RIAA Shutdown of Peer to Peer networks Highly Unlikely

[Bytronix]

Considering that the RIAA is now attempting to attack p2p nets, in the unlikely event that they manage to make p2p software illegal, (kinda like banning crowbars, hammers, nailguns, etc.) what are the odds that they'll actually manage to shut down gnutella? Correct me if I'm wrong, but wouldn't shutting down gnutella be almost impossible without shetting down almost every end user? Of which there are millions? Seems to me like the RIAA is trying to plug up a waterfall.

-Mike B.

[Bytronix]

Another thought as well...

In the event it IS possible to shut down gnutella, (odds of which I think are about the same as shutting down the internet) wouldn't that almost be considered censorship? possibly a violation of freedom of speech, not just fair use? etc.? Granted, in china they can block something from the web (kinda) if they don't like it. But I don't think it would go over in the US.

[MamiyaOtaru]

I am unfortunately unaware of how (and how well) the gweb caches work, so this doesn't take them into account.

While you could always try to find the IP of someone already connected, most people do make their initial connections by connecting to a large centralized cache with a list of online clients. public.bearshare.net, router.limewire.com, some others. I could see those possibly being shut down.

Still, as I said, people can find IPs some other way (will be a lot more inconvenient) and those gweb caches or something similar might work really well.. curse this temporary 1 GB hard drive..

[crackerjacker]

hi, this part *try to find the IP of someone already connected" is a good idea.
now, i am just going to talk a few about gnutella from my experience.
honestly, if i am correct, i believe that, these caches, for gnuclues, are accessible through the build in irc client, gnucleus has.
them shutting down gnutella, is impossible. as well as many other p2p programs.
but from what i can understand, the thing , i remeber, about gnutella, from the days, when it first came out you are able to input someones ip address into the client, to connect, and once you do this, you would be able to get more ip addresses from other individuals.

your right, public.bearshare.net. or public.router.limewire.
does host cache, a starting point for gnutella, to obtain other ip addresses. however, i believe limewire, now, uses gweb caches now. this is i believe, where websites, host these caches, regularrly, so it would be a starting point for gnutella clients, to obtain new ip addresses.

with all this taking into consideration, if the gweb caches, as well, as the other ways to obtain ip addresses, needed to be address, then far and beyond, i would say gnucleus, idea, with irc, is good, obtaining ip addresses from there.

however, if this wasnt the case, it would still be away to get, ip addresses. like i believe the old fashion way, u search the web, and seek out ip addresses.

although this wont be needed, because gnutella technically has improved dramatically, if the case, came where people needed to obtain at least one ip address, to be able to connect to another gnutella host. its a known fact, that people will be able to obtain the ip address, in various ways.

that is why in my opionion gnutella wont die,

as far as other p2p programs dying, they wont be able to shut down several p2p programs either.

dc, dc plus, edonkey, as well as overnet* and many more.
.
the point is, these types of p2p programs, have 3 reasons for never being able to be shut down.
one is people can always run a hub, t
so at any given time, anyone can host a hub
if that hub dies many more to come
two, they will always be away to get public hubs
three
the people *who wrote * these programs, werent dum.
i realize something, as for one thing, if someone creates a program, namely a p2p program.
they would want that the p2p program, to be un restrictive, in the sense, that anyone or everyone could run the p2p. and that there p2p program wuld not die.

anyways, this is my opinion, la la ..
*from my experiences anways*
later

[notbob]

uh huh, and they are really safe on gnutella, since the RIAA goes after the popular (read as napster, ag), and the weakest ones (aimster/madster)--since gnutella is strong (well distributed) and relatively unpopular (more unpopular every day) the RIAA has no reason to go after them

it's more likely it will go down from the inside, by a misguided, overquerying rogue client trying to be "popular" and get ad revenue

[12345678910]

I Don't Think The RIAA or Anyone Else Will Ever Be Able To Shutdown Gnutella.

[notbob]

yeah they are definitely doing a good enough job of that on their own...

[12345678910]

Originally posted by notbob
yeah they are definitely doing a good enough job of that on their own...

What Reasoning Do You Have Behind That? Just Because Everyone Doesn't Use KaZaA, You Don't Have To Hate On Other Networks Or Clients. I Would LIke To Know What You Are Going To Do When The RIAA Finishes Off KaZaA. And Yes, It Is Going To Happen. So All Of You Who Think KaZaA Is Invisible, Your Wrong. My Reasoning Behind Gnutella Being Unstopable Is That It Is Run By Different Means Than Which KaZaA Is Run From. To Put It In Simple Terms For All Of You Who Obviously Don't Understand, KaZaA Has A Centralized Server, Gnutella Does Not. Do I Need To Remind You What Happened To The Last P2P Client Which Ran From A Centralized Server? Didn't Think So...

[12345678910]

Originally posted by Krell
congrats nonbob, youve just been victemised by his 22nd idiotic post. I've been watching this crap grow all day, heh, I think he's in a conest with SUprEMeBeiNg.

somehow, they remind me of riding on public transportation

Obviously, You Are Mentally Retarded. I Just Posted Something(How Gnutella Will Stay Alive & How KaZaA Will Eventually Die), And You Tell Me That My Post Is Idiotic? Dude, Grow Up, And Learn Something About What 'You Think You Know'. This Is A P2P Forum. Talk About P2P Issues Or Shut The Hell Up.

[12345678910]

Originally posted by Krell


Ok you flaming idiot. You're brand new here. Unless you have read the posts of the people that you condescend to, you have no idea by what credentials the views are from. I read the thread, and I dont see where nonbob was hating on other networks or clients. (anyone else get that impression?)

From my viewpoint, nonbob has been right on in his assessments and quite knowledgeable when helping with all computer related subjects. You come off as a big mouth know-it-all with barely a few years real experience.

In the future, please dont put anything in simple terms for us who obviously dont understand, or remind us of how you know better than anyone about P2P Clients that run from a centralized server.

And lastly, for your info, we designed and built everything you know about computers and internet, and were in it before you were born, so go be a litle bitch somewhere else. Now hold your thumb and index finger about "this" far apart, and look down.

.

I Never Said That "nonbob" Wasn't Correct On HIs "Assessments". I Just Said That When He Mentioned That Gnutella Was "Ruining Themselves", I Believe The People Who Code For Programs Such As BearShare and Shareaza Deserve Some Credit For What They Are Doing, And More Than Just "Gnutella Sucks."

[12345678910]

Originally posted by Krell


whew . . all this quoting is seriously imposing on my coding. nonbob did not say that "Gnutella Sucks". He said this:
"uh huh, and they are really safe on gnutella, since the RIAA goes after the popular (read as napster, ag), and the weakest ones (aimster/madster)--since gnutella is strong (well distributed) and relatively unpopular (more unpopular every day) the RIAA has no reason to go after them . .
- it's more likely it will go down from the inside, by a misguided, overquerying rogue client trying to be "popular" and get ad revenue . . . AND
yeah they are definitely doing a good enough job of that on their own. "

It appears that he refers to the bastardizatoin from within by users and self-servitude. I never once got the impression that he dogged coders for assembling a crappy product. (hey when did this turn into a microsoft thread?)

I dogged you because you jumped in with teeth gnashing and a haughty attitude. When nonbob made his statement, he gave a rational explanation to support his opinion. All you said was "I Don't Think The RIAA or Anyone Else Will Ever Be Able To Shutdown Gnutella" Hell any jr high kid could have said that.

The preceding statements by Bytronix, MamiyaOtaru, and crackerjacker all allow room for error in the opinions expressed.
They didnt have that nene-booboo-see-I-told-you-so sound to them.

Now if we can stop pissin around and get back to work, theres a war to wage. US . .collectively, against them.

.

Ok, I See What You Are Saying Now. So You Would Want An Answer Closer To This :

It Is Almost Impossible For The Courts To Shutdown Gnutella Because It Would Require The ISP's To Individually Block All Traffic Through The Gnutella Network For Each Individual Internet Service Provider. It Is Also Difficult For Gnutella To Be Shutdown Because It Is Run On A De-Centralized Server and Does Not Know What Files Are Being Made Available. Only The Users Know What Is Available and They Connect To Each Other And Don't Go Through A Central Server ( Like Napster ) Before Connecting To Each Other Indirectly. I Will Try To Make My Posts Longer And More To The Point In The Future. I Just Though The Poster Wanted To Know If We Thought That It Could Be Shutdown And That's It.

[whiff]

you really love those capital letters, don't you? it makes your whining nonsensical blather even more difficult to read than it already is.

[12345678910]

Originally posted by whiff
you really love those capital letters, don't you? it makes your whining nonsensical blather even more difficult to read than it already is.

I Love How You Make Up Your Own Words. "Blather", I Bet That One Makes You Look Intelligent.........DumbAss!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[notbob]

http://archive.salon.com/tech/feature/2002/08/08/gnutella_developers/

now if you can read, go there (message to krell really)

now as for 12345678910, i'll just break it down for you--if you want to wreck gnutella, all you have to do is create a client that just queries the crap out of the system (like edonkeybot, only for gnutella), essentially destroying it from the inside out--and gnutella developers (first xolox, then qtraxmax, and probably new morpheus) have done this, or are doing this currently

gnutella has been steadily losing users--its not a value asessment, it's a fact. i don't like kazaa, but it is absorbing users from all clients, especially gnutella (like rats leaving a sinking ship so to speak)

gnutellas current user base= 154,000
that is by far a lot less than the million or so directly after the crash of napster

[backmann]

1234.... has a point. It is really much more difficult (if possible) to shut down gnutella than to shut down fasttrack, because Gnutella is a fully decentralised network. The only ones capable of destroying it are its own users.

Ivan
"In the dark we make a brighter light"

[notbob]

Originally posted by backmann
The only ones capable of destroying it are its own users.


exactly-- so as to the initial question posed "Can gnutella be shut down?"

yes if it can be brought down by its users, it can be brought down by anyone--RIAA, MPAA, DOJ, GNU--anyone with the werewithal to create and distribute a "poisoned peer"

[notbob]

no insult intended--actually a compliment, since i know you CAN and DO read

unlike a lot of 14 year old chimps who whose brains are not put in gear before their mouths hit 90

[12345678910]

I Read The Link That You Provided And I Think That Will Only Work If The Corrupted Network Starts To Connect To Other Networks Other Than Themselves. I Use Bearshare And It Is Configured To Connect To Bearshare Users First And So On And So On. So If No One I Am Connected To Is Connected To The Corrupted Network, Then No One WIll Have A Promblem. I Believe It Is Also Possible In Some Clients To Block Out Other Clients (Like BearShare Does Or Can Do To Xolox, Limewire, And Morpheus.) So If Only BearShare Users Conect To Other Bearshare Users And Block Out Other Clients Then BearShare Won't See The Effects Of The Other Clients Continous "Re-Query" Ways. ( I Used Bearshare As An Example When I Think It Is Possible For This To Take Affect In Another Client As Well)