Put.io
put.io
put.io
The killer feature is instant completion of torrents if someone else has already downloaded them. I can be watching a movie 60 seconds after thinking of it.
I'm a technically-inclined person, but I really don't want to spend hours fiddling with torrents. The instant torrent completion is an absolutely killer feature. The UI is easy to use and dead simple. The developers regularly update the site and let us know when there are disruptions.
I'm a "broke" college student, and to be honest, out of all of the online services I pay money for, this is the one I think the least about before purchasing.
[1] http://wiki.vuze.com/w/Sequential_downloading_is_bad [2] https://trac.transmissionbt.com/ticket/452
That said, I have 7 torrents of pretty uncommon data that is lingering with missing parts. none of the movies, so i doubt it is because someone used sequential download.
Point being, for movies and music, where sequential download would make sense, there is lots of interest so it is harder to be missing pieces.
Personally I think maybe something should be built on top of bit torrent to accomplish this task. To me it's a case of being careful when re-engineering underlying protocols because of a higher level need.
Anyway, it's a nice hack, but I kind of understand where the client developers who refuse to do this are coming from :-)
why enforce it though? Leechers will be leechers.
http://forum.xbmc.org/showthread.php?tid=174736
EDIT: wrong url
Enabling seeking requires logic on the client side to retrieve seek tables as well as encoding that facilitates seeking when streaming.
Select a torrent, watch it.
[1] http://forum.xbmc.org/showthread.php?tid=174736
[2] http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NQiC62ig3N0
Edit: wrong url
Is that at all legal? Unless you mean films that have fallen into the public domain or that remain unlicensed in your nation or jurisdiction, I'm pretty sure this is unlawful. If there aren't laws on the books yet concerning a 3rd party service downloading or hosting pirated content on one's behalf yet, I would still consider this to be unethical behavior.
Does put.io intend to share the business tactics of MegaUpload? (ie. looking the other way concerning how many users will make use of the service?)
I don't mean to sound belligerent. I feel this is an angle that would be good to discuss.
I believe the are located in an area where legislations are less strict and they can do this without having any problems.
they avoid some problems by requiring everyone to pay directly. Megaupload really got into trouble for their affiliate programs, which essentially paid people to upload pirated content. Those programs drove a whole industry in Vietnam.
They clearly keep track of unique torrents across users because they provide the instant download feature. Thus they should be able to respond to DMCA requests quickly. By the same token, they may come under legal pressure to disclose user information about accounts that accessed successfully DMCA'd files.
There are legitimate uses for Bit torrent though, and this service seems like it would benefit the health of ecosystem as a whole. They'll probably seed a lot of data, maybe especially rare data. That would be helpful for things like big scientific datasets that often end up hosted on some .edu FTP site.
Before that, you could indeed pick a film, download the torrent in the cloud and directly stream it from our web interface.
Good old days but we all moved on to new challenges.
I would love to make
compatible for registered put.io users
I'm not sure the set of legal mp4 torrents is very large.
He said that doing illegal things with these torrents will only give the corporations/ones in power more leeway into getting politicians to pass laws that require DRM, violate our privacy, etc.
If piracy stops people will say DRM works and they need more powers to really cement it in place. If piracy continues then people will say they need more DRM to stop it.
I cannot see how the existence of this site (or other torrent services) weakens the case against DRM.
With torrent, at least i'd know beforehand when setting my 40min* aside, that i will press play and see the damn content. So yeah, it does not weaken the case against DRM. i will agree that it strengthen it. Any engineer worth its salt would CACHE the damn stream. They can't because of DRM and silly contracts out of touch with reality.
(* and that is not counting the 5min that it takes to GET to the content on amazon player... piece of @!#)
What you say makes sense as well, I guess we're really talking about two different arguments. One logical/reasoned (look, DRM has basically failed) and the other emotional (OMG piracy! We must have more DRM!). They're kind of orthogonal to my mind.
>> In theory what you say makes sense, but then why is there still DRM?
For a whole complex of reasons, some of which boil down to exactly what you say. Maybe if nobody ever pirated anything it would go away, but I doubt it. It's too useful for other purposes - market segmentation, multiple resales for new formats or devices, preventing reasonable backups etc etc.
Right, and while I completely agree with your logical reason, my fear is that the emotional one is more prevalent and thus, the only one that will really determine future behavior.
I haven't considered "market segmentation" as a purpose of DRM - that's certainly interesting. I think the concept of market segmentation is unfair and manipulative, so I think this lends more weight to the commenter who suggested they feel a moral obligation to violate what copyright has become. Personally, I still prefer to pay for what I'm getting, and I just avoid products from companies who make that more difficult then it needs to be. But I see the viewpoint better now.
(a) Those who download stuff illegally instead of paying like 0.01% of their disposable income per year for it whilst making about as much money as those who have created the content.
(b) Those who download stuff illegally instead of having no access at all or paying completely unaffordable fantasy prices for it whilst making only a fraction of those who have created the content.
In which group you fall depends mostly on where you were born. And this is not primarily a debate about inequality as much as it is about infrastructure. There simply is no Netflix in most parts of the world that gives you reliable access to a huge movie library for peanuts.
So when you say "you weaken the case the rest of us" you should be aware of how "you" and "us" can mean very different things depending on who says that to whom.
The vast majority of people will be using this to watch movies they don't feel like paying for. There might be a handful who genuinely can't access it, who have no way to legally pay for it outside of handing over a substantial amount of their small wealth, and they paradoxically also have access to an internet connection strong enough and a computer powerful enough that can handle streaming these movies. However, they do not represent the vast, vast, vast majority of users.
Accidentally, an average price of a DVD movie is also around $20. So yes, there are places where fast internet is affordable, yet movies are not. Unless you want to watch only one per month and give up your internet instead.
There is also a matter of TV series, which you have to wait 1-2 years for (poorly dubbed) in TV or on DVD.
Of course we are probably in something like the top 10% of wealthy places to live in. I can only imagine that situation in poorer countries resembles the one we had when internet was just kicking off and hardly anyone had connection. There was (illegal) business model of downloading movies (from Kazaa or weird warez forums), burning them on CDs and selling for the locally acceptable price.
Guess what - unless the price of virtual goods is adjusted to the local standards, and the availability increases, piracy will be there.
Even then, while that situation is certainly more excusable, you're still the minority. That site isn't made for the Eastern European lower class who can't afford to buy a DVD. It's made for folks who have the money (which means they can purchase and maintain a computer as well as a monthly internet connection) but who don't feel like spending it.
Plus, I'm fairly sure iTunes has movie rentals in most Eastern European countries.[0]
Also, my country is in southern Europe, not part of the EU yet.
> The vast majority of people will be using this to watch movies they don't feel like paying for.
I think this is highly biased towards your own ideas of how someone could use such service. You are, in fact, projecting[0] your own probable scenarios to large group of people you have never met, living in countries you've only heard of in the news. That, sir, is unfair. You should not stick with generalized opinions and prejudice, mkay?
Maybe put.io is really the new youku.com
The only reason why broadband may cost that much is because it's localized and one can't simply buy EU broadband in US. There are actually good reasons for broadband prices to be affected by local economy, since labour and materials may have different cost there. That's not the case with DVDs, which cost the same (pennies) to manufacture.
But maybe I should have put more emphasis on the problems with availability rather than money. Having a choice of spending my $20 on cinema tickets or a DVD, sometimes I would choose latter to watch something at home. But here DVDs are released only when the dubbing is ready, often after a year from the original release. I could get to this content earlier online, but I don't have Netflix here, nor Play Movies, Pandora and many others. There were problems with DVD releases that were solved in two ways: by VOD with reasonable monthly fee or by torrents. Saying torrents are for the greedy is just a good excuse to prosecute piracy instead of improving the market.
There's also a huge population of people around the world who get access to movies, TV shows and other media only after a significant delay and use this kind of services to get access to that media on the day it is released. Those living in the US may not realize it but there's no amount of money you can pay to get the hit TV shows on the day they are released in Europe and other parts of the world.
There's a pretty penny to be gained out of these would-be customers if the media distribution companies can figure out how to monetize zero day world wide distribution. It is not a technical problem to solve. Every day that this problem goes unsolved, the content industry loses money.
A little anecdotal evidence: out of the two american tv shows I watch, the other one can not be viewed from my home country at all, the other one will be available with a delay 6-12 months and a horrible dubbed soundtrack. Would I pay a reasonable price to get them on the day they are released instead of the clumsy torrent service I am using at the moment? Yes I would.
Real, legitimate streaming services are really good. they adjust quality based on available bandwidth. they have clients for every device you own. They provide all kinds of helpful metadata like cover art, actors, content classification, playlist recommendations, watch lists, etc etc etc etc
Torrents are terrible. half the stuff is malware, the quality is all over the map, languages and subtitles are a crap shoot, you use a ton of band width, you have to manage huge files locally, etc etc etc etc
Now, if you like you can work out the intersection with countries that have access to a similarly complete selection of movies at comparable cost to what Netflix offers in the U.S.
You will quickly find out that your "handful" of people is in fact hundereds of millions of people.
Knowledge is basically free. Anyone with an internet connection and a PC made in the last 10 years (not particularly hard to come by, even with very little money) can be knowledgeable enough. Equating wealth with knowledge is foolish.
Broadband was expensive too, but 512k was something like 60$... And because internet access had so much more use than just consuming cultural information, people would prefer to get it and save on something else. Like the dvds that they would get by pirating.
Before 2002 when Broadband access was excessively rare... Most people would just buy pirated dvds from the flea market... For 5 $ or less. They where ready to pay for them... but at a lower price than what official goods where... You never bought dvd for youself except if you were wealthy or to give them as gifts.
Your options here for watching movies are (a) cinema(which doesn't work for TV shows), (b) wait for them to show up on crappy cable services, (c) buy pirated DVDs for 1~2$ a pop and (d) torrent. Buying legal DVDs is possible but extremely hard, not simply due to the cost but also the availability. If I wanted to buy a pirated DVD there are at least 3 different shops within 2min of my home in an eastern Beirut suburb whereas if I wanted to go the legal option I'd need to drive down to Virgin in downtown Beirut(15min drive) and pick from an extremely limited selection.
The only viable solutions if you want timely and not incredibly inconvenient access to movies or shows are (c) and (d). Internet connections are incredibly expensive relative to Europe or the US(50$/mo for 4mb and a 25GB cap) and yet I know a lot of people who go with option (d), mainly because traffic at night isn't subject to the cap. People will simply cue up their torrents and download them between 12am and 7am and watch them the next day. If you keep a buffer of unwatched movies/shows this can work quite well. My personal approach is to torrent to a digital ocean droplet and then download over regular HTTP overnight. Most people are not technically savvy enough to do that but they would be able to use put.io. I happen to use my droplet for other things, but if I didn't put.io would be cheaper as well.
The rest of the world hasn't got flat fee video rentals, on-demand TV services, has to wait 1-2 years to get a season already aired in the tv series home market, hasn't got the option to watch it without voice-overs, etc. This is a digital breach that decision and law-makers keep pushing for, and the result is "piracy". Later this media lobby points the finger at countries for downloading their "content". Ironic given that studios/distributors were never planning in providing that content in the timely manner and format customers wanted it in.
And my media consumption isn't enormous. A few packaged DVD purchases, Netflix account, and the movies - which is very expensive these days.
True but you can still get movies via DVD or VHS is those places. e.g. If I don't have access to Spotify it does't give me a valid excuse to pirate. I can still purchase through iTunes or buy CD's.
1) buy CD/DVDs (except the ones that are unavailable or hard to find) and rip them (assuming this is sufficiently legal) then throw away the useless pieces of plastic you just paid premium for (which in some regions equates your license), or
2) buy CD/DVDs (except the ones that are unavailable, etc) and put up with plastic crap that is bulky, unreliable and slow, or
3) not buy anything
It's ridiculous, this is the 21st century. They can fit a whole season of some serial onto a micro-SD card, but instead you want me to buy a "box set" of cardboard junk and plastic that is larger than the laptop I intend to watch it on? (which, incidentally, doesn't have a DVD drive for pretty much the same reason it doesn't play cassette tapes or vinyl records either)
Five years ago I had a fire, packed salvageable stuff with smoke damage in big cardboard storage boxes. Over the years I've unpacked and cleaned almost all of the items. The box with all my CDs? They are probably fine (I guess), but I never bothered, I just got them digitally and am happy about those things not taking up any shelf space.
Technically, it's totally feasible. of course, that only works if the content creators are willing to license the content, and that's difficult for even big players like Netflix.
There's a huge international market for video and bottom disappear prices. case in point: every sketchy DVD store in the third world. there's lots of legitimate money to be made if you were able to sell legally to that market. The real question is: how do you manage the Price differentiation? If a movie costs $10 in the USA and $0.50 in poor, region-excluded country X, how do you keep everyone in the US from buying the $0.50 version?
If put.io solves this problem, it'll become a billion dollar company.
Plus the artists who create the content get a miniscule part of your purchase money.
You can rent basically any movie on Amazon, or buy DRM free music from a variety of sources. If you choose not to and torrent, you're not performing some sort of noble protest in the name of the artists. I can assure that they don't see it that way.
Note: I'm not saying that people in creative capacities think that torrenting is evil, and yes, they know they are part of a broken system. I just think it's disingenuous when people justify torrenting using this argument. You're torrenting because you think the market price of whatever content you're downloading is too / you don't feel like paying. Simple as that.
Think about how common piracy is. They demand what? 250k for each song downloaded. Multiplied by the number of songs downloaded illegally per day... they feel they are entitled to 600 trillion dollars per year. Does that sound right to you?
Piracy is our new eighteenth amendment.
It is good when authors can earn money on their work, and thus it used to be that authors had a deal with the government. Tax money is spent to enforce a limited monopoly for a few years, and afterward society could the work to the improvement of all. This deal has now been completely perverted, and all works stays perpetually under restrictions.
Worse, In Sweden, we have a special deal on top of copyright. Every time someone purchase a harddrive, they are forced (through taxes) to pay for the privilege of "private copying". This deal is then again perverted through the use of DRM. Companies that do this are effectively stealing, and here the word is used correctly: They are stealing my money. I paid for something, and the other party is now refusing to give up their side of the bargain.
When asked to respect copyright, I am asked to balance the moral issues at hand. Can I, morally, support the perversion in order to get authors some money, or should I ignore copyright in order to force a change.
I dont mind,the problem is "who's getting the money?why artist A and not artist B".And it's usually the artists that need it the less that get the most of these "revenues".
Which collects money from plays and from public performances on behalf of artists.
IMO Local artists probably get more money than they'd have gotten otherwise, while foreign artists are probably underpaid (though Uruguayan revenue is very likely a rounding error for them).
I know of a person that works there, and I don't think they're scammers or mafia or anything, but the model is definitely outdated and I dislike a private organization having that kind of power (not to mention most artists never explicitly gave them representation power).
It could have been founded my mother Theresa. It would still be a sweet place for the MAFIAA tugs to drop DMCA requests, or whatever those abuses are called nowadays, by the truckload on their heads.
How are DMCA requests inherently abuses?
[1] http://www.theregister.co.uk/2013/08/16/microsoft_dmca_taked...
[2] https://www.eff.org/press/releases/fifteen-years-dmca-abuse
EDIT: They aren't "inherently" abuses. They are easily used as such.
I guess what I'm saying is, you might want to unbold 'Hassle-free' and embolden the word 'torrenting' in your byline. Or something like that. Here's what my brain saw when I went to your site:
http://i.imgur.com/9D78Bx9.png
I'm not being snarky, but I am trying to help you see into the mind of a disinterested internet user in the midst of a mild social media daze.
- It caches torrents that other people downloaded(popular torrents) so if you add them, they are in your library immediately
- You can subscribe to RSS feeds of TV shows from showrss.info without needing to download every show individually
- You can install the XBMC app to access you content there
- A REST API? Yup! They have it!
- It converts videos to MP4 on their cloud
- You can use multi-connection downloaders to reach to speeds like 30Mbps
- There are many apps to use with put.io - It links all your downloaded content directly to your credit card, thus incriminating you.Oh well.
There's no reason to believe any of those assumptions are true – and once any of them fail, you've helpfully given the prosecutor a detailed, hard-to-deny log of your every transaction.
Other than that, there's really not that much to implement in the mixer.
Additionally, the break in security is disjunctive. It's not just the mixer that has to be compromised, its the entire chain - exchange, wallet, mixer; if any of them do not cooperate, your trail ends.
This is true in theory but the history of software is littered with obvious counterexamples where theoretically secure software was compromised by admins forgetting to disable debugging / logging, insecure temporary or backup files, etc. When you use a mixer you're trusting the admins to get all of that right even before you talk about malice.
I'm not saying it's trivial, merely that the bitcoin infrastructure was obviously not designed to counter state-level threats. The perfect identification of all past transactions is just too easy to get wrong and and a prosecutor only needs to show a convincing case, not absolute mathematical proof – I wouldn't bet against the simple timing of transactions being enough in many cases
> It not CamelCased either
Thanks.
Perhaps also interesting, before using showRSS I was using TVshowsApp (http://tvshowsapp.com/).
Something I'm missing from showRSS btw, is the ability to browse trough all episodes/seasons and be able to select an episode/season to be added to the RSS-queue, so my downloading box would fetch it next time it checks the feed. But than, showRSS does one thing very well, so I'm not sure more features like that would be helpful for everyone.
It does what it does pretty well, though. The new system reads a few sources (not just EZTV) and picks the best releases. So, 720p for everyone in a matter of hours and for almost every show you can think of.
P.S: have you thought about using transmission+dyndns? It's how I run it (minidlna+transmission, and showRSS pushes to my rasppi, no RSS involved!).
minidlna seems like something I'm going to be looking into, thanks! And for dns, I use a domain which I manage using cloudflare and a script [1] which gets run by cron and updates the cloudflare entry every day or so. Didn't wrote the script though, found it somewhere and had to edit it a bit to work again.
Something else I have been looking into is splitting up the load, using the RPi only for streaming and xbmc; and handling downloading and NAS capabilities using a different device, such as a MIKROTIK RouterBOARD (which I'm afraid isn't going to work).
I have had contact with the support of put.io more than once, and they were always very friendly and helpful. (even if some of the request were things such as "add play.fm support").
The big advantage over anything else I've seen with putio is that populair torrents are downloaded in a matter of seconds (due to someone else already having downloaded it) and the mp4-conversion. Btw, a small tip, instead of using the site itself for watching media which is downloaded, you can stream it directly into VLC or MPlayerX (the later also support streaming youtube video's I believe) which is very very handy!
Just noticed, there is an option for the legacy 10G $5/month account: http://lry.be/WRxO
"Our servers are in Netherlands"
Are they insane? If there's any country hostile to these kinds of services it's the Netherlands. The copyright outfit BREIN is taking down Usenet providers (if they can proof they are willingly providing access to pirated material), Usenet communities and Torrent communities housed in the Netherlands left and right; I can't imagine they would leave something screaming that it basically is intended for violating copyright and with rising popularity like put.io alone for long.
Just the same way Dropbox is for people who haven't heard of NASs or Amazon S3.
Name one seedbox provider that can be set up that quickly.
1. go to your VPS control panel, span another vm
2. ssh to it
3. aptitude install transmission
done.
You don't even have to manage that box. not even install security updates if you don't want to.
If you can use a ssh client:
Then someone will probably make a billion dollar company understanding why that's an out of touch response.
But hey, super easy!
Also, rtorrent. Geez, guy! :-P
They even have 1 click installers, it's really simple.
They also allow for external subtitle tracks to be added and again, it works with the Apple TV (something that other alternatives were never able to do).
Also, judging by the percentage of torrents I add on put.io that are instantly completed, I guess they have a sizeable user-base... That wasn't always the case with the seedboxes I've tried before (I'd say more than 90% of the torrents I add on put.io are completed, converted, and instantly streamable to the Apple TV)
Is it ok to download these """Videos""" there? Because it doesn't look like it is.
So yeah, you do need either an iPad or iPhone to do it, however Put.io has a Roku app if you have one of these.
https://github.com/iBaa/PlexConnect
PlexConnect is a simple DNS server that rewrites requests to trailers.apple.com to your local machine (where a daemon is running that responds to requests from your Apple TV.) It then takes the place of the "Trailers" app, and requires only that you change your AppleTV DNS server config to your own machine, and that you install their SSL certificate in your AppleTV's certificate store.
You can edit your AppleTV's certificate store with an Apple-developed program called Apple Configurator (in the OSX App Store for free) so at least it doesn't requires anything like jailbreaking.
A seedbox would be better if: * You're active on private trackers. Most private trackers don't work well with services like put.io. * You enjoy the level of control that's available with a seedbox.
Put.io is (in my opinion) much better if your goal is quickly and painlessly getting multimedia files from public torrent sites. It has some neat features like Mp4 video conversion to stream/download to iDecvices that would be challenging to implement in a seedbox, and instantly completes downloads that other Put.io users have in their files. Something that would be impossible on any seedbox.
Now that their lowest plan is $10/mo, there isn't as much of a cost advantage for put.io as there used to be when they had $5/mo plans, but even at cost parity, I'd still pick put.io over any of the seedbox services I've used, or setting up my own seedbox on a VPS.
1) Converts and transcodes files on the client
2) Encrypts them on the client, has diffs and versioning with git
3) Stores encrypted versions in a distributed manner on many servers
4) Uses bitcoins to pay for all the bandwidth, storage
5) Is an autonomous corporation that can't be shut down
blabla
Maybe in a few years this will exist.
Minor nitpick, git is actually quite bad at handlying large files. So you shouldn't use git, you should use something git-like
> Why are downloads from put.io to my computer slow?
> Well the biggest factor is your location. Our servers are in Netherlands.
-
I guess this is why I torrent. :(
What is the point of this?
(I think I'm an exception, I have the lowest available option from my ISP, 40MBit)
I guess they would, but this is a matter of providing that speed. I don't think 128+ Mb/s is very common, usually caps around 100 Mb/s in a lot of areas.
Anyways, my ISP has a 240Mbit plan.. and this is rather small city and Europe (not north or west either). I guess I just assumed SF (for example) would have even better options. Looking at other major ISPs around shows 100, 2x150 and 250 as top speeds.
DNA: http://www.dna.fi/uberkaista 350Mbit/s.
Sonera: http://www.sonera.fi/tutustu+ja+osta/nettiyhteydet/kodin+laa... 1Gbit/s.
I live in southeast Asia, and there's even Singapore listed on it. So it's very helpful to speed up the download
As long as nobody gets a legal beatdown for using put.io...
Offloading my torrent collection into the cloud sounds like a great step forward, but not if it results in me paying more.
Xunlei has a huge network and it's very likely the content you want is already in their server and has been encoded.
I'm curious how they made it on top of HN today. They are not new, the concept is not new. Nothing is really innovative about it. Still they are topic No. 1 today.
I use http://www.cloudload.com, it is a similar app and works like a charm.
Also their arguments are somewhat invalid:
> People sharing your internet connection. They hate you! With put.io, you won't disturb them, because you won't be hogging all the bandwidth.
It doesn't matter whether I download 18GB from http(s) or from a torrent, the data remains the same size, except you can usually limit the torrent traffic whereas most people wouldn't know how to limit http(s) traffic in their browser.
> Watch RSS feeds
My torrent server does that too, but I never use it anyway
> Huge torrents are hard to get
Why?
> Get to your files from anywhere
Okay this is the only advantage if you don't have your own server.
Incorrect. For starters, torrent overhead is much higher than http traffic and so the transfer is actually cheaper for http. More critically is the fact that high connection count, as associated with torrents, results in connection saturation on 90% of consumer routers thus crippling all traffic, especially sensitive stuff like gaming, for everyone involved.
Other than that yeah, but this isn't for people like us. This is actually perfect for people like my father; he comes around every week to grab TV and Movies off me. I could remotely manage his account until he figured it out himself.
The thing that could make this service much better would be a feature to LAN sync content, so that one doesn't need to pull down from the internet when the file is avaliable over the LAN. Kind of like how Dropbox-esque services do it.
Having the server in someone else's name provides a slight buffer, but is hardly insurmountable. If the server belongs to a company in another country then that could make it difficult for a local court to issue a subpoena that's enforceable in said company's jurisdiction. If you are one of a dozen users of a given server then that could hypothetically make it harder to prove which user was the infringer.
All of that is obviously hypothetical, I am not a lawyer, and I certainly don't have expertise in international law. These are simply the musings of my groggy brain first thing in the morning. Anyone who isn't half asleep care to weigh in?
Also, how is paying somebody to brake the law for you not breaking the law as well? Out of all the ways to get "videos" of the Internet this must be the least secure nowadays.
Additionally you don't need to upload anything at all to be able to download something. Typically when downloading a torrent you do have to upload something for the swarm to prioritize data to you.
source: my apartment shares a single dsl router to all its tenants
Disclosure: I'm the author
[1] http://forum.xbmc.org/showthread.php?tid=174736
[2] http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NQiC62ig3N0
EDIT: URL was wrong
I'm not sure about this claim. From personal experience using ADSL, a 3G USB stick, my uni's 100Mbps connection back in the day and lowly 128k ISDN, I'd say that a torrent can either saturate one's connection with a healthy swarm or be slow as molasses due to the lack of seeds. I'm not sure how a seedbox can bypass the inherent mode of operation of the Bittorent protocol.
The capacity from the seedboxes back to you might not be that great, but it doesn't matter because your home connection is so slow in comparison that it can still easily be saturated.
Are they sure they won't be hacked? why?
Are they sure they wouldn't have to give up my information based on a public, lawful gov't inquiry?
What about a secret, unlawful inquiry? Are they sure about that case?
How they can launch this with ZERO information about steps they've taken to protect anonymity is mind-boggling to me. I'm about to send out a note to my less technical friends to avoid this like the plague.
I have upgraded and downgraded my plan many times, depending on my own needs, it's been years I don't use a torrent client.
This is how you download torrents blazingly fast:
Download firefox + DownThemAll! extension, configure downthemall enabling all the maximum of speeds
go to http://put.io, add a torrent in the download queue, it will probably be done within minutes, if not seconds (no exaggeration), then download them straight to your computer through downthemall
I string this together with another script to rename content and it drops right into my Plex library.
Besides the torrents, they catch rss feeds, podcasts faster than I do, and I just stream it, if I need any subtitles, I just upload them (or fetch from open subtitles) and there they are.
I love their service and will keep supporting them, and recommend to anyone I know.
I guess then the premium accounts were suspended as it was hurting Rapidshare's sales and Put.io stopped offering that service.
Put.io is awesome, it's a very good and very well executed idea, but it was even more awesome a few years ago, and less expensive.
- You don't need to seed.
- Your ISP won't throttle your torrent packets.You're paying 0.99/mo to ensure that you get top speeds of all torrents downloaded all the time.
Sometimes you can't get the best seeder because more powerful seeders are taking your priority. put.io is always that more powerful seeder.
Source: Comcast and Time Warner Cable did this to me.
You start streaming immediately if another put.io user already downloaded the same torrent.
Edit: Well, I guess you still get the benefit of them doing the seeding instead of your home connection… That's more attractive to some than others I suppose.
?
Another day another dumb dot eye oh...