarantee for consumer service. Is the guarantee really work?

Re: BitTorrent v2

#300

Post by andrei_says_ »

rolleiflex wrote: post #83

I make P2P tools too. [0] Let me tell you this: Bittorrent is one of the few things in the space that actually ... works. It works not in the sense that there is a white paper that should work. Not in the sense that there are a few company-made swarms hosted on industrial servers that keep everyone up and alive, so that the thing gives the impression the 'P2P' network does work. Not in the sense that there is a very-…

Aether looks so interesting. Do you have communities that have adopted it ? In what use cases? How do they use it daily?

I like how the data expiration is set as an intentional feature.

Post reply on HN