by Guest on 2018/09/02 09:20:37 AM
I recognize the dev doesn't want to do this, but it really needs to happen. Few people are going to move away from bittorrent to something of unknown safety. Not to mention it'd likely speed up development as the software gained traction.
Plus the software is free and the primary dev could just keep all the donations and not distribute them. Most folks that would contribute would add in features that don't benefit the end user.
by Guest on 2018/09/02 06:35:12 PM
This type of discussion has taken place on this forum before, besides the dubious claims put forward for how open sourcing is going to benefit anyone (except for an exploit hunter or MPAA employee), the track record of the Tixati/Fopnu developer has always been to maintain a closed source and retain control over his work.
I dont think any appeals to fame or money will change his mind, he enjoys his work and is currently getting on with bug fixes and feature updates so whats the big problem ?
by Guest on 2019/01/12 07:38:44 PM
The big problem, obviously, is that WinMX and Napster before it went down the proprietary client and network path before and look where that got everyone.
When the protocol and only client software is secret proprietary software that nobody knows what it really does when you run it, of course I not only don't want it on my computer, but I'd think you would have to be nuts to want it.
When Napster and WinMX tried doing the same thing, the copyright trolls went to court and got the whole thing shut down. If Fopnu ever gains any users, why won't it gain the attention of copyright trolls who do the same thing to it?
What if the only person who understands how the client software and protocol work doesn't want to maintain it anymore or dies?
If it was open source and the protocol was in the public domain, anyone could implement it and it wouldn't matter what the big corporations and courts and governments want to do, and it wouldn't be in the hands of a single control freak who can do whatever he wants with it later, including possibly adding adware, spyware, and other junk (Assuming it's not in there now. Prove it isn't.), getting bored and calling it quits, or dying.
No, I don't trust this software and that's why from the beginning I decided not to use it. A lot of these problems apply to the Tixati program as well, but at least it uses an open network that anyone can implements. (And dozens have, and many of them are open source. So why bother with Tixati, either?).
Ignoring the other complaints, why would any user invest resources in using a program that takes us back in time to the problems that bittorrent solved?
on 2019/01/13 06:29:23 PM
Your take of history seems a bit erroneous Guest, first of all WinMx is still operating and has been since it was officially closed following on from RIAA legal threats, when it became neccessary the more technically proficient users took over the network and its community is still undertaking the task.
The Napster issue revolved around having a centralised server architechture, so it was claimed to be facillitating illegal activity, neither winmx nor tixati or fopnu rely on such servers, we can argue over the more mundane bootstrapping method for initial node discovery but thats pretty much covered in each area by work about methods such as cacheing of nodes and magnet links etc, decentralised networks are not impossible to close down but they do require a tremendous effort and such an effort has the potential to be law breaking in its own right.
In both cases above the protocols are known by those who take the time to do some homework, as is the bit torrent protocol thats very poor when it comes to any sort of security, using such a protocol might be trivial but then with simplicity comes liability, 95% of all copyright claims are now delivered automatically by bots scouring the bit torrent streams for users IP addresses, its so trivial its pathetic. I dont see Fopnu as being a backward step in fact I see it for what it is, a small leap down a continually improving road, new ideas and concepts will be added on a reasonably stable codebase, this has always been the case with this developer and will I am sure remain the case. I have been using this authors software for 18 years now unmolested and so if your unsure about anything perhaps this type of software is a bit too powerful for you and should best be avoided, the rest of us can enjoy it knowing that periodic evolution is part of its DNA.