Want to read Slashdot from your mobile device? Point it at m.slashdot.org and keep reading!


Forgot your password?
The Internet

Decentralizing Bittorrent 674

An anonymous reader writes "Exeem is a new file-sharing application being developed by the folks at SuprNova.org. Exeem is a decentralized BitTorrent network that basically makes everyone a Tracker. Individuals will share Torrents, and seed shared files to the network. At this time, details and the full potential of this project are being kept very quiet. However it appears this P2P application will completely replace SuprNova.org; no more web mirrors, no more bottle necks and no more slow downs. Exeem will marry the best features of a decentralized network, the easy searchability of an indexing server and the swarming powers of the BitTorrent network into one program. Currently, the network is in beta testing and already has 5,000 users (the beta testing is closed.) Once this program goes public, its potential is enormous. "
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Decentralizing Bittorrent

Comments Filter:
  • Potential.. (Score:5, Interesting)

    by kmak ( 692406 ) on Thursday December 02, 2004 @04:58PM (#10978265)
    If it's allowed to be reached anyhow.. I have a feeling it's going to be tied down if it's the "next" big thing..
    • Re:Potential.. (Score:5, Interesting)

      by stecoop ( 759508 ) on Thursday December 02, 2004 @05:02PM (#10978338) Journal
      This thing could be even bigger if the traffic was encrypted. No - stop and imagine.
      • Re:Potential.. (Score:4, Insightful)

        by metlin ( 258108 ) * on Thursday December 02, 2004 @05:04PM (#10978384) Journal
        Hmm, but the overheads would be *enormous* - think about it. Even for a simple search, you'd need to be able to decrypt and see the file.

        But -- maybe we could use checksums of the encrypted files and have some kinda hash table to make it faster.

        Waste + Decentralized Bittorrent --> Death of RIAA + MPAA.

      • Re:Potential.. (Score:5, Insightful)

        by bloo9298 ( 258454 ) on Thursday December 02, 2004 @05:57PM (#10979244)

        You're addressing the problem of an attacker (the RIAA or their agents) finding you by looking at your network traffic. That's not what they're doing. They are finding nodes that offer files. The problem for the non-lame P2Per is that their node must tell good guys that they have lots of files and must tell bad guys that they have no files. The difficulty is that you can't tell the good guys from the bad guys on the network. One solution is to use private overlay networks, although the recent Finnish case demonstrates that it's hard to keep the "bad guys" (law enforcement in that case) out of the overlay network. Another solution would be use to use recommender systems, perhaps in a PGP style, but I haven't seen a P2P filesharing system that does that yet. Finally, Freenet attempts to give a sending node plausible deniability by hiding the true contents of a file from the sending node.

        Oh, in case you meant that you were trying to hide network traffic from your network administrators (also "bad guys" from your point of view), then it would be simpler to use encryption (perhaps layering P2P communication over HTTP/SSL or SSH to avoid arousing suspicion).

        • Re:Potential.. (Score:3, Interesting)

          by tehdaemon ( 753808 )
          What is needed to make this work is a system where it is hard/impossible to connect a person (IP address) to a shared file, or to a download. What is usually not needed is to encrypt the data itself.

          So the *AA can see that <file_name> is being transmitted. Big deal. If they can't figure out where the data is coming from or where it is going, who can they sue? (Hmmm... is that possible without encrypting the data at all?)

          • Re:Potential.. (Score:3, Informative)

            by trewornan ( 608722 )
            Anonymity is the main object of some new "next generation" P2P networks like ants [myjavaserver.com] and mule [sourceforge.net] unfortunately it doesn't seem to be possible to achieve anonymity without a considerable performance penalty.
    • Re:Potential.. (Score:3, Interesting)

      by BondGamer ( 724662 )
      Tied down by who? With programs like Kazaa and the current Bit Torrent running rampent it doesn't look like anyone is going to prevent a new P2P application from being launched.

      There is also no catagory for "illegal" applications in any country I know of. So even if it is prevented from being released someone will leak it and lots of people will use it.
    • Re:Potential.. (Score:5, Interesting)

      by l3pYr ( 754852 ) on Thursday December 02, 2004 @05:12PM (#10978530)
      Tied down by what? Finish it, GPL it, release it, done deal. My concept of how it might work: First, no server application or central server of any kind. Second, Client application (psuedo-server as well) sends out constant "seeker" packets blindly that it also responds to whenever it receives some. When it receives a response on a seeker packet a connection is established, forming a web of clients. Once 5 or so connections are established, we can stop sending out seeker packets. Do to the nature of the network, once we hit that many connections we have probably "connected" to the entire network. When a search request is sent out, it goes to the entire network because every client which receives a request sends it out to all their connections as well. Clients with no local matches do nothing after that. Clients that have a local match to the search send a directed response to the initial requestor. Reponses contain enough information to determine which files are identical. Identical responses are all grouped together, and then all responses are sorted based on relevance. When you choose to download a file, a connection request will be sent out to all those who responded for that file. All available connections are then managed locally (and updated regularly) as individual packet requests are sent out to all responders to the connection request. Once a packet fails 3 or so times that responder is removed from the list of available connections and the packet is requested from someone else. I typed this quickly at work, so if there are any gross inconsistencies or obvious errors please don't flame me. It's just my idea of how this thing might work.
    • Re:Potential.. (Score:5, Interesting)

      by leuk_he ( 194174 ) on Thursday December 02, 2004 @05:27PM (#10978798) Homepage Journal
      you mean supernove.org was down last week for a few hours, as was tvtorrens and some other major torretn sites.

      It might have been more than technical.
  • by Primotech ( 731340 ) on Thursday December 02, 2004 @04:58PM (#10978271) Homepage
    It's only for legitimate trade of legal files you own, kids.
  • Hype (Score:4, Funny)

    by heyitsme ( 472683 ) on Thursday December 02, 2004 @04:58PM (#10978275) Homepage
    Hey! I have this great thing, but you can't see, use, or otherwise evaluate it on your own. But it will be great when it's done!
  • Long live SuprNova (Score:2, Interesting)

    by iamzack ( 830561 )
    Didn't realize these guys were hackers, too. Wonder how many RIAA/MPAA scum got in on the beta test?
  • by Triumph The Insult C ( 586706 ) on Thursday December 02, 2004 @04:59PM (#10978283) Homepage Journal
    just the end was affected. the correct version is

    its potential for lawsuits from 'artist' organizations is enormous
  • Wonderful! (Score:5, Insightful)

    by DaHat ( 247651 ) on Thursday December 02, 2004 @04:59PM (#10978288) Homepage
    Just imagine the benefits of the system, with so many new trackers, the RIAA/MPAA will demand even more when they haul you into court.

    "Your honor, the defendant wasn't just a person sharing the file, our records indicate that he was the person sharing the file, running a server, not just a client on a network with files to share"
  • by Leperflesh ( 200805 ) on Thursday December 02, 2004 @04:59PM (#10978300) Homepage Journal
    There are just so many different P2P products these days. Doesn't each new one subdivide the market more? If half of the torrent folks use the new thing, and half stick with bittorrent, don't both of them become less useful? I'm not sure what can be done about that, and I'm not saying there shouldn't be progress. But I miss the days when there was only Napster, and you never came up blank on your search terms. -Lep
    • Not really. (Score:5, Insightful)

      by nathan s ( 719490 ) on Thursday December 02, 2004 @05:02PM (#10978349) Homepage
      Just a minor thing - if half use each, then bittorrent becomes LESS useful and exeem becomes much MORE useful than with only 5000 beta testers.

      I say let's give it a chance - never know, it might make up for what you miss:-) Worst case, no one will use it and everyone will stick with regular bittorrent.

    • Yeah, and a while back, they were saying the same thing about that new-fangled "horseless carriage."

      If this is a really good/new thing, it could conceivably replace the old things entirely.
    • amen to that brother,

      I remember in the glory days of Napster, when it was the only player in town, you could find damn near any mp3/album you wanted. Now with so many different apps and networks out there, I find it much more hit or miss. And i don't think it has anything to do with the RIAA crackdown. The files are still out there, just spread out across a bunch of different networks. I use Shareaza, and have decent luck cause it hits a few different networks, but nothing like Napster from 2000-2001.
  • by nil5 ( 538942 )
    I think the biggest win is the ease of finding files. Theoretically this would allow file information to propagate, and I tihnk the most interesting problem that will be faced is stability. How do you make effective searches that do not loop around the network?

    This could be a really cool development, and there is a lot of research in the EE/CS community right now going in to studying these decentralized networks. They show great promise!

  • But... (Score:5, Insightful)

    by rosewood ( 99925 ) <(rosewood) (at) (chat.ru)> on Thursday December 02, 2004 @05:00PM (#10978304) Homepage Journal
    With the IP addresses still out there, wtf is the point?
    • Re:But... (Score:5, Funny)

      by oexeo ( 816786 ) on Thursday December 02, 2004 @05:19PM (#10978645)
      > With the IP addresses still out there, wtf is the point?

      If your computer has a IP address; your Microsoft is probably infected with a virus horse from one of the internets.
      • Re:But... (Score:5, Funny)

        by daeley ( 126313 ) * on Thursday December 02, 2004 @05:21PM (#10978690) Homepage
        If your computer has a IP address; your Microsoft is probably infected with a virus horse from one of the internets.

        If the Slim Whitman defense doesn't work out when Mars attacks, I suggest we use that phrase to make the Martians' heads explode. Gave me a headache just reading it. ;)
    • Re:But... (Score:5, Interesting)

      by Hatta ( 162192 ) on Thursday December 02, 2004 @05:30PM (#10978846) Journal
      With the IP addresses still out there, wtf is the point?

      The point is to move the bandwidth load of providing all those .torrents off of suprnova.org and onto the users. This way we wont have to deal with tracker downtime due to overload/ddos.
  • Shweet! (Score:3, Interesting)

    by jargoone ( 166102 ) * on Thursday December 02, 2004 @05:00PM (#10978308)
    The only time I ever had a problem with torrents is when downloading something very timely and popular, and the tracker would get soaked. This happened with both Fedora Core 1 and 2. Take away this one tiny problem, and you have a perfect technology.
  • Wait... (Score:5, Interesting)

    by Pxtl ( 151020 ) on Thursday December 02, 2004 @05:00PM (#10978316) Homepage
    So BitTorrent took the whole "everybody's on the same network" and converted it into "one network per file".... and now this new system puts it *back* like that? How is this different from every other p2p filewhoring system?
    • Re:Wait... (Score:5, Informative)

      by Kelerain ( 577551 ) <avc_mapmaster@ho ... om minus painter> on Thursday December 02, 2004 @05:06PM (#10978407)
      Because, theory goes, finding one person with that file finds everyone with that file, and furthermore you get the organized anti-leeching distribution advantage of bit torrent. You can think of it this way. Bit torrent works well, right? This is just a different way of finding torrents.
  • by Omniscientist ( 806841 ) <(matt) (at) (badecho.com)> on Thursday December 02, 2004 @05:01PM (#10978325) Homepage
    How can you truly decentralize P2P? Don't we still need to hit up a server that has a list of all the people? How can you track the trackers if you don't have a list of who is sharing? The only way I can think is just crude port scanning across subnets...can anyone clarify this for me?
    • Port scanning for this purpose ? Naah, why be brutal and unethical (on the top of sharing, that is) since we have service discovery solutions for ages now.

    • Assume every node connects to some number of "neighbors", and you can query a node and request its list of neighbors. You can then find a fairly random node from a N node network by starting from any node, picking one of its neighbors at random, then picking one of its neighbors at random and so forth about log N times. Then, assuming the network connections were random to start with, the node you pick has a uniform probability of being any of the N nodes in the network. You pick this node as your neighb
  • The point of Exeem (Score:5, Informative)

    by bairy ( 755347 ) * on Thursday December 02, 2004 @05:01PM (#10978326) Homepage
    is to basically become a Kazaa but using the bittorrent protocol. I was one of the beta testers and I can say it works well, it's fast it's efficient and because it doesn't have to faff around with one tracker it starts transferring the second, *the second* you add the torrent.

    Publishing a torrent is incredibly easy, drag the folder in, pick a category, click go. It hashes it and it starts seeding within seconds.

    It still (obviously) needs some work doing to the app to make it more friendly but it's shaping up well.

    • Is there any encryption or anonymity?

      Not really much point if it is just as easy to be caught. You would think suprnova.org of all groups would want it this way.
      • Well atm you can't access any pages or anything to list what ip addresses are connected to you, all you have is usernames that you can make up and change as you fancy. No encryption as yet but it is still early days.
      • by DaHat ( 247651 )
        How would encryption save you? Once the protocol is understood, one need only build a client (or modify an existing open source one) to download a particular file, all the while logging each and every IP it gets a bit of the file from. Once done, you verify the file is infringing on someone's copyright, and bam, you let the C&D's fly against all of those IP's you logged.

        Unless you can completely remove the IP from the process (ie go through some anonymous proxy), you are still catchable once BayTSP and
        • by MindStalker ( 22827 ) <mindstalker@g[ ]l.com ['mai' in gap]> on Thursday December 02, 2004 @05:48PM (#10979123) Journal
          I think he is referrering to a system like freenet where files are routed through random users, and said user has no way of knowing what files are routed through them because its encrypted. Even the files you are sharing on yor computer are encrypted and get spread out and split up in pieces among everyone else, so just because you have a piece of the file doesn't mean you asked for it. Its all about plausable deniability. You can't prove who put a file on the network, and you someone has no idea as to what files or pieces of files their computer is sharing.
    • which licence it uses, GPL?
    • by Hatta ( 162192 )
      I was one of the beta testers and I can say it works

      It's slashdotted, so I can't find these things out for myself. Is this just a p2p app for .torrents? Can the .torrents be used in a normal bittorrent client? Is there a console unix client? I'll still be able to use my btlaunchmany.py wrapper script right?
  • I like Suprnova... (Score:5, Insightful)

    by antiMStroll ( 664213 ) on Thursday December 02, 2004 @05:01PM (#10978329)
    ..for the same reason I like Usenet. Files are pre-sorted by genre and by fans, making it easy to discover new music and film of the kind that interest you. Kazaa is only good for getting copies of what you already know.
  • Excellent (Score:3, Interesting)

    by techsoldaten ( 309296 ) * on Thursday December 02, 2004 @05:02PM (#10978340) Journal
    This is excellent news from a user standpoint. I use Bittorrent for just about everything - downloading Linux distributions, game betas and, uh... other commonly downloaded files. But I always seem to be a bit behind the tracker, and when I go to download there are hardly ever more than 5 peers at a time.

    What I want to know is: basically, this is an indexing server that will allow torrents to be searchable. What happens with multiple versions of the same torrent? For instance, let's say there are 2 torrent distributions of Gentoo, identical files within the torrents. It would seem this server would ideally be able to recognize the similarities and kind of 'merge' the files - is this possible?

  • Most important thing (Score:5, Interesting)

    by ultrabot ( 200914 ) on Thursday December 02, 2004 @05:02PM (#10978355)
    What would really matter these days is anonymity. It's a bit late to develop yet another non-anonymous network, when the real problem is the risk of lawsuits...

    I realize that full anonymity is going to be a problem, but at least some degree of deniability and limited IP address propagation would be a boon. SuprNova might have the name recognition to really give something like that a good start.
    • Actually, I think the best bit about Bittorrent is that it *does* have legitimate usages that are either street-legal (fansubs, rarities, etc) or fully legal and don't require anonymity and is being used for many of those.

      I mean, when everybody slashdotted Scaled Composites' server for a video file, they just put a torrent up.

      So SuprNova may end up doing more damage than aid.
  • by d_jedi ( 773213 ) on Thursday December 02, 2004 @05:03PM (#10978364)
    Pirates will be able do download their illegal wares much faster, without the inconvenience of web mirrors going offline by pesky interference by law enforcement officials.

    Let's just be clear: BitTorrent is legal, and can be very useful
    but the trackers on suprnova.org pretty much all link to ILLEGAL pirated files.
    • by Gadzinka ( 256729 ) <rrw@hell.pl> on Thursday December 02, 2004 @05:40PM (#10978981) Journal
      Yes, those damn pirates! For example, for last couple of years I engage only in illegal downloading of TV series.

      I mean, it's despicable, how can people distribute and watch TV shows that are normally viewed for free!!! This must be incredible loss of revenue for rightsholders, mustn't it? Especially when they don't care enough to release those shows on DVD.

      Frankly, I'd prefer them make those shows strait-to-dvd so I could buy them for 20-40 bucks a season. Maybe this way no power-hungry fatass exec would cancel shows like Farscape, Firefly, Jeremiah or Angel. No more fucking games with "ratings-scheduling feedback loop", just simple rules -- either it sells with a profit or it doesn't.

  • Freenet? Hello? (Score:5, Interesting)

    by RudeDude ( 672 ) * on Thursday December 02, 2004 @05:05PM (#10978399) Homepage Journal
    How is Freenet [sourceforge.net] not mentioned in this context. It is decentralized and other than the dropped packets / routing needed for anonymity it is swarming dowloads since any node might have the data you need.
    • Re:Freenet? Hello? (Score:5, Informative)

      by Severious ( 826370 ) on Thursday December 02, 2004 @05:31PM (#10978856)
      I gave freenet a try for well over a week constantly on and in the end it was still basically useless. It was about 10x slower than a modem. It is a great idea but from my experience it just doesn't work.
      • Freenet's purpose (Score:3, Insightful)

        by nurb432 ( 527695 )
        Remember that the purpose of freenet was NOT to share a bunch of binary files.. .

        Its intent is to allow people to publish *information*, ( i.e. WebPages ) in an anonymous fashion.. So judging it by 'speed' of your file downloads is an unfair judgment

        Anything else that is grafted on, such as p2p type downloads, chat, etc is just that.. stuff grafted on.. and veers away from the original intent.
    • Re:Freenet? Hello? (Score:4, Insightful)

      by burns210 ( 572621 ) <maburns@gmail.com> on Thursday December 02, 2004 @06:22PM (#10979555) Homepage Journal
      1. It doesn't work reliably.
      2. You can't host files, and it takes a long time to insert large(medium even) files.
      3. Files are dropped if not popular. Thus, you can't get rare files, only popular or recent ones.
      4. It DOES NOT WORK reliably.

      And this coming from a guy that hopes beyong hope that one day it WILL work. Today is not that today. Tomorrow doesn't look good, either.
  • I wonder how they will solve the issue of slow searches because it is a decentralized network. Do I have to propagate my search through several users, who may be really slow, before I can find what I want? One of the good things about a centralized list of torrents is that you can find the results really quickly even though the central tracker is the key vulnerability in the network. If the searches don't propagate fast enough, not enough people will get into using this new network unless they are forced
  • Is uploading a torrent of itself!

    MUAHAHAHAHA then nobody will be able to shut them down! MUAHAHAHA!
  • Cringely's rule (Score:4, Interesting)

    by Chris Siegler ( 3170 ) on Thursday December 02, 2004 @05:07PM (#10978444)
    I think they're ignoring the fact that to be the "next big thing" requires being more than just incrementally better than what it replaces. Bittorrent itself is exponentially better than a FTP or HTTP server when demand is high. And Suprnova works quite well as it is, so I think it will be interesting to see whether Suprnova holds tough if people don't switch to the new technology fast enough.
  • Bittorrent needs a replacement that adds security. The protocol's creator has gone so far as to voice that doing illegal filesharing on torrent is a dumb idea, due to its utter lack of any security features. That said, Once you add this kind of capability to torrent as mentioned above, well, it will have become kazaa's replacement in every way. Let's hope the signal to noise ratio for downloads stays high.
  • Decentralized everything
  • for bittorrent would prevent this: attack on BitTorrent servers [com.com]
  • by Anonymous Coward on Thursday December 02, 2004 @05:12PM (#10978532)
    always produce the best software!
  • 1)With all the lawsuit attempts and legislation in the works, we still haven't seen filesharing development dwindle as much as one would expect.

    2)The RIAA and their comrads are lawsuit crazy, but you haven't seen any "cease and decist" orders issued out to projets like this. A bigger thing to note is the fact that everyone seems to be a target - except companies like LimeWire who actually sell the P2P service and make money off of it (they get paid for the ads in the free version as well).

    3)How the heck
  • by Gadzinka ( 256729 ) <rrw@hell.pl> on Thursday December 02, 2004 @05:16PM (#10978598) Journal
    Until they release some info about the inner workings of this app, there's not much to talk about.

    There are serious problems with decentralising BitTorrent. One of the reasons that people have such good transfers on BT is that there is central tracker supervising particular file and knowing all users serving bits and pieces of this file. This way in case of high demand/high popularity files I achieve speeds over 1MB/s (yes, that's megabyte).

    Depending on design choices you can have couple of trackers with subset of users on each of them, or every user seeding file has his own tracker. In first case your client wouldn't be able to use all cloud, and in second tracker would disappear when original seeder turned off his computer.

    You can of course design some communication between trackers, or elections or some other magic, but it's too early to tell at the moment. I'll wait for more information.

    Whatever they do, I hope that there will be some console based client for this, because asymmetric connections at homes plainly suck at upload (hence on torrent at download too), and I'd rather keep running my torrents on the server plugged into the fast network.

  • Bah! (Score:4, Interesting)

    by tarsi210 ( 70325 ) <nathanNO@SPAMnathanpralle.com> on Thursday December 02, 2004 @05:19PM (#10978664) Homepage Journal
    Decentralized Bittorrent? Wake me up when they have secured Bittorrent and then I'll listen.

    My ISP, Mediacom, scans my network packets to determine if I'm grabbing a torrent of questionable nature. If they see it, they'll send me a nasty email. Hence, I'm on the edonkey networks now because BT is clearly not an option at the moment. I'm sure they'll scan those packets, too, at some point.

    Unsecured BT is fast, sure, but if your ISP is snooping...well. And illegal or questionable content aside, it'd be handy for distributing other files to people in a more secure manner.

    Or is this out there and I'm just missing something?
  • by yorkpaddy ( 830859 ) on Thursday December 02, 2004 @05:21PM (#10978687)
    The great thing about BitTorrent is that you are being pointed to a known file. You can judge for yourself who points you at a given file by what website is hosting the tracker. This is one of the reasons you don't get the spoofed files on BitTorrent. The fact that you can tell who is offering a tracker also means that the RIAA can. Thus the RIAA can sue this person. I see a distributed bittorrent being useful for non RIAA protected files. Once bittorrent is distributed though, the RIAA will start spoofing it.
    • The great thing about BitTorrent is that you are being pointed to a known file. You can judge for yourself who points you at a given file by what website is hosting the tracker.

      It is possible to provide the same chain of trust in a decentralised network, just digitally sign the release notes and hash values. By checking the digital signature you can check that the file has been announced by the same group or person that announced previous files.
      If content announcers issue digital certificates you could pa
  • by Free_Trial_Thinking ( 818686 ) on Thursday December 02, 2004 @05:25PM (#10978772)

    Any new big thing needs absolute anonimity. I already worry for all of the innocent civilians out there using bittorrent now to get their favorite shows and movies. I'm sure their transgressions are all being logged for future lawsuits.

    And yes they are INNOCENT. Here's one good reason why. We first must ask, why did the founders of the US constitution feel it was important for accused criminals to be convicted only by a jury of peers?

    I believe this is because they knew that honest citizens doing honest activities will often run afoul of the law, especially in a broken government where England (back then) or corporations today make all the laws. The jury of the peers is built into our criminal justice system in order to prevent just this kind of thing. I mean the hope is that a jury of bitorrent users will never convict a fellow bit torrent user. That's probably why we're only seeing civil lawsuits today by the RIAA and the like. I think I criminal jury trial for file sharing would be quite interesting.

  • Could be good. (Score:5, Interesting)

    by mogrify ( 828588 ) on Thursday December 02, 2004 @05:25PM (#10978775) Homepage
    "...being kept very quiet" (until now)

    This should be good... BT is without question the fastest p2p app (in fact, the only thing that has ever topped out my 'net connection), but it needs two features to kill off the others in my book:

    1. Search - it's no fun to rely on third party websites to find things. Hopefully now we'll be able to do this.
    2. Anonymity - BT could use an option for a system like Freenet's for making it really hard to tell who's serving who. Combined with the distributed nature of BT, it would be difficult to prove anything at all about BT users.

    The article is /.ed, so I can't speak directly to Exeem, but it sounds from the blurb like these features are a possibility. Hope it's free in all senses.

    Here's another thought: the current BT system is really good at dispersing new content, like distro ISOs and TV shows, through RSS feeds from central websites. It would be cool to be able to subscribe to network-wide custom feeds, to stay informed about new files that match certain criteria.
  • Why? (Score:5, Informative)

    by Julian Morrison ( 5575 ) on Thursday December 02, 2004 @05:45PM (#10979068)
    I don't agree with the all-in-one idea. It seems to me the problem would be better solved in a more modular way.

    (1) having a search that only indexes trackers, and can then launch an external app of your choice to do the torrent download

    (2) improving the bittorrent protocol so anybody with a seed can failover as the tracker

    When I want to download torrents, I want to use Azureus, regardless of whether it was a P2P searched torrent or one off a website. I don't want to have to use some all-in-one app that decides for me the One True Way that downloads shall be handled, merely because it implemented the search to find them.
  • by Zed2K ( 313037 ) on Thursday December 02, 2004 @06:21PM (#10979545)
    According to them no linux version for a long time. This probably means no open source either. Forget it.

    Some other stuff:

    "The main problem with kazaa is that it doesn't have hash system which means that if you make MP3 with same name and same size that's already on the network and someone downloads one part of this file from you the MP3 will be corrupted. (This is exactly what RIAA did to kazaa). And since people don't delete bad MP3's from their computer you have more and more of this files in the network. And here is where our client is different you wont be able to corrupt files in the network because they have hash.

    One more difference from kazaa is that we wont have entire folders of files on the network only those that will be manually uploaded from users. Kazaa has so many viruses because users don't even know they have them on there computer. So I personally think that we will have a lot less fake files on our network and we also plan to implement rate system so that if people find fakes,
    viruses, spyware in one of the files they will vote it as bad so hopfully not many people will download that file.

    What we are trying to do is bring best of P2P world and best of bittorrent together."

    About eXeem replacing suprnova:

    "That's a reporters view on it. Remember, they probably know next to nothing about eXeem, and are doing what reporters do best: bullshit. /. will give eXeem a pretty big audience though."

  • by aero2600-5 ( 797736 ) on Thursday December 02, 2004 @06:28PM (#10979596)
    I'm an Exeem beta tester that's been trying to give it a fair shake. I'll probably get banned just for this post, but here's some general details about the new client.

    First off, it's in beta testing, but it's not ready for beta. It has some serious isses at the moment. Torrents disappear off the network for no reason is just one of them.

    Second, they don't have 5,000 beta testers. They sent out 5,000 serials, but my best guess by looking at the network is that there are less than 1,000 actually testing it and never more than 200 or 300 people running it at the same time. They actually sent out new serials to all the 5,000 beta testers because they didn't have enough people.

    Third, it lacks the details. With most BT clients, such as BitTornado and G3 Torrent, you can see all kinds of details about the file you're trying to acquire, how many seeds, portions of seeds, how many complete copies are distributed amongst the peers if there are no seeds. Exeem lacks all of these details.

    Fourth, it doesn't use bitTorrent. It's based on bitTorrent, and uses libTorrent, but it's not a torrent. It's their own unique format. Exeem will not be compatible with other BT clients. It's use their client or don't connect. It almost appears to be a Kazaa rip off with bitTorrent features.

    Fifth. 'But it's open source? Why can't we just write our own clients?' From everything I can tell, they have no intention of making this an open source project. They're talking about the type of ads they want to put in it.

    Sixth: Pr0n. A lot of people like Suprnova.org and other torrent sites because there is no pr0n. Exeem has an adult filter, but 'Adult' is one of the more popular categories for Exeem users at the moment.

    Exeem will not replace bitTorrent. The problem I see is that Exeem is being developed by the same guys that run suprnova.org. [suprnova.org] Whether Exeem ever works or ever becomes popular, will they take down what appears to be the most popular torrent site on the web because of it?

    There are more problems with Exeem, but these are the major ones that I see. I'm sure some of the coders of Exeem will be reading this post. Please feel free to tell me where I'm wrong and why.

  • by owlstead ( 636356 ) on Thursday December 02, 2004 @07:19PM (#10980182)
    What I am missing from the enormous array of file sharing tools is a simple one. Sharing a virtual LAN with your friends. There are many VPN server/clients out there, but they are all point to point. What I would like is some software that emulates a workgroup LAN, so you could use simple SMB or FTP filesharing over a trusted, encrypted, distributed network. The tricky part would probably the broadcast packages and the IP range.
  • Platform? (Score:3, Insightful)

    by Macgrrl ( 762836 ) on Thursday December 02, 2004 @09:17PM (#10981469)

    Given the name, (Exeem), should we assume it is an exe file for running on Wintel platforms?

    Suprnova used to have a significant collect of Macintosh resources listed.

  • Blech... (Score:3, Interesting)

    by br00tus ( 528477 ) on Thursday December 02, 2004 @10:28PM (#10982004)
    I am developing a p2p app, and keep up with what is going on in p2p development. Some of what I'm reading here is wrong, so I'll make some points.

    One is that the Bittorrent protocol is thusfar the best protocol for transferring large files. The clients are designed to transfer large files. The Edonkey/Kademlia protocol exists to transfer large files as well, but it is just not as good as Bittorrent. It is much slower.

    p2p has to be looked at as a process. There is the search for information. There is the response to the search. Then there is the request to download a file. Then there is the download of the file. Each of these parts is separate and important. In Bittorrent, only the last part, the download is decentralized. The prior parts are not decentralized, are not p2p - even the request to download goes to a centralized torrent.

    Despite this, Many people figure that Bittorrent's partial file sharing, protocol attributes and program attributes are what make the downloading good. Of course, having a good source of current holders of the file - partially or fully, is important, as is having a good hash of the file, or multiple hashes in the case of Bittorrent. But this can all probably be done via p2p as well.

    As far as the comments on hashes and file integrity, this is not a problem at all. There are many ways to deal with this. If you want, you can still have a central torrent, but you could only check it once instead of many times. Or maybe there could be distibuted PGP signatures of the validity of certain hashes.

    As far as other comments, I'm interested in this so I'm glad to know, although I agree its vaporware until release.

    As far as Freenet, encryption, IP addresses and so forth - I think for technical innovation reasons, unencrypting, non-masking p2p technologies need to be developed for now. I'm also glad, alongside this, anonymous, IP masking, encryption-capable p2p networks like Freenet are being created. And once p2p becomes mature, I hope the technologies implement any encryption and anonymity that does not put in too much overhead. Turn it on by default, and let people manually turn it off if they want.

    As far as copyrighted material and so forth, I really could give a damn. Big corporations hate the idea of sharing, and trying to kill something like Linux or a GPL open p2p protocol and client is instinctive to them, just like the enclosure of the commons was.

    And as far as non-centralization being one of the benefits of Bittorrent, and decentralizing ruining it, I completely disagree. As I said before, file integrity and hashes are not a problem, you can do PGP signatures on hashes or something. Any problem can be dealt with. Bittorrent is good because it is the best protocol to deal with partial file sharing of large files. Any of its centralized features can be decentralized, some of them very easily, as I'm sure Freem is doing.

If you think nobody cares if you're alive, try missing a couple of car payments. -- Earl Wilson