Recommended Posts

So an idea popped into my head for a new way to download torrents that makes it way easier.

You know how when you download a torrent, your system can bog down sometimes? Azureus is pretty resource intensive, and any clients tend to use all the bandwidth you have, making everything internet-based pretty damn slow. You can limit the transfer speeds, but who wants to intentionally slow down a download. When I download something, I tend to want it quickly.

So what if you could go to a website and have it download the torrents on their server, and then when you are ready you can do a simple/reliable http download? Torrents are notoriously unreliable and it seriously sucks when you download 99% of some 2gig file and couldn't use your comp that entire time.

There is a project called TorrentFlux that could be modified to provide this. But I'm not sure it's worth it? Would you guys use something like that? I would, but maybe I'm not the norm? Thoughts?

More info based on comments made: https://www.neowin.net/forum/index.php?show...ost&p=587507095

Edited by PeterOliver
Link to comment
https://www.neowin.net/forum/topic/460901-bittorrent-idea/
Share on other sites

Storage and bandwidth costs?

Let's say a finished torrent get's deleted 24 hours after completion automatically.

Bandwidth wise, a cheap dedicated server comes with 1tb of bandwidth. Let's say 20 clients on it each given 50 gigs of bw to burn a month? I for one don't DL 50 gigs worth of stuff a month via BT.

So an idea popped into my head for a new way to download torrents that makes it way easier.

I think its a brilliant idea for everyone: Your clients get files off BitTorrent easily, The other peers get a *good* seed, and you've got a business that has a good working revenue (you're only paying for the servers + what data transfer people actually use rather than having excess stock).

Remember that you need to factor in the cost of downloading, seeding and then sending them a complete copy.

Have a system that recognises when a torrent has already been recently downloaded and pass that on.

Let's say a finished torrent get's deleted 24 hours after completion automatically.

Bandwidth wise, a cheap dedicated server comes with 1tb of bandwidth. Let's say 20 clients on it each given 50 gigs of bw to burn a month? I for one don't DL 50 gigs worth of stuff a month via BT.

Well, by that logic. Everything seems cool and nice.

But, what you gonna do about the ratio (I understand the server gonna download, without uploading back to the tracker. I mean, if the server uploads, your bandwidth will jump even higher (Not including the upload of the finished downloaded file from the torrent to the user))?

Many of the clients simple limit speeds to other clients (Web based probably too) that just leech or limit in big percentages their upload speed, to keep the P2P alive.

In that case, it will take a big amount of time to download the torrent and not many users will wait that long.

It will be simpler to just put the torrent over night back at home.

You could make it paid (per GB, let's say) and market as an alternative to proxies for people behind firewalls or on public computers without torrent clients.

The price can't be high though, and provided most people (i suspect) use BT to download warez, we can deduct that they don't want to pay anything. And yeah, i think even advertisement will not be able to support huge bandwidth costs.

Also, while this is a good idea, the notion of waiting for the server to finish downloading a file, then you downloading off that server again will seriously slow it down. For the money you're paying for dedicated servers, you could easily buy a cheap system and make that a dedicated torrent server in your house.

I think its a brilliant idea for everyone: Your clients get files off BitTorrent easily, The other peers get a *good* seed, and you've got a business that has a good working revenue (you're only paying for the servers + what data transfer people actually use rather than having excess stock).

Remember that you need to factor in the cost of downloading, seeding and then sending them a complete copy.

Have a system that recognises when a torrent has already been recently downloaded and pass that on.

I think it would work that each user would be given a total set amount of bandwidth. Then, downloading of the torrent, as well as downloading of the file when it is complete, all comes out of that. The upload bandwidth used would not be counted towards the amount they are given, as that is outside the users control and we will manage/limit it fairly.

Also, each person's files are private. Only they will be able to access them, and a file is deleted 24 hours after initial completion. This way no pirated material stays on the server for very long if it is downloaded.

You would have to make sure the people are only getting linux ISO's, if you get caugt out doing illegal things you may get into a little trouble....

Files are deleted automatically after 24 hours. We would not be monitoring all the downloads and checking to see if the downloader has the copyright to download each file, as it just isn't feasible. BT is heavily used for legal purposes, and is even supported by the RIAA. (This would all be information on the site explaining why this is a legal service. Yes people will use it for piracy, but it has very very legit purposes as well. Large podcasts?) Warner Brothers is even going to be using it: http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/12694081/

Well, by that logic. Everything seems cool and nice.

But, what you gonna do about the ratio (I understand the server gonna download, without uploading back to the tracker. I mean, if the server uploads, your bandwidth will jump even higher (Not including the upload of the finished downloaded file from the torrent to the user))?

Many of the clients simple limit speeds to other clients (Web based probably too) that just leech or limit in big percentages their upload speed, to keep the P2P alive.

In that case, it will take a big amount of time to download the torrent and not many users will wait that long.

It will be simpler to just put the torrent over night back at home.

The server will be uploading. It will be limited and upload bandwidth is not charged to the user. Their alloted bandwidth is for the downloading of the torrent and downloading off the file once it is finished.

Good idea, especially when ISPS are blocking people from downloading torrents. Besides my modem cant handle torrents so this idea works for me.

CLick download shutdown the computer and come back later. Getting an email when its done? Or even a txt? Great idea!

Some kind of notification system could work as well, yes. But these downloads go surprisingly quickly on a good server with a fat connection. My test setup is a 10mbit connection, so just imagine a 100mbit line downloading a 700mb linux iso in a couple minutes max.

This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
  • Posts

    • So what is it, "Some exciting upgrades happened under the hood, and one of those upgrades is now available to all Windows 11 users." or "Also, you may need to enable it manually, as new features are rolling out gradually. Here is how to do it:" We keep hearing these are rolling out but they never seem to show up, we have force them on with ViVetool. Getting a bit tired of it.
    • Seems very lazy, so basically drain more battery power on laptops/tablets if this is turned on.
    • Edifier's popular R1280Ts bookshelf speaker can be a nice upgrade for your PC desktop audio by Sayan Sen Yesterday we covered a very nice discount on Sony's high-resolution SS-CS5M2 speakers, which are currently on sale for just $178. It packs the rather rare super tweeter that offers an additional level of clarity and "airy"-ness which a tweeter cannot provide. It's a passive speaker though which means it will require external amplification, which will cost extra. Let's say though that you have a budget of under $150 but still want a decent-sounding speaker that's active. The Edifier 1280Ts can help in this regard, as the unit is currently at a decent price of $130 (purchase link under the specs table down below). While you will not get deep sub-bass from the 1280Ts, you should get clearer vocals and highs like cymbals than a cheaper satellite-based 2.1 system. Obviously the soundstage and imaging will also improve due to the better reproduction of highs. As mentioned above, the Edifier R1280Ts is active and so does not need a separate amplifier, as it's a powered system with its own amplification. A great thing about this model is that you can add a separate active subwoofer to it too using the "sub out" option, which essentially acts like an LFE. This way, you can add in the missing deep bass. The technical specifications of the Edifier R1280Ts are given in the table below: Specification Value Total Output Power 42W RMS (21W + 21W) Driver Units 4-inch mid-range/bass driver + 0.5-inch silk diaphragm treble driver Frequency Response 52Hz – 20kHz Signal-to-Noise Ratio (SNR) ≥85dBA Input Sensitivity Line In1: R/L: 500±50mV Line In2: R/L: 700±50mV Inputs Dual RCA inputs Outputs Sub Out port for external subwoofer Get it at the link below: Edifier R1280Ts Powered Bookshelf Speakers - 2.0 Stereo Active Near Field Monitors with Subwoofer Line Out: $129.99 (Sold by Edifier Online Store, Shipped by Amazon US) This Amazon deal is US-specific and not available in other regions unless specified. This is a first-party seller link (at the time of article publishing); ensure that you also purchase from a first-party seller link only. If you don't like it or want to look at more options, check out the previous deals that we have covered, OR you can also visit Amazon US deals page. Get Prime (SNAP), Prime Video, Audible Plus or Kindle / Music Unlimited. Free for 30 days. As an Amazon Associate, we earn from qualifying purchases.
    • Appreciate the focus on UI performance, but this is going the wrong way. Instead of optimizing performance, coding to lower latency, etc. this is just throwing horsepower. This is lazy.
  • Recent Achievements

    • Week One Done
      FBSPL earned a badge
      Week One Done
    • One Year In
      Jim Dugan earned a badge
      One Year In
    • One Month Later
      Tommi118 earned a badge
      One Month Later
    • One Month Later
      sjbousquet earned a badge
      One Month Later
    • Week One Done
      sjbousquet earned a badge
      Week One Done
  • Popular Contributors

    1. 1
      +primortal
      490
    2. 2
      PsYcHoKiLLa
      197
    3. 3
      +Edouard
      155
    4. 4
      Steven P.
      84
    5. 5
      ATLien_0
      69
  • Tell a friend

    Love Neowin? Tell a friend!