Jump to content

Talk:BitTorrent: Difference between revisions

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Browse history interactively
← Previous edit
Content deleted Content added
VisualWikitext
m Reverted edit by 14.102.123.110 (talk) to last version by Sceeegt
 
(45 intermediate revisions by 29 users not shown)
Line 1: Line 1:
{{talkheader}}
{{talkheader|noarchive=yes|search=no}}
{{WikiProject banner shell|collapsed=yes|class=C|vital=yes|
{{WikiProjectBannerShell|1=
{{WikiProject Computing|class=c|importance=mid}}
{{WikiProject Computing |importance=mid}}
{{WikiProject Internet Culture|class=c|importance=}}
{{WikiProject Internet culture |importance=High}}
{{WikiProject Internet|class=c|importance=}}
{{WikiProject Internet |importance=High}}
{{WikiProject Software|class=c|importance=|computing-importance=mid}}
{{WikiProject Software |importance= |computing-importance=mid}}
{{WikiProject Business|class=b|importance=high}}
}}
{{ArticleHistory
|action1=PR
|action1date=17:38, 3 Nov 2004
|action1link=Wikipedia:Peer review/BitTorrent/archive1
|action1result=reviewed
|action1oldid=7086920
}}
}}
{{afd-merged-from|BitTorrent index|BitTorrent index|12 September 2016}}
{{ArticleHistory|action1=PR|action1date=17:38, 3 Nov 2004|action1link=Wikipedia:Peer review/BitTorrent/archive1|action1result=reviewed|action1oldid=7086920}}
{{onlinesource
{{onlinesource
| year=2005| section=March 1-10| author=Darren Waters| title=How Doctor Who spread on the net| org=BBC News| url=http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/technology/4328781.stm| date=March 8, 2005
| year=2005
| year2=2005| section2=May 20-30| title2= BitTorrent maker sets up search| org2=BBC News| url2=http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/technology/4587371.stm| date2=May 27, 2005
| section=March 1-10
| year3=2005| section3=July 10-20| author3=John Cranmer| title3=Bound to be Gagged| org3=Gay Times| date3=July 17, 2005

| year4=2006| author4=Spencer Kelly| title4=BitTorrent battles over bandwidth| org4=BBC News| url4=http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/programmes/click_online/4905660.stm| date4=April 16, 2006
| author=Darren Waters
| title=How Doctor Who spread on the net
| org=BBC News
| url=http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/technology/4328781.stm
| date=March 8, 2005
| year2=2005
| section2=May 20-30
| title2= BitTorrent maker sets up search
| org2=BBC News
| url2=http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/technology/4587371.stm
| date2=May 27, 2005
| year3=2005
| section3=July 10-20
| author3=John Cranmer
| title3=Bound to be Gagged
| org3=Gay Times
| date3=July 17, 2005
| year4=2006
| author4=Spencer Kelly
| title4=BitTorrent battles over bandwidth
| org4=BBC News
| url4=http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/programmes/click_online/4905660.stm
| date4=April 16, 2006
}}
}}
{{archives|auto=yes|search=yes|bot=MiszaBot I|age=365}}
{{archives|auto=yes|search=yes|bot=MiszaBot I|age=365}}
Line 49: Line 21:
|minthreadsleft = 4
|minthreadsleft = 4
|algo = old(100d)
|algo = old(100d)
|archive = Talk:BitTorrent (protocol)/Archive %(counter)d
|archive = Talk:BitTorrent/Archive %(counter)d
}}
}}


== Is bundles.bittorrent.com is 'a download site which is prohibited and promotes copyright infringement'? ==
== Tit for Tat/Reform? ==

"Downloading torrents and sharing files" section makes a reference to a "tit for tat scheme"
Bittorrent clients following the specification do '''not''' operate via tit for tat whatsoever, and I believe this should be removed. If you read the spec, you'll find that the actual behavior is something else.
This is from memory and very informal-
A given torrent will have a number of upload slots. These upload slots are given to the peers which are giving you the most upload speed. There is no other shaping done.
I think this article needs to be completely reformed as it includes very large amount of relatively specific and slightly wrong statements. It's also has very mixed information. I'm too lazy to take up any reform effort, but I will complain =p. It should be noted that bittorrent is commonly misunderstood and even so-called reliable sources may be incorrect.
([[Special:Contributions/12.148.227.250|12.148.227.250]] ([[User talk:12.148.227.250|talk]])) <span style="font-size: smaller;" class="autosigned">—Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|undated]] comment added 21:49, 1 June 2011 (UTC).</span><!--Template:Undated--> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->

"These upload slots are given to the peers which are giving you the most upload speed." Sounds exactly like a tit for tat scheme. [[Special:Contributions/115.64.19.205|115.64.19.205]] ([[User talk:115.64.19.205|talk]]) 11:18, 6 June 2012 (UTC)

== Article Name ==

There needs to be an article about the actual BitTorrent protocol which is different from the BitTorrent article, much the same as the [[WWW]] article is different from the [[HTTP]] article. This article BitTorrent_(protocol) should be renamed to simply BitTorrent, or possibly BitTorrent_network, so that a second article BitTorrent_Protocol can be created. Also, the use of the word "protocol" is inconsistent and ambiguous in the article. [[Special:Contributions/38.96.160.226|38.96.160.226]] ([[User talk:38.96.160.226|talk]]) 19:13, 23 December 2010 (UTC)
:[[BitTorrent]] (and the [[Bittorrent|Bit'''t'''orrent]] redirect) is the disambiguation page, which distinguishes protocol, company, and software clearly, in my opinion. Your point about clarity in this, the protocol article, may have merit. If you have specific suggestions, feel free to make them here. Because it's a highly technical subject, there are two conflicting goals: comprehensibility for general readers, and technical thoroughness. It can be difficult to harmonize these goals, since Wikipedia is [[WP:NOT]] a tutorial, nor is it a reference manual. --[[User:Lexein|Lexein]] ([[User talk:Lexein|talk]]) 02:06, 24 December 2010 (UTC)
:My point is that this article BitTorrent_(protocol) is not actually about a protocol. It's actually misnamed. This article is actually about the software and network. It never goes in to any detail about the actual protocol. look at the [[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Www]] which covers the architecture, network, and software. Then look at [[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Http]] which is about the protocol of the www. This article here is like the WWW page. There should be a second article about the protocol. This article here should hold the [[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bittorrent]] then an actual protocol article at [[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bittorrent_protocol]] should be created. [[Special:Contributions/38.96.160.226|38.96.160.226]] ([[User talk:38.96.160.226|talk]]) 18:33, 11 January 2011 (UTC)
::Well, this article actually does discuss the protocol in the context of the behavior of a generic bittorrent client, which I find meets Wikipedia's goal of being comprehensible to a general audience. More detail might be good, if reliably sourced, but a too-narrowly technical "pure protocol" article of the sort which satisfy programmers and academics would likely diverge from that goal, into ''reference manual'' land. There probably will never be any protocol article on Wikipedia which is complete enough to actually code any client, so it's probably best to let that go.
::Some time ago, the once-unified "BitTorrent" article was split. The divisions semi-settled on company, first client, and protocol/generic-client behavior/performance/adoption/cultural impact/etc. Renaming isn't much of an option, because a search for "BitTorrent" should land on the disambiguation page. I don't think splitting further is a good option, nor is re-merging, really, so maybe careful rewriting and re-organization is the best option. --[[User:Lexein|Lexein]] ([[User talk:Lexein|talk]]) 22:52, 11 January 2011 (UTC)

I agree with mister IP address—this is a BitTorrent overview, and is written in a very accessible, unassuming manner. This is not about the BitTorrent *protocol*. <span style="font-size: smaller;" class="autosigned">— Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[Special:Contributions/88.14.115.243|88.14.115.243]] ([[User talk:88.14.115.243|talk]]) 21:04, 16 August 2011 (UTC)</span><!-- Template:Unsigned IP --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->

== Diagram ==

The GIF detailing how BitTorrent works is mindlessly fucking confusing, and this is for someone who knows how the protocol works. I can only imagine how bewildering it is for someone who doesn't understand BitTorrent at all.
<small><span class="autosigned">— Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[User:202.180.105.198|202.180.105.198]] ([[User talk:202.180.105.198|talk]] • [[Special:Contributions/202.180.105.198|contribs]]) 16:38, 5 July 2011</span></small><!-- Template:Unsigned -->
{{anchor|asking}}
:Specific recommendations would be helpful. There was discussion about it as it was created and modified. In my opinion, a Javascript/HTML5 image player with a controllable timeline would be an improvement, but I don't know of one offhand. --[[User:Lexein|Lexein]] ([[User talk:Lexein|talk]]) 23:51, 22 August 2011 (UTC)

:Second that; Diagram really annoying. Speaking as someone who does not know the protocol its useless and annoying. [[Special:Contributions/220.239.207.197|220.239.207.197]] ([[User talk:220.239.207.197|talk]]) 07:39, 14 February 2013 (UTC)

::Uh, yeah, got it, you don't like it. Does that mean "stop the animation" or "delete the image" or "change the image" or "make it not repeat" or ''what?'' I vaguely recall ''[[#asking|asking for specific recommendations]]''. --[[User:Lexein|Lexein]] ([[User talk:Lexein|talk]]) 08:40, 14 February 2013 (UTC)

:::I completely disagree with the above, the current [[:File:FildelningMedBitTorrent.png|FildelningMedBitTorrent.png]] is much less useful than the previous [[:File:Torrentcomp small.gif|Torrentcomp small.gif]]; I suggest a revert to the latter. [[User:Buhman|Buhman]] ([[User talk:Buhman|talk]]) 21:33, 12 May 2013 (UTC)
::::I agree - I always found the animated GIF to be a good illustration. The present one misses just about everything. I think people thought there was going to be a test, and rather than just watching the flow and understanding the principle, some thought they had to understand and remember the exact order that each computer talked to which other, and what colour each arrow was. Or something. --[[User:Nigelj|Nigelj]] ([[User talk:Nigelj|talk]]) 22:44, 12 May 2013 (UTC)

== Piracy ==

Piracy at least deserves a mention. It's not a secret that BitTorrent's main use-case is movie piracy by college students and anime fan dubs. <span style="font-size: smaller;" class="autosigned">— Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[Special:Contributions/76.100.61.70|76.100.61.70]] ([[User talk:76.100.61.70|talk]]) 23:31, 22 August 2011 (UTC)</span><!-- Template:Unsigned IP --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->
:This is the article about the ''protocol'' which is (should be) a purely technical article, explaining how it works. Piracy is mentioned elsewhere, see "See also", and the topnote. --[[User:Lexein|Lexein]] ([[User talk:Lexein|talk]]) 23:40, 22 August 2011 (UTC)
If it were purely technical it wouldn't have an adoption section. Piracy should have it's own bullet point there, probably the first one. [[Special:Contributions/76.100.61.70|76.100.61.70]] ([[User talk:76.100.61.70|talk]]) 23:09, 29 August 2011 (UTC)

In fact, there isn't even a link to the Piracy article [[User:Fionakiwi|Fionakiwi]] ([[User talk:Fionakiwi|talk]]) 21:15, 27 February 2012 (UTC)

== User accounts per IP ==
"At any given instant of time BitTorrent has, on average, more active users than YouTube and Facebook combined. (This refers to the number of active users at any instant and not to the total number of unique users.)[5][6][dubious – discuss]"

It would be nice to remove the "dubious" tag, obviously, but it is going to take a little work. It can be empirically observed that the statement is true, but it could be misleading. It has to be true, because there is no such thing as no IP address for a positive number of active user accounts, and it is so improbable as to be impossible that there are no IP addresses with more than one user account. On the other hand, is the ratio significant enough to mention? If BitTorrent has numbers for IP addresses, then someone should get them. Please. [[User:Anarchangel|Anarchangel]] ([[User talk:Anarchangel|talk]]) 23:26, 16 December 2011 (UTC)

== Metaphysics ==

The way bittorrent works is analogous to the way big ideas are transmitted between people. Is there a science that looks at this in more detail? I think the world can learn a lot from computer science. <span style="font-size: smaller;" class="autosigned">— Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[Special:Contributions/196.215.118.227|196.215.118.227]] ([[User talk:196.215.118.227|talk]]) 21:55, 25 June 2012 (UTC)</span><!-- Template:Unsigned IP --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->

:I agree but the talk is too big. Firstly, what you really want to see should be written in p2p article, whereas bittorrent the protocol, no matter how common, doesn't change the fact that it is an implementation of the greater concept you describe, we have plenty p2p networks for different things, btw. I don't know how it is related to CompSci, the idea is highly trivial for CompSci-ists. My guess is that you are referring to sociology, what you feel so amazing, so powerful about p2p is that, if people have lower connectivity among each other, then people(the clients) have higher tendency to rely on certain clients(aka. centralized server). This happens everywhere before bittorrent, when it gets on news some brands it as illegal, we also have new words like piracy, not strictly relevant though.
:I am not sure how this kind of sociology can fit in, but you better find some reliable sources first. --[[User:Mylittleanon|Mylittleanon]] ([[User talk:Mylittleanon|talk]]) 07:07, 7 April 2013 (UTC)

== Distributed Trackers ==

The section on '''Distributed Trackers''' should be more thoroughly cited:

* Virtual torrents - little to no explanation of how this works by searching. Need a citation or explanation.
* Anatomic P2P - ''

Also, the section itself could possibly be restructured to better inform. Changes should be outlined regarding the difference between Kademlia and BitTorrent Mainline DHT.

[[User:Liamzebedee|Liamzebedee]] ([[User talk:Liamzebedee|talk]]) 11:51, 14 July 2012 (UTC)

==Inaccessible language==
I have done my best with general copyediting, but a more knowledgeable copyeditor will need to review the article for technical language.--[[User:Soulparadox|Soulparadox]] ([[User talk:Soulparadox|talk]]) 09:54, 24 September 2012 (UTC)


Am I misunderstanding the essence of [[BitTorrent_(company)#BitTorrent_Bundle]]? Please see this (attempt at a) discussion over whether we can/should link to Madonna's bundle: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:IndianBio#Accusations_about_personal_behavior_that_lack_evidence_are_considered_personal_attacks... It's hard to deal with someone who thinks users are uploadable to a website. <sic> And conflates protocols, domains and hostnames. And seems to be saying we need to delete [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/BitTorrent_(company)#External_links this page section]! --[[Special:Contributions/50.201.195.170|50.201.195.170]] ([[User talk:50.201.195.170|talk]]) 06:28, 14 August 2018 (UTC)
== Briefly describe the outstanding advantage over centralization using big-O or graph? ==


== bittorrent.com malware ==
It is tagged that the article is too technical. It bundles the encryption and DHT stuff, I think the article is also too long. What i would like to change is that the reader would say "aha!" immediately out of visualization of p2p network, a svg graph for example, to explain what bittorrent is, and its difference between centralized server. --[[User:Mylittleanon|Mylittleanon]] ([[User talk:Mylittleanon|talk]]) 06:46, 7 April 2013 (UTC)


If you install the Bittorrent Web, your PC will be riddled with bloat ware, malware, web browser extensions installed, search engine changed, etc. Beware. <!-- Template:Unsigned IP --><small class="autosigned">—&nbsp;Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[Special:Contributions/2601:600:9500:3180:BC17:E90:56BC:5C8E|2601:600:9500:3180:BC17:E90:56BC:5C8E]] ([[User talk:2601:600:9500:3180:BC17:E90:56BC:5C8E#top|talk]]) 06:01, 6 December 2018 (UTC)</small> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->
== Relevance of college to article ==


== Update last paragraph of summary ==
I reverted this twice and I would prefer to have other feedback before doing so again. I see no relevance to listing Cohen's college in this article at all. It is extremely rare for this to be done (outside of cases like Google where Page & Brin started the search engine at Stanford). Cohen didn't start BitTorrent at Buffalo, didn't receive any assistance/funding/etc. from Buffalo, and didn't even graduate from there. If I'm the only one who thinks this, I will leave it alone but I would like to see other editors opinions on this.[[User:Caidh|Caidh]] ([[User talk:Caidh|talk]]) 12:31, 9 August 2013 (UTC)


Are there any news stats for "As of 2013, BitTorrent has 15–27 million, concurrent users, at any time." seen on the last paragraph of the article summary? BitTorrent has expanded probably exponentially like the rest of the internet in those 7 years. [[User:DannyDouble|DannyDouble]] ([[User talk:DannyDouble|talk]]) 21:19, 5 September 2020 (UTC)
== bitlove.org ==


== Disputing claim that bittorrent generated Internet traffic, with 2.46% of down, and 27.58% of up traffic ==
Hey I am unsure if pages like http://bitlove.org/ should be listed in [[BitTorrent#Broadcasters]]. I am not sure what the policy is for a listing. bitlove.org functionas as a bittorrent webseed supported tracker for podcasts. --[[User:Sk!d|Sk!d]] ([[User talk:Sk!d|talk]]) 12:29, 2 January 2014 (UTC)
: My apologies - I inadvertently removed your comment on the talk page but I restored it. Sorry about that! [[User:Caidh|Caidh]] ([[User talk:Caidh|talk]]) 19:50, 2 January 2014 (UTC)


In first section is mentioned that ''In 2019, BitTorrent was a dominant file sharing protocol and generated a substantial amount of Internet traffic, with 2.46% of downstream, and 27.58% of upstream traffic'' I would like to dispute this on those reasons:
== the BitTorrent entry is perfectly fine - please don't dumb it down ! ==


As I don't see any obvious reason why up and down traffic should be not equivalent (remember each date that you send, you're sending it to somebody so what's on your side upstream is on receiving side downstream).


After checking referenced article "doi:10.1002/cpe.5723" I found that article itself is not about this subject but rather about energy consumption of BiTtorent network,
it's a really good article - it's clear and precise !
They are mentioning original statement in introduction page, but not as part of their study. And they are referencing ''The Global Internet Phenomena Report, Sandvine; 2019.'' as source for that information.


For that last reference, I wasn't able to get hand on that so I wasn't able to verify if it's mentioned there and how they get that number.
== "sequential downloading" section requested! ==
{{Expert-talk}}


[[User:Burlak23|Burlak23]] ([[User talk:Burlak23|talk]]) 19:46, 3 February 2021 (UTC)
I am talking about certain torrent clients ability to download a small chunk of the file and making that available for consumption (viewing, listening, etc) while more chunks are downloaded, essentially allowing the client to act as if the content was streamed.


: The obvious reason that an identical upload and download rate would result in significant differences in percentage share is that the vast, vast majority of Internet traffic is downloads; Web servers are not considered to be uploading their bytes every time. Most Web users never upload anything; their upstream consists solely of GET requests, unless they're sending email, or playing a game, or using chat software.
I browsed the article but could not find anything on this. I therefore propose that a knowledgeable editor adds a small new section discussing this capability that torrent clients can have. If you object "this isn't part of the torrent specification" then at the very least, add a mention and a link onwards to a dedicated article.
: BitTorrent accounts for a significant amount of downloads, but it's competing against all other downstream traffic for its share. There are far fewer competing upload categories. The remainder is almost surely entirely other P2P or high-bandwith duplex activities like video calls.
: [[User:Thumperward|Chris Cunningham (user:thumperward)]] ([[User talk:Thumperward|talk]]) 18:20, 13 September 2021 (UTC)
:Sandvine is the source for all these claims, indeed. The problem is it now says it is just 4% upstream and not even on mobile networks. Also, they probably do not have high enough visability on this anyway. As for your confusion about upstream and downstream, it is a famous rule that when you download something on bittorrent you should stay on the upload as long as possible. So the difference is not at all surprising. [[User:Valery Zapolodov|Valery Zapolodov]] ([[User talk:Valery Zapolodov|talk]]) 10:17, 3 May 2024 (UTC)


== Requested merge 30 September 2024 ==
Please note: I am certainly no expert and I'm not even sure what to call this feature. Please improve mercilessly :)


I propose the merging of [[Torrent file]] into here BitTorrent. There's not much of a reason for it to be fractured and separate from here. On a side note, that article is also very lacking in references as it is. [[User:Sceeegt|Sceeegt]] ([[User talk:Sceeegt|talk]]) 00:07, 30 September 2024 (UTC)
[[User:CapnZapp|CapnZapp]] ([[User talk:CapnZapp|talk]]) 12:10, 18 March 2015 (UTC)

Latest revision as of 01:55, 3 December 2024

Article milestones
DateProcessResult
November 3, 2004Peer reviewReviewed

[edit]

Am I misunderstanding the essence of BitTorrent_(company)#BitTorrent_Bundle? Please see this (attempt at a) discussion over whether we can/should link to Madonna's bundle: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:IndianBio#Accusations_about_personal_behavior_that_lack_evidence_are_considered_personal_attacks... It's hard to deal with someone who thinks users are uploadable to a website. <sic> And conflates protocols, domains and hostnames. And seems to be saying we need to delete this page section! --50.201.195.170 (talk) 06:28, 14 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

bittorrent.com malware

[edit]

If you install the Bittorrent Web, your PC will be riddled with bloat ware, malware, web browser extensions installed, search engine changed, etc. Beware. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2601:600:9500:3180:BC17:E90:56BC:5C8E (talk) 06:01, 6 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Update last paragraph of summary

[edit]

Are there any news stats for "As of 2013, BitTorrent has 15–27 million, concurrent users, at any time." seen on the last paragraph of the article summary? BitTorrent has expanded probably exponentially like the rest of the internet in those 7 years. DannyDouble (talk) 21:19, 5 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Disputing claim that bittorrent generated Internet traffic, with 2.46% of down, and 27.58% of up traffic

[edit]

In first section is mentioned that In 2019, BitTorrent was a dominant file sharing protocol and generated a substantial amount of Internet traffic, with 2.46% of downstream, and 27.58% of upstream traffic I would like to dispute this on those reasons:

As I don't see any obvious reason why up and down traffic should be not equivalent (remember each date that you send, you're sending it to somebody so what's on your side upstream is on receiving side downstream).

After checking referenced article "doi:10.1002/cpe.5723" I found that article itself is not about this subject but rather about energy consumption of BiTtorent network, They are mentioning original statement in introduction page, but not as part of their study. And they are referencing The Global Internet Phenomena Report, Sandvine; 2019. as source for that information.

For that last reference, I wasn't able to get hand on that so I wasn't able to verify if it's mentioned there and how they get that number.

Burlak23 (talk) 19:46, 3 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The obvious reason that an identical upload and download rate would result in significant differences in percentage share is that the vast, vast majority of Internet traffic is downloads; Web servers are not considered to be uploading their bytes every time. Most Web users never upload anything; their upstream consists solely of GET requests, unless they're sending email, or playing a game, or using chat software.
BitTorrent accounts for a significant amount of downloads, but it's competing against all other downstream traffic for its share. There are far fewer competing upload categories. The remainder is almost surely entirely other P2P or high-bandwith duplex activities like video calls.
Chris Cunningham (user:thumperward) (talk) 18:20, 13 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Sandvine is the source for all these claims, indeed. The problem is it now says it is just 4% upstream and not even on mobile networks. Also, they probably do not have high enough visability on this anyway. As for your confusion about upstream and downstream, it is a famous rule that when you download something on bittorrent you should stay on the upload as long as possible. So the difference is not at all surprising. Valery Zapolodov (talk) 10:17, 3 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Requested merge 30 September 2024

[edit]

I propose the merging of Torrent file into here BitTorrent. There's not much of a reason for it to be fractured and separate from here. On a side note, that article is also very lacking in references as it is. Sceeegt (talk) 00:07, 30 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/enwiki/w/index.php?title=Talk:BitTorrent&oldid=1260877150"