Reviews:
 ·Verizon FiOS
 ·DIRECTV
 ·Optimum Online
·Cablevision
| One problem with this study.. While I don't mean to argue the contention that the majority of bittorrent traffic is infringing, There is one problem with this statistic, it uses the trackerless DHT as the only source of it's bittorrent information, and who uses trackerless DHT by far the most? Groups looking to bypass the need for a central tracker that can be taken down, aka thepiratebay, and other sites like it, which also have the most copyright infringing torrents.
Trackers that contain only legitimate content tend to not rely on DHT as much since they have no reason to fear the tracker being taken down and a real tracker is faster than DHT. |
|
|
|
| said by MovieLover76:While I don't mean to argue the contention that the majority of bittorrent traffic is infringing, There is one problem with this statistic, it uses the trackerless DHT as the only source of it's bittorrent information, and who uses trackerless DHT by far the most? There are also other problems:
•How did they query DHT? I am not an expert but I dont really know how to query a DHT for a list of all torrents available... Is it even possible? I don't think you can verify that a DHT node is cut off in some way...
•Out of the possible MILLIONS of torrents out in the wild they *from what the article actually mentions* query one DHT node? One that could focus on a specific genre of torrent... why was the total number of torrents available not given? Only a ~1000 file sample was taken from what total? 2000? A million? A billion?
Where is the code / methodology / steps to reproduce? The article just shows results and very basic info about the study. How do others reproduce to verify? What methodology and steps used so others can analyze (and scrutinize) the what/when/how?
This does not seem very scientific at all...
--
- "Techie" Jim |
|
 sivranBack to Opera againPremium
join:2003-09-15
Arlington, TX
kudos:1 | reply to MovieLover76
Re: TWO problems with this study.. A second problem is the extremely small sample size.
--
In dadkins' memory, Think outside the Fox... |
|
