Re: [decentralization] Decentralization and exhastive searches: mutually exclusive?
- Napster is not exhaustive, you got it right. When you log on to a server you
can only find out about songs that are accessible through that server. When
I met with the Napster folk they said it was otherwise, but my own use
indicates otherwise. If you disconnect and reconnect it can find songs that
it couldn't find before. Dave
----- Original Message -----
From: "Gen Kanai" <gkanai@...>
Sent: Monday, July 31, 2000 6:56 PM
Subject: Re: [decentralization] Decentralization and exhastive searches:
> Correct me if I'm wrong...Napster is NOT exhaustive. When you use
> you don't see the _whole_ Napster network, only your "neighborhood" (which
> I'm not sure is defined by the software or the Napster servers or what
> Ian Clarke was mentioning a while ago (on a different list) that one of
> goals of Freenet was to enable search capability that DID comb the entire
> Freenet network. He also said that search time did not increase equally
> with the size of the network (which would be a drag ;)
> Judge for yourself...
> At 07:46 PM 7/31/00 -0400, Alex Bokov wrote:
> >-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> >Okay, this is a theoretical question that I'd like to ask without
> >getting bogged down in politics. I'm using Napster and Gnutella as
> >convenient examples and not because I approve or disapprove of either.
> >1. Gnutella--
> > It's distributed and therefore robust. You cannot shut down
> >2. Napster--
> > It is exhaustive. For better or worse, you'll find every single
> >So, what about combining the best of the two? Decentralization and
> >exhaustive searching? Is it a logical impossibility, or is it merely
> >something that hasn't been done yet?
> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
- Alex Future Bokov <alexboko@...> writes:
> Okay, this is a theoretical question that I'd like to ask withoutOne solution is to decouple the searching data-space from the content
> getting bogged down in politics. I'm using Napster and Gnutella as
> convenient examples and not because I approve or disapprove of either.
> 1. Gnutella--
> It's distributed and therefore robust. You cannot shut down
> gnutellanet by shutting down one, or ten, or a thousand servers.
> However, you cannot do exhaustive searches on it. The content
> you're looking for might be out there and yet not be guaranteed
> to show up on a search. Another disadvantage is that the
> searches make inefficient use of bandwidth.
> 2. Napster--
> It is exhaustive. For better or worse, you'll find every single
> instance of Michael_Jackson_Thriller.mp3 that anybody on the
> network is serving. However, the server/s that store the
> content listings and corresponding locations of the content are
> all under the control of one company, which means they are
> vulnerable to legal action, censorship, company-wide technical
> failure, corporate abuse, and attack by hackers.
> So, what about combining the best of the two? Decentralization and
> exhaustive searching? Is it a logical impossibility, or is it merely
> something that hasn't been done yet?
data-space and have seperate logical networks for them (seperate
logical networks, even if many physical nodes do both).
Since search info is infinitesimally small compared to the content
data, replicating every bit of search info and distributing it across
many systems would give a full search index in a much closer search