your BS anarchist attitude is ridiculous, and does nothing to improve the arts or technology. pull out your wallet and pay for art you like (it doesnt have to be major label/studio stuff) or technologies you use. i’m sure there must be some creators worth supporting aren’t there?

is there an employer which finds your service valuable?

And the reason BitTorrent works is that Bram Cohen recognizes that people are not altruistic. Tit for tat mandates that you “give” in order to “get”. File sharers have never behaved like pure, touchie feelies who embrace the “spirit of free file sharing among the p2p communities” as you suggest. Take a look at upload/download ratios of the major networks.

Lastly, why would a downloader be categorically opposed to pay for something? Your attitude is what gives us a bad name. I certainly despise the exorbitant prices and ridiculous format decisions the cartels make, but if movies were less than a buck to download, and i could get whatever i wanted all in one easy to use environment, i would be thrilled. Bram, I hope you can convince these guys to make a great download service for movies. it would really rock.

Don’t get me wrong, i think bittorrent is great, and bram cohen will surely go down in history. But this doesn’t change the fact that file sharing had a big role in the wider adoption of this. People like Ashwin Navin seem to be forgeting this and touting it like the success is down soley to their inventiveness and business savey. I have some bad news for them, it’s only popular because of the spirit of free file sharing among the p2p communities.

Who in their right mind would pay to download video’s, only to waste their bandwidth propagating it to other customers of the cartels. It defeats the whole point(you are effectively paying for both the video you have bought plus the cost of distributing it to others, all of which is feeding the coffers of the money grabbing mpaa/riaa and associates). Yes, as a delivery mechanism, the bittorrent protocol works well. However it’s just a protocol, like http, ftp and others before it.

You don’t see people paying for the pleasure of using the http or ftp protocol, do you?

a year from now, you’ll be a millionaire after selling it to apple.

i use azureus and thepiratebay, so no one is taking my pirated content away. bram cohen, bravo if you can become the steve jobs of downloadable video. i’d pay for a good reliable selection if you keep the prices low.

When the first p2p apps came out, they used multiple sources for downloads, why is bittorrent so different? it just takes that idea further by passing around pieces while you are downloading also, taking advantage of large numbers of users in a connection pool.

[quote]
“We are not a P2P network, and we are not developing file-sharing tools. eDonkey and the P2P networks can have the entire file-sharing market because we’re not interested in it at all.”
[/quote]

Nice attitude!. I guess this guy doesn’t realise what made bittorrent popular in the first place. Shall we remind him?

The fact is without p2p file sharing, bittorrent wouldn’t be what it is today. And the cartels certainly wouldn’t be interested in developing it for commerical purposes. I think Ashwin Navin needs to acknowledge this fact.

Does anyone really think bittorrent would be so popular if it only swapped commerical products and linux distros?, i think not. Ashwin Navin, i suggest you think long and hard about your arrogant statements, and the people who made bittorrent popular - (p2p).

besides the fact that the cartels’ files will be stuffed with DRM, adware, spyware and malware…

besides the fact that the files probably won’t transferable between computers or systems, as well as between friends…

besides the fact that it will not be free and that only (or mostly) the uninformed appleheads (ipod lovers) who purchase off-the-shelf systems (again, mostly apples) would consider using a cartel BT service…

besides the probability that the files will be mostly wmv/wma/quicktime/realmedia which will not play on standalone dvd players which support the populat divx and xvid codecs…

besides the anticipated positive reactions from lamescream news and media outlets (most notably the Criminal News Network CNN)…

besides all that - and more - how will the cartels entice their subscribers to continue seeding the files? if a person completes a download, why should they continue seeding it? they’ve already paid for it and won’t feel under any obligation to keep the file available.

and indeed, why should they? after they’ve completed their “purchase” (download) it’s their property and have no incentive to give it back to the swarm.

this is a very different situation than the current attitudes and mindsets of BTers and other p2pers. within these long-established communities have grown invaluable friendships of people around the world willing and able to share what they have - and not charging a cent. and it’s the sense of community, sharing, giving, not only of the files, but of time and help, also free of charge.

it’s doubtful that communities of trusted people such as we’ve come to know, can or will be formed though the cartels’ fee-based services to come.

probably, the cartels will come up with a ridiculous cashless point system for a person to accumulate downloading points, based upon how much one uploads. this would be such a crock of BS.

plus the cost of a subscription will probably be outrageous, as we’ve seen with the current online fee-based services for audio files. and if you think the current average of $1/per song is unfair, just think what the cost will be for a video file.

good luck to the appleheads out there. i know you’re just gonna eat this stuff up.