P2P News Syndication? 266
Buggernut writes "According to an article at BBC, news may be the next major item to be passed around through P2P networks, thereby escaping the grasp of the censors' attempts to control the spread of forbidden information."
Remember the article troll? (Score:5, Interesting)
This may accelerate the outlawing of p2p (Score:3, Interesting)
Remember... (Score:3, Interesting)
Public Keys (Score:2, Interesting)
Find a journalist you trust? An entire news organization maybe?
You could check the validity of source every time.
No changing the articles after either... (Score:3, Interesting)
The only thing necessary for Micro$oft to triumph is for a few good programmers to do nothing". North County Computers [nccomp.com]
:: Usenet III? :: (Score:4, Interesting)
Which does make me wonder how a medium even less controllable than Usenet would manage to avoid turning every group into spam. You'd need something like Google News to make sense of it... but, hold on, we already *have* Google News.
Freshness? (Score:5, Interesting)
Now spread this out to a wide implementation, what news is 'worthy' and 'trusted' to read if this very untraceable route holds true? I might as well read mind-numbing, ultra-biased blogs, because that is all the system would amount to.
I go to the news outlets I currently do because I can to a high degree trust the articles, news without that trust is.. gossip.
P2P for articles, especially news doesn't hold true, how is the article propogated? Will I have to wait 2 days for a fresh article to make its way around the Internet to me? If I want news, I'm used to getting information when I want it, P2P fails on this point.
People think P2P is the cure to [insert internet downfall] because it works for MP3's. But MP3-P2P essentially runs off peoples greed, so there are mass copies of MP3's around, no-one cares if an Mp3 is four days, old, 3 years old, it makes not a difference, but hell, even MP3's are tainted, blanks, bad rips, misnamed, to assume this wouldn't follow on to any other P2P implementation is wishful thinking.
Not to mention that only when an article gains a certain critical popularity mass would most people be able to find it on the system due to the inability to search every user without having a centralised database/hub (which could of course be.. you got it, censored!)
Re:Remember... (Score:3, Interesting)
Now, the NSA on the other hand... Those guys are the reason why P2P networks like Freenet must be deployed...
P2P Sockets project (Score:3, Interesting)
the P2P Sockets project paper has interesting
comments about this (it's a JXTA core project)
P2PSockets Intro [codinginparadise.org]
Cheers, Joel
I wish I could read the article (Score:3, Interesting)
grrr...
Isn't that called "Gossip" and "Rumors"? (Score:3, Interesting)
And yes, there's a level of quality that you can get from professionals, but don't think that "objectivity" means there isn't a lot of bias. I'm not talking about the US's "Liberal Media" that the right-wingers whine about - the actual media are radically biased towards the Establishment, and if you want to find some actual liberal media you need to listen to Pacifica Radio or read leftist web sites. National Public Radio is relatively liberal in its cultural content, except for an obvious bias in favor of music by Dead White Europeans, but if you look at its poilitical coverage, it's still basically believing that the government that funds it are a really good thing, even if there are occasional individuals it doesn't like.
Oh, and back to the reliability of P2P-distributed news, did you hear that thing about Bush's trouble with Duct Tape?
Don't see it happening (Score:4, Interesting)
Re:Your one-stop source for news... (Score:2, Interesting)
--
Re:credibility? (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:The problem isn't censorship (Score:3, Interesting)
I certainly hope that is usually the case, but certainly not all the time. After all, Bill Maher lost his show, Politically Incorrect, because the advertisers pulled out when he said something controversial. However, the ratings didn't drop. The advertisers pulled out based on the content of the show, not based on the numbers. That doesn't make much sense, but that is what happened.