Well I guest I'm lucky since the java update. I've got no problems since well before 7th october. Can you confirm that virtual memory behavior on your two macs? Since the last restart of my LW I've been UP, downloaded four short video clips and uploaded 2.5 gigs with LW now using 468mg virtual memory :eek: Well at least I can't complain!

Ciao

drag & Drop from LW's window
 

Was anybody aware that you can drag & drop from LW 4.1.5's windows onto iTunes. See: http://www.gnutellaforums.com/showth...826#post101826 I don't know if this is restricted to 4.1.5 or OSX.

Re: re: fake files
 

I know that these fake files are returned by automated replies, that match any query, not only the queries that contain some porn keyword (although a number of automatic repliers are only targetting porn keywords to send their fakes, exactly like what happens in newsgroups whos name contain some porn keyword, and that are targetted automatically by robots. This is less a question of copyright infringement than a question of abusive advertizing (spamming), something that webmasters of porn sites are used to do since long...

Now that nearly nobody looks for porn messages in newsgroups because of these spams that fill them completely, and that email filtering is becoming more and more effective, I do think that these spammers are trying other popular networks (and Gnutella is one of these)...

We are only at the beginning of such attacks, so the current filters implemented in servents as well as limitating usage policies may soon become ineffective to protect the network from such spammers.

The copyright holders use other strategies: they want you to download some non-deceptive content, but that use file formats containing active scripting and links which, when activated, will monitor and limit your ability to download possibly copyrighted materials. Some of them include some active components, which are not technically spywares, but profit from the P2P network to build a parallel topology that allows copyright holders to inspect easily the content of the network.

The focus of these components is not to monitor your search activity directly but to build an efficient search topology reaching rapidly the copyrighted materials, so that they will be able to list their ffective sources, even if these sources are proxied through other servents: these parallel network build a topology that can bypass these proxies, because they behave themselves as proxies on which those wanting to hide themselves will connect without knowledge. For now they will attack sources, rather than downloaders.

A counter-measure for this kind of indirect monitoring is to really make Gnutella share only fragments of files, and to accelerate the adoption of swarming downloads from multiple sources, so that no one shares completely a single file, but some fragments. This could be done by offering, like on Freenet, a spare space into which random file fragments will be cached when downloaded directly or proxied for someone else. (Freenet goes a little further, by encrypting this spare space, so that even the user owning that cache in its PC can't know what is in this space where the cached and fragmented content is only indexed by blind URNs, without identifying information).

I don't think we need encryption for this space, which could be feeded only when the content is proxied for someone else, and not directly for downloads. This space would be found on the network through Alt Locations with HUGE, or by active searches for URNs (when this will work someday if we later find a scalable DHT to manage them), but not directly through Gnutella searches by query strings.

Careful: Caching is dangerous legally. That way the programmers could be sued, and I assume we all don't want this.

Yes, dragging from LimeWire to another application works. It was added in 4.1.3 -- see the feature history at http://www.limewire.com/english/cont..._history.shtml .

Caching is a universal technic for programming.
A programmer could be sued, only if it does not offer to the user an option to clear its cache. The detail level at which a cache content can be consulted by the user is not defined legally: a user just needs to know that there are data in this cache.

If it was so sensible, there would be no legal use of any proxy even for the web navigation. What is critical here? Are there legal requirements on what a cache can contain? Must we maintain a log of remote accesses to this cache? If so, we should also add a log for past downloads in the current Gnutella. I don't know the legal details, and I don't want to know more about it. If you are informed about such things, then don't program it, but let others do it, notably if such legal constraints do not apply to this programmer.

In US and on the Internet, until there's a legal constraint not to do so, you are free: what is not forbidden is authorized, and something can be forbidden legally only if there's a public statement about such regulation, and efforts have been done to make these constraints publicly accessible.

In France, a law is considered public and known, if it has been published in the "Journal Officiel" and some other private publications and newspapers covering the area of application.

In the European Union, a directive cannot apply to any member country before it has been backed by a national law defining its level of application: a member country can choose not to apply a directive, and can be attacked face to a European Court if there's no such law after a dead-line date, but even so, that Directive will not apply before there's a matching national law.

i have a problem with the beta i use it for mac os x 10.3.5 and it connected yesterday but now it isnt connecting at all

Memory issue
 

Just a short update for LW 4.1.5 (since I changed over from dialup to adsl last night): after about 10 hrs Real memory use was 620 MB, VM at 1.1 GB. But after I cancelled some old searches from last night & some completed files, Real memory dropped back to about 530-40 MB.
I'm just a bit curious b/c in my java folder in the apps utilities folder there's both Java 1.3.1 & 1.4.2 Plugin Settings files. Also in my OSX/Lib/Internet Plugins/Java Applet.plugin is for Java 1.3.1 I presume these are for my browsers?! I've wondered whether I should delete 1.3.1 settings file at least!?

LOTR: I would not touch to that if I were you, they do not have influences on LW. I would wait until LW beta 4.1.6 goes live to test the VM issue with open searches because I remember fixes by LW team related to that later than the 4.1.5 release. As said before, the VM issue is gone for me. Maybe it is because of changes in CVS. Either that or the only change I made to the CVS version fixed the problems (banning many Gnet client abusers).

Ciao

Well! Congrats on the ADSL (at last!) LOTR. You can always confirm which java LW is using from the sample bug report in prefs.

et voilà--Thanks for yesterday's reminder to try on both machines.
I ran both the G3 and G4 for more than 18hrs (as UP's; the usual 2 GB+ of uploads and a few big swarmed downloads), and the VM never went higher than 800 MB's on either machine, so I couldn't repeat yesterday's results.

I ran out of time to see if repeated "browse host" might be the factor, since that was what I was playing with mostly before. Browsing a host with lots of shares is still the number one way to get a non-responsive screen here.

I did do a safe boot/permission repair on the G3, though. Perhaps that might make a difference for you too LOTR (I'd be interested in hearing if it does).

btw LOTR--has your ISP set a monthly cap on the bandwidth? Automatic throttling starts here as soon as bw exceeds 70 GB in the last 30 days.