Home  ›  what happened to the world the jacka torrent download

what happened to the world the jacka torrent download

Written By Saturday, April 2, 2022 Add Comment Edit

Data distribution using P2P networking applied science.

Peer-to-peer file sharing is the distribution and sharing of digital media using peer-to-peer (P2P) networking engineering. P2P file sharing allows users to access media files such as books, music, movies, and games using a P2P software plan that searches for other connected computers on a P2P network to locate the desired content.[1] The nodes (peers) of such networks are terminate-user computers and distribution servers (not required).

Peer-to-peer file sharing technology has evolved through several design stages from the early networks like Napster, which popularized the technology, to later models like the BitTorrent protocol. Microsoft uses it for Update distribution (Windows 10) and online playing games (eastward.thou. the mmorpg Skyforge [2]) use it equally their content distribution network for downloading large amounts of data without incurring the dramatic costs for bandwidth inherent when providing just a single source.

Several factors contributed to the widespread adoption and facilitation of peer-to-peer file sharing. These included increasing Internet bandwidth, the widespread digitization of physical media, and the increasing capabilities of residential personal computers. Users are able to transfer one or more files from 1 computer to another across the Internet through various file transfer systems and other file-sharing networks.[1]

History [edit]

Peer-to-peer file sharing became popular with the introduction of Napster, a file sharing application and a prepare of central servers that linked people who had files with those who requested files. The central index server indexed the users and their shared content. When someone searched for a file, the server searched all available copies of that file and presented them to the user. The files would exist transferred direct between private computers (peers/nodes). A limitation was that only music files could be shared.[three] Considering this procedure occurred on a central server, however, Napster was held liable for copyright infringement and shut downwards in July 2001. It later reopened as a pay service.[four]

Afterwards Napster was close down, the nigh popular peer-to-peer services were Gnutella and Kazaa. These services also allowed users to download files other than music, such as movies and games.[3]

Technology evolution [edit]

Napster and eDonkey2000 both used a central server-based model. These systems relied on the operation of the respective central servers, and thus were susceptible to centralized shutdown. Their demise led to the ascension of networks similar Limewire, Kazaa, Morpheus, Gnutella, and Gnutella2, which are able to operate without any central servers, eliminated the cardinal vulnerability by connecting users remotely to each other. However, these networks however relied on specific, centrally distributed customer programs, and then they could be crippled by taking legal action confronting a sufficiently large number of publishers of the client programs. Sharman Networks, the publisher of Kazaa, has been inactive since 2006. StreamCast Networks, the publisher of Morpheus, close down on Apr 22, 2008. Limewire LLC was shut downwards in late 2010 or early 2011. This cleared the fashion for the dominance of the Bittorrent protocol, which differs from its predecessors in 2 major means. The first is that no individual, group, or company owns the protocol or the terms "Torrent" or "Bittorrent", meaning that anyone tin write and distribute client software that works with the network. The 2nd is that Bittorrent clients have no search functionality of their ain. Instead, users must rely on 3rd-political party websites similar Isohunt or The Pirate Bay to detect "torrent" files, which office similar maps that tell the client how to discover and download the files that the user actually wants. These two characteristics combined offering a level of decentralization that makes Bittorrent practically incommunicable to shut down. File-sharing networks are sometimes organized into iii "generations" based on these unlike levels of decentralization.[5] [six]

So-called darknets, including networks like Freenet, are sometimes considered to be third-generation file-sharing networks.[7] Soulseek is a first-generation file-sharing network that has escaped legal trouble and continues to operate in the 3rd-generation era.

Peer-to-peer file sharing is also efficient in terms of toll.[8] [nine] The system administration overhead is smaller because the user is the provider and usually the provider is the administrator besides. Hence each network tin can exist monitored past the users themselves. At the aforementioned time, big servers sometimes require more storage and this increases the cost since the storage has to be rented or bought exclusively for a server. However, usually peer-to-peer file sharing does not require a dedicated server.[10]

Economic bear upon [edit]

There is notwithstanding ongoing give-and-take almost the economic impact of P2P file sharing. Norbert Michel, a policy annotator at the Heritage Foundation, said that because of "econometric and information issues, studies thus far have produced disparate estimates of file sharing's touch on on album sales."[eleven]

In the volume The Wealth of Networks, Yochai Benkler states that peer-to-peer file sharing is economically efficient and that the users pay the full transaction toll and marginal cost of such sharing even if information technology "throws a monkey wrench into the particular way in which our gild has called to pay musicians and re-cording executives. This trades off efficiency for longer-term incentive effects for the recording manufacture. Yet, it is efficient within the normal meaning of the term in economics in a way that information technology would not accept been had Jack and Jane used subsidized computers or network connections".[12]

As peer-to-peer file sharing tin can be used to exchange files for which the distribution right was granted (due east.thou. public domain, Creative Commons, Copyleft licenses, online games, updates, ...).

Specially startups can salve massive amounts of money compared with other ways of content delivery networks.

A adding example:

with peer to peer file sharing: total toll = filesize customers × cost-per-byte {\displaystyle {\text{full cost}}={\frac {\text{filesize}}{\text{customers}}}\times {\text{cost-per-byte}}}

with coincidental content delivery networks: total toll = filesize × customers × cost-per-byte {\displaystyle {\text{total price}}={\text{filesize}}\times {\text{customers}}\times {\text{cost-per-byte}}}

Music industry [edit]

The economical effect of copyright infringement through peer-to-peer file sharing on music revenue has been controversial and hard to determine. Unofficial studies constitute that file sharing had a negative impact on record sales.[thirteen] [14] [xv] [sixteen] [17] It has proven difficult to untangle the crusade and effect relationships amongst a number of different trends, including an increase in legal online purchases of music; illegal file-sharing; drops in the prices of CDs; and the extinction of many independent music stores with a concomitant shift to sales by big-box retailers.[18]

Also many contained artists choose a peer-to-peer file sharing method named BitTorrent Parcel for distribution.

Film industry [edit]

The MPAA reported that American studios lost $2.373 billion to Internet piracy in 2005, representing approximately one third of the total cost of film piracy in the United States.[nineteen] The MPAA's gauge was doubted by commentators since it was based on the supposition that one download was equivalent to i lost auction, and downloaders might not purchase the movie if illegal downloading was non an selection.[20] [21] [22] Due to the individual nature of the report, the figures could not be publicly checked for methodology or validity,[23] [24] [25] and on January 22, 2008, as the MPAA was lobbying for a pecker which would hogtie universities to crack downward on piracy, it was admitted by MPAA that its figures on piracy in colleges had been inflated by up to 300%.[26] [27]

A 2010 report, commissioned by the International Sleeping accommodation of Commerce and conducted by independent Paris-based economic science firm TERA, estimated that unlawful downloading of music, film and software cost Europe's creative industries several billion dollars in revenue each year.[28] Furthermore, the TERA study entitled "Edifice a Digital Economy: The Importance of Saving Jobs in the EU's Creative Industries" predicted losses due to piracy reaching as much as 1.2 million jobs and €240 billion in retail revenue by 2015 if the trend continued. Researchers applied a substitution rate of ten percentage to the volume of copyright infringements per year. This rate corresponded to the number of units potentially traded if unlawful file sharing were eliminated and did not occur.[29] Piracy rates of ane-quarter or more than[ vague ] for pop software and operating systems have been mutual, even in countries and regions with strong intellectual belongings enforcement, such as the U.s. or the Eu.[30]

Public perception and usage [edit]

In 2004, an estimated lxx million people participated in online file sharing.[31] According to a CBS News poll, nearly 70 pct of eighteen- to 29-yr-olds idea file sharing was acceptable in some circumstances and 58 percent of all Americans who followed the file sharing issue considered it acceptable in at to the lowest degree some circumstances.[32]

In January 2006, 32 million Americans over the age of 12 had downloaded at least one feature-length motion picture from the Cyberspace, 80 percentage of whom had done and so exclusively over P2P. Of the population sampled, sixty percent felt that downloading copyrighted movies off the Net did not constitute a very serious crime, still 78 percent believed taking a DVD from a shop without paying for information technology constituted a very serious offense.[33]

In July 2008, 20 percentage of Europeans used file sharing networks to obtain music, while 10 percent used paid-for digital music services such as iTunes.[34]

In February 2009, a Tiscali Great britain survey found that 75 per centum of the English public polled were aware of what was legal and illegal in relation to file sharing, but there was a dissever equally to where they felt the legal burden should be placed: 49 percent of people believed P2P companies should be held responsible for illegal file sharing on their networks, 18 percent viewed individual file sharers as the culprits, while 18 percent either didn't know or chose not to answer.[35]

According to an earlier poll, 75 percent of young voters in Sweden (xviii-xx) supported file sharing when presented with the statement: "I think it is OK to download files from the Internet, even if it is illegal." Of the respondents, 38 percent said they "adamantly agreed" while 39 percent said they "partly agreed".[36] An academic study amidst American and European college students found that users of file-sharing technologies were relatively anti-copyright and that copyright enforcement created backlash, hardening pro-file sharing beliefs among users of these technologies.[37]

Communities in P2P file sharing networks [edit]

Communities have a prominent role in many peer to peer networks and applications, such as BitTorrent, Gnutella and DC++. There are different elements that contribute to the formation, development and the stability of these communities, which include interests, user attributes, cost reduction, user motivation and the dimension of the community.

Interest attributes [edit]

Peer communities are formed on the basis of common interests. For Khambatti, Ryu and Dasgupta common interests can be labelled as attributes "which are used to make up one's mind the peer communities in which a particular peer can participate".[38] There are two ways in which these attributes can be classified: explicit and implicit attributes.

Explicit values are information that peers provide about themselves to a specific customs, such as their interest in a subject or their taste in music. With implicit values, users do not directly express information most themselves, albeit, it is still possible to discover information about that specific user by uncovering his or her past queries and inquiry carried out in a P2P network. Khambatti, Ryu and Dasgupta divide these interests further into iii classes: personal, claimed and group attributes.[38]

A full set of attributes (common interests) of a specific peer is divers as personal attributes, and is a collection of information a peer has most him or herself. Peers may decide not to disembalm data most themselves to maintain their privacy and online security. Information technology is for this reason that the authors specify that "a subset of...attributes is explicitly claimed public by a peer", and they define such attributes as "claimed attributes".[38] The 3rd category of interests is group attributes, defined every bit "location or affiliation oriented" and are needed to form a...basis for communities", an case being the "domain name of an net connexion" which acts every bit an online location and group identifier for certain users.

Cost reduction [edit]

Cost reduction influences the sharing component of P2P communities. Users who share exercise and so to try "to reduce...costs" as made clear by Cunningham, Alexander and Adilov.[39] In their work Peer-to-peer File Sharing Communities, they explain that "the act of sharing is costly since any download from a sharer implies that the sharer is sacrificing bandwidth".[39] As sharing represents the footing of P2P communities, such every bit Napster, and without it "the network collapses", users share despite its costs in order to attempt to lower their own costs, specially those associated with searching, and with the congestion of internet servers.[39]

User motivation and size of community [edit]

User motivation and the size of the P2P community contribute to its sustainability and action. In her work Motivating Participation in Peer to Peer Communities, Vassileva studies these ii aspects through an experiment carried out in the University of Saskatchewan (Canada), where a P2P awarding (COMUTELLA) was created and distributed amid students. In her view, motivation is "a crucial cistron" in encouraging users to participate in an online P2P customs, specially because the "lack of a critical mass of active users" in the grade of a community will non let for a P2P sharing to role properly.[forty]

Usefulness is a valued attribute past users when joining a P2P community. The specific P2P arrangement must exist perceived as "useful" by the user and must be able to fulfil his or her needs and pursue his or her interests. Consequently, the "size of the community of users defines the level of usefulness" and "the value of the arrangement determines the number of users".[xl] This two way process is divers by Vassileva as a feedback loop, and has allowed for the nascency of file-sharing systems like Napster and KaZaA. However, in her research Vassileva has as well found that "incentives are needed for the users in the beginning", especially for motivating and getting users into the habit of staying online.[40] This tin exist washed, for case, by providing the organization with a wide amount of resource or by having an experienced user provide assistance to a less experienced one.

User classification [edit]

Users participating in P2P systems tin be classified in different ways. According to Vassileva, users can exist classified depending on their participation in the P2P system. There are five types of users to exist found: users who create services, users who allow services, users who facilitate search, users who allow communication, users who are uncooperative and free ride.[40]

In the get-go instance, the user creates new resources or services and offers them to the community. In the 2d, the user provides the community with disk space "to store files for downloads" or with "computing resources" to facilitate a service provided by another users.[forty] In the 3rd, the user provides a list of relationships to help other users find specific files or services. In the fourth, the user participates actively in the "protocol of the network", contributing to keeping the network together. In the last situation, the user does non contribute to the network, downloads what he or she needs but goes immediately offline once the service is not needed anymore, thus free-riding on the network and community resources.[forty]

Tracking [edit]

Corporations go along to combat the use of the internet as a tool to illegally copy and share various files, specially that of copyrighted music. The Recording Industry Association of America (RIAA) has been agile in leading campaigns against infringers. Lawsuits have been launched against individuals as well as programs such as Napster in guild to "protect" copyright owners.[ commendation needed ] One endeavour of the RIAA has been to implant decoy users to monitor the use of copyrighted cloth from a firsthand perspective.[41]

Risks [edit]

In early June 2002, Researcher Nathaniel Skilful at HP Labs demonstrated that user interface design issues could contribute to users inadvertently sharing personal and confidential information over P2P networks.[42] [43] [44]

In 2003, Congressional hearings before the House Commission of Government Reform (Overexposed: The Threats to Privacy & Security on File Sharing Networks)[45] and the Senate Judiciary Committee (The Dark Side of a Vivid Thought: Could Personal and National Security Risks Compromise the Potential of P2P File-Sharing Networks?) [46] were convened to address and discuss the issue of inadvertent sharing on peer-to-peer networks and its consequences to consumer and national security.

Researchers take examined potential security risks including the release of personal data, bundled spyware, and viruses downloaded from the network.[47] [48] Some proprietary file sharing clients have been known to parcel malware, though open source programs typically have not. Some open up source file sharing packages have even provided integrated anti-virus scanning.[49]

Since approximately 2004 the threat of identity theft had become more prevalent, and in July 2008 in that location was another inadvertent revealing of vast amounts of personal information through P2P sites. The "names, dates of birth, and Social Security numbers of about 2,000 of (an investment) firm's clients" were exposed, "including [those of] Supreme Court Justice Stephen Breyer."[50] A drastic increase in inadvertent P2P file sharing of personal and sensitive information became axiomatic in 2009 at the beginning of President Obama's administration when the blueprints to the helicopter Marine One were made available to the public through a breach in security via a P2P file sharing site. Access to this information has the potential of being detrimental to US security.[50] Furthermore, shortly before this security breach, the Today prove had reported that more than 150,000 taxation returns, 25,800 student loan applications and 626,000 credit reports had been inadvertently made bachelor through file sharing.[50]

The Usa government and then attempted to make users more enlightened of the potential risks involved with P2P file sharing programs[51] through legislation such equally H.R. 1319, the Informed P2P User Act, in 2009.[52] Co-ordinate to this human activity, it would exist mandatory for individuals to be aware of the risks associated with peer-to-peer file sharing before purchasing software with informed consent of the user required prior to use of such programs. In addition, the act would allow users to block and remove P2P file sharing software from their computers at any time,[53] with the Federal Trade Commission enforcing regulations. US-CERT likewise warns of the potential risks.[54]

Nevertheless, in 2010, researchers discovered thousands of documents containing sensitive patient information on popular peer-to-peer (P2P) networks, including insurance details, personally identifying information, medico names and diagnosis codes on more 28,000 individuals. Many of the documents contained sensitive patient communications, treatment information, medical diagnoses and psychiatric evaluations.[55]

Copyright problems [edit]

The deed of file sharing is non illegal per se and peer-to-peer networks are also used for legitimate purposes. The legal issues in file sharing involve violating the laws of copyrighted cloth. Most discussions about the legality of file sharing are implied to be nearly solely copyright material. Many countries take fair use exceptions that let limited apply of copyrighted fabric without acquiring permission from the rights holders. Such documents include commentary, news reporting, research and scholarship. Copyright laws are territorial- they do not extend beyond the territory of a specific state unless that land is a party to an international understanding. Most countries today are parties to at least one such agreement.

In the surface area of privacy, recent court rulings seem to indicate that in that location tin can exist no expectation of privacy in data exposed over peer-to-peer file-sharing networks. In a 39-page ruling released Nov 8, 2013, United states Commune Court Judge Christina Reiss denied the motion to suppress evidence gathered by government without a search warrant through an automated peer-to-peer search tool.[56]

See also [edit]

  • Anonymous P2P
  • Comparing of file-sharing applications
  • Disk sharing
  • File sharing in Canada
  • File sharing in Nippon
  • File sharing timeline (peer to peer and not)
  • Friend-to-friend or F2F
  • List of P2P protocols
  • Open Music Model
  • Privacy in file sharing networks
  • Private P2P
  • Public domain
  • Torrent poisoning
  • Trade grouping efforts against file sharing
  • Warez

References [edit]

  1. ^ a b Carmack, Carman (2005-03-26). "How Bit Torrent Works". computer.howstuffworks.com/. Archived from the original on 2011-08-07. Retrieved 2011-05-21 .
  2. ^ "Heads upwardly if you lot're installing Skyforge - The downloader is a P2P client and by default starts with Windows. • /r/MMORPG". reddit. Archived from the original on 2017-02-13. Retrieved 2016-03-03 .
  3. ^ a b Tyson, Jeff (2000-10-thirty). "How the Old Napster Worked". howstuffworks.com. Archived from the original on 2011-08-25. Retrieved 2011-05-21 .
  4. ^ "Copyright and Peer-To-Peer Music File Sharing: The Napster Case and the Statement Confronting Legislative Reform". murdoch.edu.au. March 2004. Archived from the original on 2010-07-09. Retrieved 2011-05-21 .
  5. ^ Gong, Yiming. "Identifying P2P users using traffic assay". Symantec. Archived from the original on 7 December 2014. Retrieved 8 December 2014.
  6. ^ Watson, Stephanie (2005-02-ten). "How Kazaa Works". calculator.howstuffworks.com. Archived from the original on 2011-08-15. Retrieved 2011-05-21 .
  7. ^ Peer-to-peer systems and applications. Steinmetz, Ralf., Wehrle, Klaus, 1972-. Berlin. 2005-11-03. ISBN9783540320470. OCLC 262681429. {{cite book}}: CS1 maint: others (link)
  8. ^ Babaoglu, Ozalp (2012). "Introduction to Peer-to-Peer Systems" (PDF). Complex Systems. Universitá di Bologna. Retrieved six February 2013. [ permanent dead link ]
  9. ^ "Archived copy" (PDF). Archived from the original (PDF) on 2016-03-03. Retrieved 2013-12-25 . {{cite web}}: CS1 maint: archived re-create every bit title (link)
  10. ^ Winkelman, Dr. Roy. "Software". Florida Center for Instructional Engineering College of Education, University of Southward Florida. Archived from the original on 12 Jan 2013. Retrieved 6 February 2013.
  11. ^ J. Michel, Norbert. Internet File Sharing and The Evidence And then far Archived 2011-10-08 at the Wayback Car, heritage.org, Baronial 23, 2004.
  12. ^ Yochai Benkler (2006). Wealth of Networks . Yale Academy Press. ISBN978-0300127232. benkler.
  13. ^ Alejandro Zentner, "File Sharing and International Sales of Copyrighted Music: An Empirical Analysis with a Panel of Countries" [ permanent dead link ] , The B.Due east. Journal of Economical Assay & Policy, Vol. 5, Outcome 1 (2005)
  14. ^ Liebowitz, Stan J. (2006). "File Sharing: Creative Destruction or Just Plainly Destruction?". The Periodical of Police & Economics. 49 (1): 1–28. CiteSeerXten.1.ane.320.601. doi:10.1086/503518. JSTOR x.1086/503518. S2CID 6000126.
  15. ^ Rob, Rafael; Waldfogel, Joel (2006). "Piracy on the High C's: Music Downloading, Sales Displacement, and Social Welfare in a Sample of College Students". The Journal of Police force & Economic science. 49 (1): 29–62. CiteSeerX10.1.1.505.4843. doi:ten.1086/430809. JSTOR x.1086/430809.
  16. ^ Zentner, Alejandro (2006). "Measuring the Effect of File Sharing on Music Purchases". The Periodical of Law & Economics. 49 (1): 63–ninety. CiteSeerX10.i.one.571.6264. doi:x.1086/501082. JSTOR ten.1086/501082. S2CID 154353570.
  17. ^ Stan J. Liebowitz in a series of papers (2005, 2006)
  18. ^ Smith, Ethan. March 21, 2007. "Sales of Music, Long in Decline, Plunge Sharply: Rising in Downloading Fails to Boost Industry; A Retailing Shakeout" Archived 2017-08-09 at the Wayback Machine, The Wall Street Periodical Website
  19. ^ "SWEDISH AUTHORITIES SINK PIRATE BAY: Huge Worldwide Supplier of Illegal Movies Told No Safe Harbors for Facilitators of Piracy!" (PDF). MPAA. 2006-05-31. Archived from the original (PDF) on 2009-12-10. Retrieved 2020-05-03 .
  20. ^ Gross, Daniel (2004-11-21). "Does a Free Download Equal a Lost Sale?". The New York Times. Archived from the original on 2007-10-12. Retrieved 2007-07-16 .
  21. ^ Oberholzer, Felix; Strumpf, Koleman (March 2004). "The Effect of File Sharing on Record Sales: An Empirical Analysis" (PDF). UNC Chapel Hill. Archived from the original (PDF) on 2008-06-thirteen. Retrieved 2010-09-11 .
  22. ^ Schwartz, John (2004-04-05). "A Heretical View of File Sharing". The New York Times. Archived from the original on 2008-01-03. Retrieved 2007-07-16 .
  23. ^ Fisher, Ken (2006-05-05). "The problem with MPAA'southward shocking piracy numbers". Ars Technica. Archived from the original on 2007-06-13. Retrieved 2007-07-15 .
  24. ^ "Movie Piracy Cost 6.i Billion". Torrent Freak. 2006-05-03. Archived from the original on 2007-09-30. Retrieved 2007-07-sixteen .
  25. ^ "Hollywood written report examines costs of film piracy". ZDNet (Reuters). 2006-05-03. Archived from the original on 2007-04-17. Retrieved 2007-07-sixteen .
  26. ^ Anderson, Nate (2008-01-22). "MPAA admits higher piracy numbers grossly inflated". Ars Technica. Archived from the original on 2012-05-09. Retrieved 2017-06-14 .
  27. ^ Anderson, Nate (2008-01-15). "2008 shaping upward to be "Twelvemonth of Filters" at colleges, ISPs". Ars Technica. Archived from the original on 2011-09-13. Retrieved 2017-06-14 .
  28. ^ Mundell, Ian. Piracy in Europe costs $thirteen.7 billion, Variety. March eighteen, 2010.
  29. ^ Geoffron, Patrice. Edifice a Digital Economy Archived 2010-07-06 at the Wayback Machine, iccwbo.org, March 17, 2010.
  30. ^ Moisés Naím (2007). Illicit: How smugglers, traffickers and copycats are hijacking the global economic system, p. xv. Arrow Books, London. ISBN 1-4000-7884-nine.
  31. ^ Delgado, Ray. Constabulary professors examine ethical controversies of peer-to-peer file sharing Archived 2008-06-25 at the Wayback Motorcar. Stanford Written report, March 17, 2004.
  32. ^ Poll: Young Say File Sharing OK Archived 2013-10-29 at the Wayback Auto CBS News, Bootie Cosgrove-Mather, 2003-09-18
  33. ^ "Solutions Research Group - Moving picture File-Sharing Booming: Study" (PDF). Archived from the original (PDF) on Feb 17, 2012.
  34. ^ 17:41 GMT, Thursday, iii July 2008 eighteen:41 UK. Engineering: "Alert letters to 'file-sharers'" Archived 2010-10-xxx at the Wayback Machine, BBC NEWS.
  35. ^ MarkJ - 24 February 2009 (1:46 PM). "Tiscali United kingdom of great britain and northern ireland Survey Reveals Illegal File Sharing Attitudes" Archived 2011-07-sixteen at the Wayback Machine, ISPreview United kingdom of great britain and northern ireland News.
  36. ^ TT/Adam Ewing. eight Jun 06 09:54 CET. "Young voters back file sharing" Archived 2010-08-15 at the Wayback Machine, The Local.
  37. ^ Ben Depoorter et al. " Copyright Backlash" Archived 2022-02-05 at the Wayback Auto, Southern California Law Review, 2011.
  38. ^ a b c Khambatti, Mujtaba; Ryu, Kyung Dong; Dasgupta, Partha (2004). "Structuring Peer-to-Peer Networks Using Interest-Based Communities". Databases, Information Systems, and Peer-to-Peer Computing. Lecture Notes in Information science. Vol. 2944. pp. 48–63. doi:ten.1007/978-three-540-24629-9_5. ISBN978-3-540-20968-three.
  39. ^ a b c Cunningham, Brendan; Alexander, Peter; Adilov, Nodir (28 Oct 2003). "Peer-to-peer file sharing communities". Data Economics and Policy. Archived from the original on four March 2016. Retrieved 16 Dec 2015.
  40. ^ a b c d due east f Vassileva, Julita (2003). "Motivating Participation in Peer to Peer Communities". Engineering Societies in the Agents Earth 3. Lecture Notes in Computer science. Vol. 2577. pp. 141–155. doi:10.1007/3-540-39173-8_11. ISBN978-3-540-14009-ii.
  41. ^ Banerjee, Anirban; Faloutsos, Michalis; Bhuyan, Laxmi (Apr 2008). "The P2P war: Someone is monitoring your activities". Calculator Networks. 52 (six): 1272–1280. CiteSeerXten.one.1.76.9451. doi:ten.1016/j.comnet.2008.01.011.
  42. ^ Proficient, Nathaniel; Aaron Krekelberg (5 June 2002). "Usability and privacy: a study of Kazaa P2P file- sharing". HP Labs Tech Report. Archived from the original on xv Oct 2013. Retrieved 15 October 2013.
  43. ^ Proficient, Nathaniel S.; Krekelberg, Aaron (2003). "Usability and privacy". Proceedings of the conference on Human factors in computing systems - CHI '03. p. 137. doi:10.1145/642611.642636. ISBN1581136307. S2CID 14850483.
  44. ^ Markoff, John (June seven, 2002). "Security Hole Found in KaZaA File-Sharing Service". New York Times. Archived from the original on 13 Nov 2013. Retrieved 15 October 2013.
  45. ^ Overexposed: the threats to privacy and security on filesharing networks (PDF). U.Southward. Government Press Part. 2003. ISBN978-0-16-070566-3. Archived (PDF) from the original on 2013-06-16. Retrieved 2013-10-15 . [ page needed ]
  46. ^ "The Dark Side of a Bright Idea: Could Personal and National Security Risks Compromise the Potential of P2P File-Sharing Networks?". Archived from the original on 2012-12-19. Retrieved 2013-x-15 .
  47. ^ Johnson, G. Eric; McGuire, Dan; Willey, Nicholas D. (2008). "The Evolution of the Peer-to-Peer File Sharing Industry and the Security Risks for Users". Proceedings of the 41st Annual Hawaii International Briefing on Organisation Sciences (HICSS 2008). p. 383. doi:x.1109/HICSS.2008.436. S2CID 15137757.
  48. ^ Håvard Vegge, Finn Michael Halvorsen and Rune Walsø Nergård (2009). "Where But Fools Dare to Tread: An Empirical Study on the Prevalence of Zero-day Malware". 2009 Fourth International Briefing on Cyberspace Monitoring and Protection.
  49. ^ "Torrent Server | TurnKey GNU/Linux". www.turnkeylinux.org. Archived from the original on 2022-01-16. Retrieved 2022-02-05 .
  50. ^ a b c Greg Sandoval. April 21, 2009 x:41 AM PDT. "Congress to probe P2P sites over 'inadvertent sharing'" Archived 2011-06-17 at the Wayback Machine, CNET News
  51. ^ "P2P File-Sharing Risks". OnGuardOnLine.gov. 2011-09-24. Archived from the original on 2013-01-28. Retrieved 2013-01-25 .
  52. ^ "Hearing on Barrow P2P Legislation Held on Tuesday". Congressman John Barrow. May 2009. Archived from the original on 2010-10-07. Retrieved 2010-09-11 .
  53. ^ "Text of H.R. 1319: Informed P2P User Act" Archived 2012-01-21 at the Wayback Machine, GovTrack.us
  54. ^ "Risks of File-Sharing Engineering science". US-CERT. Archived from the original on 2013-01-26. Retrieved 2013-01-25 .
  55. ^ Vijayan, Jaikumar (17 May 2010). "P2P networks a treasure trove of leaked health care information, study finds". Computerworld. Archived from the original on 24 April 2021. Retrieved 24 April 2021.
  56. ^ ComputerWorld.[1] Archived 2013-xi-12 at the Wayback Machine " Don't expect data on P2P networks to be private, guess rules".

traceydoculd68.blogspot.com

Source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peer-to-peer_file_sharing

0 Response to "what happened to the world the jacka torrent download"

Post a Comment

Subscribe to: Post Comments (Atom)

Iklan Atas Artikel

Iklan Tengah Artikel 1

Iklan Tengah Artikel 2

Iklan Bawah Artikel