[HN Gopher] The World's Oldest Active Torrent Turns 18 Soon
       ___________________________________________________________________
        
       The World's Oldest Active Torrent Turns 18 Soon
        
       Author : uniqueid
       Score  : 214 points
       Date   : 2021-09-12 11:36 UTC (11 hours ago)
        
 (HTM) web link (torrentfreak.com)
 (TXT) w3m dump (torrentfreak.com)
        
       | ryanmm wrote:
       | I remember using BitTorrent for the first time in the first half
       | of 2003. I'm a bit surprised that absolutely none of those are
       | still around.
        
         | washadjeffmad wrote:
         | The commercial web devoured the concept of the internet as a
         | place where information was freely shared between any and all
         | minds. I exported my bookmarks frequently all the way back to
         | the 90s, and practically none of the dozens and dozens of
         | communities that I was a part of as late as the 00s are still
         | around.
         | 
         | I remember the year when the ad people started bullying the fan
         | sites off the web because they were "stealing from creators"...
         | by driving clicks away from traffic whoring aggregators that
         | were worse, less curated, depersonalized, less focused in every
         | way than what they cannibalized.
         | 
         | The modern web feels so empty and full of darkness in
         | comparison. Nothing in it seems like it matters unless it
         | enriches someone else's mission of accumulating wealth, and
         | everything else is villainized that doesn't signal loudly for
         | the sake of the dragons how much it costs to keep the lights
         | on.
         | 
         | And I just realized the irony of saying this on HN.
        
       | nielsole wrote:
       | > easily saved hundreds of thousands of dollars in distribution
       | costs
       | 
       | For reference, a server in Germany in 2003 had bandwidth prices
       | between EUR.8 and EUR2 per gigabyte [0]
       | 
       | [0]
       | https://web.archive.org/web/20030810125406/http://www.hetzne...
        
         | matheusmoreira wrote:
         | Makes me wonder how much unnecessary load these streaming
         | services are placing on global networks. Problems created by
         | copyright. How much cheaper, easier and more efficient would
         | things be if we were allowed to use torrents for media
         | distribution?
        
           | cheschire wrote:
           | Streaming services are, for the most part, optimized to only
           | send you a portion of the file at a time, send you lower
           | bandwidth versions when the throughput drops below a
           | threshold, or in the case of COVID lockdowns everyone
           | temporarily dropped the max resolution of their services
           | because there was a sudden surge in home media streaming.
           | 
           | When it comes to video torrents, I suspect a lot of people
           | would start at looking for 4k rips (even if their devices
           | didn't support it), or fall back to standard bluray rips.
           | That's a huge amount of bandwidth when most people probably
           | are fine with DVD or upscaled DVD quality.
        
           | mindslight wrote:
           | A CDN box at a datacenter or ISP is more efficient than
           | uploading through the last mile, especially if that last mile
           | is a half-duplex shared medium like cable. I'm pro-p2p, pro-
           | home-servers, and pro-piracy, but I don't think it's
           | necessarily more efficient in terms of network load.
        
             | AnthonyMouse wrote:
             | The network load from P2P is about the same as it is from a
             | very well distributed CDN. In theory the CDN could be a
             | little better, e.g. if the network topology is such that a
             | user uploading to another user on the same segment has to
             | make a round trip through the head end, that will be
             | somewhat less efficient than a CDN box which is already at
             | the head end. But not by a lot. Linearly worse, not
             | polynomially or exponentially worse.
             | 
             | And that's assuming the CDN is perfect. That it has a node
             | in every place there are users. Which none of them actually
             | do because the world is really big.
             | 
             | Worse, the places without them are the places with the
             | slowest networks in general. If you're using twice as much
             | bandwidth on some 100Gbps piece of fiber in New York City,
             | the users aren't even going to notice that and the ISP can
             | just send more light through the glass. But when there are
             | a hundred users sharing some 40Mbps microwave link in some
             | third world village and all trying to download the same
             | thing, there isn't going to be a CDN node there and only
             | having to suck it through the straw once multiplies the
             | efficiency improvement by the number of users on the far
             | end of the line, which in that case would be a factor of a
             | hundred.
             | 
             | Moreover, you can get the efficiency benefit of the CDN by
             | replacing the CDN box with a box in the same place that
             | seeds popular content using a P2P protocol, without losing
             | the efficiency benefits of P2P for the people not near one
             | of those.
        
               | myself248 wrote:
               | Thank you for saying, succinctly and clearly, what I've
               | always figured was the case.
               | 
               | However.
               | 
               | If the _majority_ of traffic came p2p, then the asymmetry
               | of upload /download bandwidth on shared media like cable
               | modems would start to be a significant issue, wouldn't
               | it? Only on the local segment, but on _every_ such
               | segment.
               | 
               | In that case, the seedbox-as-CDN-node route would be a
               | no-brainer for ISPs to install.
               | 
               | Are we reinventing the topology of Usenet?
        
             | Retric wrote:
             | Not in comparison to other customers closer than the ISP's
             | data center. BitTorrent has significant overhead but can
             | scale really well for extremely popular downloads like the
             | latest WoW patch at it's peak. It's really hard to beat
             | when your exchanging data with a dozen people in the same
             | apartment complex.
        
               | mindslight wrote:
               | Only if that apartment complex is wired with ethernet and
               | a local switch [0]. GPON, cable, and DSL would all still
               | go back to the ISP's core, transiting the last mile link
               | twice. There are definitely efficiency gains to be had
               | with decentralized identifiers and distributed systems,
               | but with the centralized nature of the physical Internet
               | they're not always a win.
               | 
               | [0] or roommates want the same files and their router
               | supports hairpin NAT or the software uses local segment
               | discovery.
        
               | Retric wrote:
               | Last mile link twice, but still saves hops on an ISP's
               | core network as their CDN's are still generally
               | centralized.
        
       | EliRivers wrote:
       | This would explain why I've just seen it pulse towards the top of
       | my seeded torrents today. I will be dragging this torrent around
       | in my seeds until the day I die (or until some companies get
       | together to eliminate torrents).
        
       | smoldesu wrote:
       | Today I learned, _The Animatrix_ and _The Fanimatrix_ are
       | separate, distinct films.
        
         | vmoore wrote:
         | A lot of people learned that today.
        
       | dewlinedew2 wrote:
       | "With a limited budget of just $800, nearly half of which was
       | spent on a leather jacket" -- plus we finally know how much
       | clothes cost in the Matrix
        
         | dharmab wrote:
         | "We couldn't afford a wind machine for this shot, so we bought
         | a leaf blower from a hardware store. We kept the receipt, so we
         | can return it after we're done."
         | 
         | https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G025oxyWv0E
        
       | cesarb wrote:
       | Relevant: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=10962253
       | 
       | It's funny to be part of that history. As the article says, "for
       | a file to live on, at least one person has to keep sharing it",
       | and for a while, I was that person (see the comments on that HN
       | post).
        
         | jghn wrote:
         | About 10-15 years ago I went to download a torrent. It never
         | had many seeders and got stuck at 94.8%. It was there for a few
         | years. One day one of the very few, if not the only, humans
         | with the whole torrent must have connected as it was 100%.
         | Serendipity.
         | 
         | And then about 5 years later I lost the files in a hard drive
         | crash. Tried to grab the torrent again and all this time later
         | it is sitting at, you guessed it, 94.8%.
        
           | bserge wrote:
           | Someone somewhere has the exact same problem and they're
           | hoping a peer with the rest of the torrent will connect. That
           | or a seed box :D
        
           | leokennis wrote:
           | I once loooong ago tried downloading a rare music album but
           | it was stuck at 99.8% with 0 seeders and 2 peers (including
           | me) for months so I was pretty bummed.
           | 
           | But I neglected to actually check the download folder. When I
           | did, I found out it actually downloaded all the important
           | files, just the logo of the upload group was still a .part
           | file...
           | 
           | So I quickly downloaded another more popular release by the
           | same group, copied over the logo and lo and behold, now it
           | got to 100%!
           | 
           | That day I actually felt like a hacker...
        
             | FalconSensei wrote:
             | That's nice! When it happens with me, it's like a torrent
             | with 1 large file + the unnecessary files (txt, nfo from
             | the upload group), and the missing .1% is on the file I
             | want :/
             | 
             | But then, occasionally 1 or 2 gets completed, and then I'm
             | happy
        
           | pessimizer wrote:
           | I've had that happen more than a couple of times at this
           | point (often on Chinese or Japanese torrents), and I find it
           | very strange. I always assume that some long replaced-but-
           | not-thrown-away computer was turned on to find some old file,
           | and it immediately and automatically resumed its mission to
           | send bits of a 90s soap opera intercontinentally. Then after
           | the owner finds what they need, the computer goes off and
           | into the closet again, as I send those bits back to China, to
           | the other 5 people who are silly enough to leave these things
           | open for years.
        
           | SSLy wrote:
           | It's strange that your other peers didn't pick up the missing
           | pieces.
        
           | arthurcolle wrote:
           | What's the torrent?
        
           | [deleted]
        
       | hellbannedguy wrote:
       | It's too bad what governments, big corporations, did to a great
       | technology.
       | 
       | I don't even go close to a torrent site anymore.
       | 
       | It's just not worth being accused of something.
       | 
       | And to the Copyright Net Nannies--what's the outcome?
       | 
       | Musicians are paid less than before the crackdown.
       | 
       | Books are selling at an all time low.
        
         | NaturalPhallacy wrote:
         | >governments, big corporations,
         | 
         | Behind all of those is lawyers. Contemporary copyright exists
         | exclusively for the benefit of lawyers and people who can
         | afford lawyers.
        
         | nerdponx wrote:
         | It was never for the benefit of the musicians or the authors,
         | it was for the benefit of the record labels/distributors and
         | book publishers.
        
           | __MatrixMan__ wrote:
           | I think it was originally for the benefit of the church, who
           | didn't want people remixing the bible. They just had to add
           | sweetener for the publishers so that they'd cooperate in
           | censorship that would otherwise be to their disadvantage.
        
             | nerdponx wrote:
             | There are copyright claims on the Christian bible?
        
               | MomoXenosaga wrote:
               | You'd be amazed, it gets a new retranslation/adaptation
               | all the time. They don't give them away in a bookshop.
        
       | banana_giraffe wrote:
       | Mildly interesting to see the recent peer counts for this
       | torrent:
       | 
       | https://imgur.com/a/ur0dUb8
       | 
       | Something like 10,000 peers have been keeping it alive for the
       | past two years. Of course this mention is enough to drastically
       | increase it's popularity.
        
       | rhn_mk1 wrote:
       | An article about the oldest torrent and nary a magnet link in
       | sight? Sure, there's the hash in the picture, but that's weak.
       | 
       | What's the second oldest torrent? That's probably a better
       | measure of the network health, because it doesn't get attention
       | from articles about the oldest active torrent.
        
         | mindslight wrote:
         | Articles about torrents almost never contain a link to the
         | torrent, even though magnet links are more authoritative than
         | their own crappy https urls that can be arbitrarily changed.
         | Journalists would rather mediate your access to source material
         | than help you experience it directly. See also: Wikileaks.
        
         | em-bee wrote:
         | _What 's the second oldest torrent?_
         | 
         | according to the thread here:
         | https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=10962253 an article about
         | the then believed to be oldest torrent, turned out to be a few
         | months less old than this one, so we need to look for the third
         | oldest now to get a good answer.
         | 
         | on piratebay i found a torrent from 2008 that still works.
        
         | uniqueid wrote:
         | The first torrent I, and probably quite a few others, ever
         | downloaded was some Linux distro that Bram Cohen shared with
         | the internet as a demo of the protocol.
        
           | hedgehog wrote:
           | The first torrent I downloaded was one of the demo videos he
           | put on his home page in 2001 (I think there were two). Never
           | seen a reference to them since.
        
         | belter wrote:
         | http://www.legittorrents.info/download.php?id=72c83366e95dd4...
        
         | ivegotnoaccount wrote:
         | BakaBT still has the three torrents uploaded in december 2003
         | that the article mentions, and they are still up and well. 25
         | more between Jan.1 and Apr.30 of 2004, all alive as well.
         | 
         | Though I don't know if it is a good indicator. Even though, at
         | the time, BakaBT was semi-private and not private, lessening
         | the incentives to seed as one could download without limit by
         | logging out, it still has a system that rewards seeding
         | torrents with no/few seders.
        
         | p1mrx wrote:
         | magnet:?xt=urn:btih:72C83366E95DD44CC85F26198ECC55F0F4576AD4
        
           | [deleted]
        
       | MomoXenosaga wrote:
       | I'm a member of a private torrent site that has been around for
       | 15 years whose very mission is preservation. Everything is well
       | seeded even the obscure stuff.
       | 
       | But it's impressive for a public tracker.
        
         | wincy wrote:
         | I was pretty disappointed when a games archive torrent site I
         | frequented went down. It had every PS1 game in a nicely
         | organized bundle, and PS2 games. Hundreds of terabytes of
         | archived organized torrents, all gone now.
        
         | washadjeffmad wrote:
         | Same, and the outage yesterday gave me the willies. I've
         | accumulated a vast upload in that time, and I'm only waiting to
         | move somewhere without ISPs with packet limits to flesh out the
         | disk shelves and get the better part of it archived.
        
         | 0des wrote:
         | Is there a word for this interaction, where an act is taking
         | place with the knowledge that the action is characterized as
         | 'wrong' but done anyway to achieve an outcome that is
         | ultimately benevolent and a benefit to posterity?
        
           | edoceo wrote:
           | Chaotic-Good
        
         | voltaireodactyl wrote:
         | That sounds like a valuable and amazing resource, and something
         | to which I'd enjoy contributing! Are they open to new members
         | by any chance?
        
           | pessimizer wrote:
           | They are, but it's a little difficult (hence the longevity.)
           | Now that you know it exists, a little determination will get
           | you there, and it'd love to have you.
           | 
           | Yes, it's good enough that this discussion can only possibly
           | refer to one place.
        
       | [deleted]
        
       | BuyMyBitcoins wrote:
       | Regardless of what people think about copyright infringement, I
       | see torrenting as an essential tool for the transmission and
       | preservation of information.
       | 
       | In this day and age of convoluted terms of services (TOS/TOC),
       | xyz as a service/subscription, and just plain DRM, no one really
       | owns anything anymore. No one can be sure what version they do
       | have is the original and immutable version. Edits and omissions
       | happen because of licensing issues and just plan social activism.
       | Problematic content should be acknowledged but not purged and
       | erased.
       | 
       | It's vital people have the means to share data regardless of what
       | the powers that be allow to be shared.
       | 
       | /soapbox
        
         | IncRnd wrote:
         | > Problematic content should be acknowledged but not purged and
         | erased.
         | 
         | By problematic content, do you mean stolen content? What do you
         | suggest other than purging and erasing stolen content?
        
           | matheusmoreira wrote:
           | By problematic he means stupid things like GTA Vice City
           | losing parts of its original soundtrack due to idiotic
           | copyright licensing issues and people having their games
           | replaced with this "updated" version.
           | 
           | Also, you can't steal data. Copying is not stealing.
        
             | handmodel wrote:
             | Jumping the fence at a concert and sitting in an empty seat
             | is not stealing. But that doesn't mean it is moral, legal,
             | or to the benefit of the musicians + concert venue that
             | invested in the act.
        
               | Andrew_nenakhov wrote:
               | 'Legality' of some actions is not a Sacred Cow. A lot of
               | essential freedoms we now take for granted were once
               | illegal.
               | 
               | As famous quote goes, 'Slavery, Apartheid and Holocaust
               | were legal'
        
               | Lev1a wrote:
               | Or as Bill Burr said [0]:
               | 
               | > (imitating a woman defending ridiculous divorce
               | settlements): "That's what the law says!"
               | 
               | > (himself): "A hundred years ago I could beat you with a
               | mop handle, that's what the law said! Doesn't make it
               | _right_! "
               | 
               | [0]: https://youtu.be/x0gaYyNk7QA?t=603
        
               | albertgoeswoof wrote:
               | If that seat would remain empty otherwise, is it not more
               | moral to fill it? After all who wants a concert with no
               | fans
        
               | moehm wrote:
               | Moreover, if the trespassing fan buys merchandise after
               | the concert, you could argue it was better for the
               | artists that they jumped the fence.
        
               | matheusmoreira wrote:
               | > Jumping the fence at a concert and sitting in an empty
               | seat is not stealing.
               | 
               | Of course not. That's trespassing, a real crime unlike
               | copyright infringement. Physical space at the venue is
               | limited and the actual artists are the most scarce
               | resources there is. It makes sense to pay to see artists
               | you love play live.
               | 
               | No idea why you're applying physical world concepts to
               | digital "content" which can be infintely copied. It
               | doesn't work. Mental gymnastics like copyright exist
               | purely to enable rent seeking monopolists. It's not even
               | morally defensible. Artists receive what, 30% of the
               | profits of their record sales?
        
               | handmodel wrote:
               | Artists receive a fraction of their profits because the
               | distribution network is immensely valuable to them.
               | 
               | The 30% is pulled out of your ass. If I did all my own
               | editing and released songs on Spotify without any
               | assistance I would get a much higher cut. If I don't like
               | Spotify I am allowed to sell mp3s on my own website.
               | However - if I was trying to produce a high quality album
               | a year and coordinate worldwide tours then it is worth it
               | to me to share my profits with hundreds of talented
               | artists/marketers/engineers on my team or in contract
               | with my team.
        
               | matheusmoreira wrote:
               | > The 30% is pulled out of your ass.
               | 
               | I pulled it off a search engine. And that was one of the
               | better figures. Do you have better data?
        
               | edoceo wrote:
               | ASCAP, SEACAM and BMG I think are the big three licensing
               | orgs (USA). When you buy licenses from them they give you
               | some paperwork that explains where the fees go. They even
               | have a person explain it to you on the phone. (They took
               | steps to pre-emptively high prices) I've cancelled those
               | contracts awhile ago so I don't have handy numbers. It
               | might even be on their sites?
        
         | [deleted]
        
       ___________________________________________________________________
       (page generated 2021-09-12 23:00 UTC)