26 Mar 2003 tjansen   » (Journeyer)

I don't understand the fuss about BitTorrent and similar systems. In the end I pay with my own bandwidth. For each file that I download I will have to upload at least the same amount of data, otherwise the system can't work. And here comes the problem: for me, as a regular dial-up or DSL user, bandwidth is much more expensive than for someone who hosts the file on a server. At T-Online, Germany's largest provider, I pay 15,90 EUR (ca. $15) per GB. On the other hand, when I co-locate a server, I don't pay more than 5 EUR per Gigabyte (at fileburst.com the rate is <$1/GB). And routing the traffic through dial-up, cable and DSL connections instead of dedicated servers is complete nonsense, technically seen, more expensive for the network infrastructure as a whole and almost always slower. The only reason why people do this is because a) they have flat rates and b) there is no easy way for micropayments. I think sites that require the user to pay for bandwidth are a much better way to solve the problems for content creators. Flat rates will soon be a thing of the past when things like BitTorrent get more popular, and even if the processing overhead for micropayments is %80 the bandwidth from a dedicated host is still cheaper than the bandwidth cost for many dial-up/DSL users.

Latest blog entries     Older blog entries

New Advogato Features

New HTML Parser: The long-awaited libxml2 based HTML parser code is live. It needs further work but already handles most markup better than the original parser.

Keep up with the latest Advogato features by reading the Advogato status blog.

If you're a C programmer with some spare time, take a look at the mod_virgule project page and help us with one of the tasks on the ToDo list!