Wetlook World ForumCurrent time: Sat 27/04/24 17:24:09 GMT |
Message # 7889.1 Subject: Re: A suggestion to circumvent bandwidth/FTP problems -- USENET Date: Wed 07/01/04 23:58:17 GMT Name: Farang Email: der_taucher@hotmail.com |
Report Abuse or Problem to Nigel at Minxmovies
|
Yes, I think you are right. Usenet was invented exacty for purposes like this: To distibute non-interactive content netwide with minimal bandwidth usage. Some years ago, all "real" postings to alt.binaries.erotica.fetish.wet-and-messy identified themself by including the string "WAM:" in the subject line and it was easy to configure your local newsreader to display (and download!) only these postings and ignoring all the spam and "aquasports" stuff.
But today it is difficult to find a free nntp-service providing the binary-groups. Most servers are quite expensive starting with 5US$/month. One server (with web-interface only) seems to be here: http://www.coolgroups.com/freenews4/showgrp.cgi
Today, most people think only of the www when talking about the internet, but in reality the www is just a very small part of the net. But unfortunatly the binary groups consist of more than 99% spam and are difficult (or expensive) to get.
But what do you think about p2p? Bittorrent is perfectly suited for fast downloads of legal stuff. It concentrates only on distributing the net load between all the peers, the bandwidth requirements for the server (called tracker) are really low (in contrast to edonkey servers and FastTrack Supernodes).
Farang
|
In reply to Message (7889) A suggestion to circumvent bandwidth/FTP problems -- USENET
By SoakHerHose - Wed 07/01/04 15:12:46 GMT Good day and Happy New Year.
I lurk quite a bit on this forum, and though I don't have any decent original content to offer, I occasionally support producers by purchasing videos and picture sets as funds allow. I can't help but wonder, while listening to people having so many problems getting on FTP sites, bandwidth being exceeded on webhosting due to posting of free sets, etc., why USENET isn't considered more often for dissemination of free content?
With Usenet, one simple posting of a movie clip or photo set is all it takes to propagate it to servers worldwide. Most Internet Service Providers have a Usenet server (if not, bandwidth on third party servers can be purchased by the downloader for a few bucks a month), and bandwidth is the downloader's/ISP's problem, not the poster's. Advances in redundancy technology ("PAR" files) have even made it easy to re-create file segments that didn't make it across the system. Programs such as PowerPost make uploading files and creating PAR volumes extremely easy.
I seem to recall that people were complaining about wading through spam a couple years back when MK tried posting photosets to alt.binaries.erotica.fetish.wet-and-messy, not to mention that a.b.e.f.w-a-m is home to many posts by "watersports", bukkake and other fetishes that fall outside the scope of wetlook.
My two-pronged idea to solve the abovementioned problems: 1.) Everybody wanting to download material should use a newsreader that either weeds out spam or only shows messages with actual binary content. "GrabIt" is excellent for this purpose and it's FREE. 2.) The wetlook community should petition to get a dedicated group instated for wetlook, such as alt.binaries.erotica.fetish.wetlook, to distance itself from the watersports/bukkake aficionados.
I know Usenet has limitations, but it seems like the clear winner to get free content to the masses with minimal hassle. I would much rather field a few technical questions about Usenet than wade through incessant "can't log into the FTP server!" messages.
Just my $.02 ...
I would like to join with the grateful out there and salute Leon, MK and the other wetlook producers who not only bend over backwards to create new material for us, they even go to lengths to provide free content from time to time! Great job everyone, and thanks!
|
Report Abuse or Problem to Nigel at Minxmovies
If you enjoy this forum, then please make a small donation to help with running costs:
(you can change amount)
|
[ This page took 0.030 seconds to generate ]