Blah. You really think your the only one with 30/3 mbps? torrents just go looking for more hosts with content, and swaps low speed ones for higher speed ones.
And anyways, I tho it was stated (long, long ago, valve time you know) that valve was stepping over to some other download type http or w/e, where ISP proxies could speed up stuff. CBA to search my mail for it. As for its use on Bittorrent, maybe you should learn more about it, for you clearly have no idea. And I'm not going to waste a explanation to you about it. But let me say this: If it was implemented, I think the shell-shock for you will be 2 months after, when you finally find out that it was the reason why it was faster since that time. And then you will be blocking outgoing, which will make you go slower with downloading the content (guess why that is). And then we hear you again complaining about torrents. >________________________________ > From: dan <[email protected]> >To: Half-Life dedicated Linux server mailing list ><[email protected]> >Sent: Saturday, 18 February 2012, 23:22 >Subject: Re: [hlds_linux] Full Steam Ahead > >On 18/02/2012 20:08, Asher Baker wrote: >> On Sat, Feb 18, 2012 at 5:39 PM, dan<[email protected]> wrote: >>> p2p is a waste of time - most end users have download bandwidth more than >>> upload and the only reason people started using it is because they are >>> stealing stuff with it. >> Yes but there are lots of users, a lot of users with a little upload >> bandwidth would provide a nice boost alongside Valve's content >> servers. >Well no it wouldn't. This is the flaw that people think if they switch off one >lightbulb then all the lightbulbs add up and we save loads of electricity. > >But it doesn't work like that, you just save a tiny bit of electricty compared >with that being used overall. > >When I download from steam I'd ideally want 30mbps (60mbps in July) > >If my upload speed is 3mbps, then you need 10 people, with connections similar >to mine, to support one download. > >So you see, it doesn't work, it's a pyramid scheme. And it doesn't really >"boost" what Valve already has either since I'm getting 30mbps as often as not >from them anyway. > >The other reason it doesn't work is because I'm not donating my bandwidth and >neither is my ISP - so I hit caps and filtering and all kinds of other things >designed to make it rubbish. >(I'm definitely not donating when I'm playing a game for reasons that should >be obvious) > >Plus it doesn't scale. You see, if everyone company decides that "p2p" is some >kind of magic free bandwidth they can pinch from their userbase then my >bandwidth will be used several times over, by steam, blizzard, spotify, >google, Uncle Tom Cobley and all. So now which one do I pick? Because this >"boost" is getting smaller and smaller once you stop deciding p2p is great >because you can get crap without paying or the odd linux CD and think about >what Valve's requirements are and how p2p does not fit them. > >It would be much better to get ISPs to mirror Valve's content locally. If >there is a problem to solve. >Personally I downloaded the MW3 free weekend on Thursday without any problems >at all. >-- Dan > >_______________________________________________ >To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives, please >visit: >https://list.valvesoftware.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/hlds_linux > > > _______________________________________________ To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives, please visit: https://list.valvesoftware.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/hlds_linux
