[Mldonkey-users] here's a guy that I stupidly offended because this wasn't clear

[lenny bruce]

this guy probably DID write the how-to that I read...

but he was trying to sell the concept as a good thing
instead of explaining that it's how the MLDonkey network functions

meaning... the same system that is intended to prevent leeching
is penalizing us as leechers because our connections are asymmetrical
even when we upload as fast as we can... we can never win.



TO PIERRE:  I APOLOGIZE, I DIDN'T UNDERSTAND HOW IT WAS DESIGNED
but you also have to understand that this problem isn't explained 
anywhere.

I know most people's assumptions have to be exactly like mine:

I thought it was deliberately designed to overcome
the limitations of asymmetrical connections
by letting us download a tiny bit from a tremendous number of people
therefore not taxing their (or our) asymmetrical problems



On Monday, December 30, 2002, at 06:21  AM, Pierre Etchemaite wrote:
> Le Sun, 29 Dec 2002 20:00:47 -0800, lenny bruce
> <address@hidden> a écrit :
>
> > and the "suggestions" pages I've seen seem to be written by people
> > who have political views insisting we should upload more than we 
> > download
> > so I don't trust the advice because it seems to be skewed against the 
> > user.
>
> Well, you don't call it by name, but I guess you're talking about one 
> of my
> HOWTOs...
>
> "In a closed network, sum(downloads) = sum(uploads)"
>
> This is not just a good idea, this is THE LAW :)
>
> Let's observe a connection between two peers:

see... he's not only right but he's selling it as a good thing
and it WOULD BE a good thing... but we CANNOT do it... or do it quickly 
enough

you don't understand that even though we want to give back in equal 
amounts
we simply cannot do it because our ISPs are screwing us!!!

you probably get hate mail for your how-to
and you cannot figure out why... but it's not your fault!!!

I'm one of the morons who didn't understand what's going on here.

again, I apologize.

>    +---------+                                   +-------------+
>    |         | bytes uploaded                    |             |
>    | source  |---------------------------------->| destination |
>    |         |                  bytes downloaded |             |
>    +---------+                                   +-------------+
>
> If bytes aren't lost between the two peers, you have, for that 
> connection,
>
> amount of bytes downloaded = amount of bytes uploaded
>
> Now, if you look at the whole network, data is only exchanged thru
> connections, so for the network you have:
>
>
>       sum(bytes downloaded) = sum(bytes uploaded)
>
>
> It looks like you're fighting against the physics (well, 
> arithmetics)...

no, the ISPs are screwing us in America
forcing lousy asymmetrical connections on us

they give us no other choice
unless we want to pay ten times the price
for symmetrical internet access



> > are the P2P politics really weird here in this group too?
> > go ahead and embarrass them... it's good for them to see how psycho
> > they are.
>
> You're more annoying than embarrassing, I suggest that you moderate 
> yourself
> when you have to talk in public places.
>
> > [...]
> > I don't mind uploading but I'm doing a lot more uploading than
> > downloading. I thought the benefit of being able to download from so 
> > many people at once was that each person didn't have to upload 
> > incredible amounts...
>
> Then your logic was totally wrong, see above

see how stupid and wrong I am?

WE NEED TO GET THE WORD OUT THAT THIS IS WHAT'S HAPPENING
because there are a lot more morons like me coming
with exactly the same misconceptions about P2P and Donkey



> > but apparently I'm the upload king of my area. Who knew I was so 
> > generous? I'm getting nothing back!
>
> We have a very hard time getting good download speeds since eMule 
> peers are
> more than 80% of network. The HOWTO was written before eMule became so
> popular :(
>
> > [...]
> > I got patches from here
> > http://concept.free.free.fr/mldonkey/patches-against-CVS2.02/
> >
> > is this Pango's site? is this somebody else's patches? Who is Pango?
>
> That's me

oh god, I'm offending Pango... please accept my sincere apology.




> There are a few suggestions that I was not 100% confident about, and 
> that's
> written in the HOWTO. And for those I was absolutely not sure about, 
> like
> some TCP stack tweaking, I preferred not writing anything about them.

no, just don't try to sell the reality of the network
euphemistically as a good thing...

it isn't even clear to us that we can't win no matter what we do
because our connections are 10:1 asymmetrical


> Writing "straightforward, impartial explanations of the settings" was 
> an alternative, that may even more durable than suggestions (sadly, 
> 90% of those suggestions are now "obsolete" with eMule), but it would 
> have required a much greater effort: there's no straightforward 
> explanations because the settings are not straightforward. I would 
> have to explain all the possible cases and interactions between 
> settings, instead of suggesting some sets of parameters that work. In 
> the end, explaining how things really work would be the same as 
> explaining mldonkey sources (and more, if explaining interactions with 
> servers or others peers is also necessary) in plain english. And since 
> sources change, that too would require updating.
>
> I already spent several days writing the forementioned HOWTO, it's 
> nice to see my work recognized... *g*

no, don't give up on us...
it's important that we understand why it does what it does
because it's impossible to anticipate misunderstandings like this

again, I apologize... but I didn't know why it functioned that way.
Now I know I can't win no matter what I do... and that's the ISP's 
fault.


lenny bruce
address@hidden