3 ms·

Several companies tried this for distributing software. It was very controversial. Users were angry that software companies were using their internet bandwidth

Several companies tried this for distributing software. It was very controversial. Users were angry that software companies were using their internet bandwidth to distribute their software. Made a lot of people angry.

ivanmontillam 6d ago
If only Blizzard servers were seeders, and clients were only leechers, that'd have not been a problem.
- ehe78qhe 6d ago
  This is less efficient (in bandwidth, complexity, and monetary cost) than an HTTPS based CDN.
- mococa 6d ago
  There’s web seeding
- x-complexity 6d ago
  That's just a CDN, but now it's not HTTP accessible (thus strictly worse).
kzrdude 6d ago
Typical example to show that people who want to be angry will be angry, even for pointless things.
- mh- 6d ago
  As someone who was annoyed by it at the time, I don't think it's a good example of that. This was in an era of much more limited upstream bandwidth. The p2p nature was obscured from non-technical users in some implementations. So on and so on. I'm sure there are plenty of writeups from that era detailing why it was a bad idea. These companies already used capable CDNs to distribute patches. It was a way for them to shift their CDN bill onto their paying customers.
  - mitxela 6d ago
    I think it's like residential proxies. People get upset about "it's using my thing!" even though it has literally no effect on them.
    - mh- 6d ago
      I don't know how to respond to that, because it has quite a few negative effects on them..
    - bayindirh 6d ago
      When you have barely the upstream bandwidth to send the ACK stream of your downloads, anything sending something becomes a big burden on your system. Not everyone has the luxury of fully symmetric internet connections even in this age. Yes, my uplink speeds are absurd when compared to a decade ago, but when I ratio it to my downlink, it's still slow. I have no comment on residential proxies. Somebody doing something in my name is unacceptable to put it very mildly.
blharr 6d ago
>software companies were using their internet bandwidth to distribute their software If I understand the description correctly, microsoft still does this! https://support.microsoft.com/en-us/windows/privacy/windows-update-delivery-optimization-and-privacy https://support.microsoft.com/en-us/windows/privacy/windows-...
- himata4113 6d ago
  Steam still does this! For your local network only and not using the torrent protocol.

ivanmontillam 6d ago

If only Blizzard servers were seeders, and clients were only leechers, that'd have not been a problem.

ehe78qhe 6d ago
This is less efficient (in bandwidth, complexity, and monetary cost) than an HTTPS based CDN.
mococa 6d ago
There’s web seeding
x-complexity 6d ago
That's just a CDN, but now it's not HTTP accessible (thus strictly worse).

kzrdude 6d ago

Typical example to show that people who want to be angry will be angry, even for pointless things.

mh- 6d ago
As someone who was annoyed by it at the time, I don't think it's a good example of that. This was in an era of much more limited upstream bandwidth. The p2p nature was obscured from non-technical users in some implementations. So on and so on. I'm sure there are plenty of writeups from that era detailing why it was a bad idea. These companies already used capable CDNs to distribute patches. It was a way for them to shift their CDN bill onto their paying customers.
- mitxela 6d ago
  I think it's like residential proxies. People get upset about "it's using my thing!" even though it has literally no effect on them.
  - mh- 6d ago
    I don't know how to respond to that, because it has quite a few negative effects on them..
  - bayindirh 6d ago
    When you have barely the upstream bandwidth to send the ACK stream of your downloads, anything sending something becomes a big burden on your system. Not everyone has the luxury of fully symmetric internet connections even in this age. Yes, my uplink speeds are absurd when compared to a decade ago, but when I ratio it to my downlink, it's still slow. I have no comment on residential proxies. Somebody doing something in my name is unacceptable to put it very mildly.

blharr 6d ago

>software companies were using their internet bandwidth to distribute their software If I understand the description correctly, microsoft still does this! https://support.microsoft.com/en-us/windows/privacy/windows-update-delivery-optimization-and-privacy https://support.microsoft.com/en-us/windows/privacy/windows-...

himata4113 6d ago
Steam still does this! For your local network only and not using the torrent protocol.