Re: [MLUG - DISCUSSION] Napster alternatives

["Igor Izyumin Jr." <EMAIL:PROTECTED>]

On Tuesday 13 February 2001 11:14, Hunter Cook wrote:
> That's right...gnapster will not save us from the upcoming napster
> fees...They are going to charge for the login, so regardless of your client
> you will need to pay to make it work.  But napster is junk anyway.  I mean,
> we all use it because it's *available*, but it is seriously flawed.  One
> file type (no vorbis?)?  Central server?  It's not only politically and
> legally unstable, it's not particularly robust or flexible, either.  I have
> been wondering for quite some time when we will go to the next level and
> build some sort of open-standardized, filetype-independant, peer-to-peer,
> secure, and fast protocol for simple file transfer.  I'm not much of an
> expert in this arena, but if an internet "community" can build a whole
> posix system, I don't see why we couldn't whip napster.  Anyone know of any
> current projects in this arena?  Anyone wanna start one?

While I do not have any objections to distributing music over the web, I do 
have MANY objections to peer-to-peer file sharing.  First, it is against 
almost every ISP's rules.  Second, it slows down the internet because it 
attracts too many clueless idiots.  That's why napster is bad - it attracted 
too many people, most of whom were just leeching files.  A better system 
would have credits: if people download 10 megs from you, you have the right 
to 10 (maybe more) megs of downloads.  That would cut the freeloaders 
dramatically, cut off most of the clueless morons, and leave a system which 
has more content.  By the way, the thing you were talking about is called 
freenet and it's been around for a few years now.
-- 
-- Igor
--
To manage your subscription, go to http://mlug.missouri.edu/members/edit.php

Archives are available at http://mlug.missouri.edu/list-archives/