23 Jan
2012
23 Jan
'12
7:39 p.m.
On 01/23/2012 07:58 PM, David Riley wrote:
On Jan 23, 2012, at 1:26 PM, Chuck Guzis wrote:
To bad the tech gets to carry the cross here. I know of one big
government funded installation that uses bittorrent to distribute a
GNU/Linux system image to compute nodes in a cluster simply because
there wasn't enough bandwidth to do normal net boot of several hundred
nodes simultaneously in a reasonable amount of time.
I hope they can continue to do so without feds busting in the door...
/Pontus.
(Sorry for making this political)
Sorry, Alexandre, but I don't do
torrents--they've gotten a very bad
reputation here in the USA for a means of pirating intellectual
property. If you could upload this to one of the file-sharing sites,
that would be better for a lot of people.
Which is a shame, because it's
otherwise a perfectly legitimate means of distributing large files (e.g. Linux
distributions). I see the same organizations badmouthing BitTorrent as were badmouthing
CD burners in the '90s; what I found especially ironic about that situation was that
Sony was one of the major record labels pushing for things like excise taxes to counteract
piracy on writeable CDs, while they themselves were producing burners and discs.
There's nothing intrinsically wrong with BitTorrent, reputation or not. Does your
organization flag all torrent connections as illegal downloads? I know a number of
universities that do. It's a problem, because a number of legitimate sources
(Blizzard's game update mechanism comes to mind) use it as an underlying protocol and
get unfairly flagged as a result.
- Dave