Q. I found this article (never mind how short it was) very boring to read. The title created some expectations, but the actual text didn't really live up to them. To me, as a sort of computer nitwit it was all one big technical circus that I'm not interested in to be honest. Why is is THAT important to have a definition on wat p2p is exactly? An also; I just don't understand why it is really necessary to spend so much time on this so-called 'horseless carriage'
A. As a Kazaa and E-Mule user I only know the basics of p2p. I never download movies, only series and music which other people have offered to share. If a tv company broadcast a series, a viewer tapes them and puts it on the Kazaa network...why should this be a problem? Once a cd has been bought by one person and he or she decides that sahring is only a nice thing to do, there's no stopping to it. Once people start selling downloaded music (not to a friend for some euro's but let's say small time dealer-type-people or marketpeople) it's where the fun stops. Isn't this p2p type of filesharing not the result of the increased prices for cd's, dvd's etc? Not that those companies have that much to cry about: I recently read that the sale of music cds in regular stores didn't really decreased as much as people thought (with the coming of p2p). As far as the different systems to which p2p does or doesn't belong and why...it's here where I have to draw the line because to me it makes as much sense as trying to read Chinese backwards wile standing upside down. It is just that on MY LEVEl of 'peeriness' I don't get all the fuss that surrounds thisInternet movement.
Rutherford (reader)
Q. This text on p2p was has a more business like character and offers companies a short insight on this popular technology. The only thing that came up in my Hollywood-scenario-driven-mind was: what happens in the security area? Is there any trace thing that updates on who is looking into whose computer and for what?
A. p2p makes your company not only better and faster, it also makes your company more vulnerable. Well...according to me:) New technologies always bring negative sides with them. Information abuse etc. I was just wondering how this security aspect works with major companies like Intel and AOL that are mentioned in the article. Having the p2p in their own hands gives them a lot of power at the same time
Sorry but that was all I could come up with... wel not really.... there was ONE other tiny detail that I was thinking about was the instant messaging aspect in business p2p systems. I think people underestimate the immense outcome it has on relationships, both on the floor and off. (I'm being veeeeery serious here) Things that before would have been discussed during lunchbreaks or coffebreaks are now safely being talked about through the computer. Nobody ever finds out...or maybe someone does: if there actually is a p2p police officer that serves Intel or AOL. Who knows how many relationships have emerged, been ended, or how many internal take-overs have been planned through the messaging. To me, a research like THAT would be interesting to read. Maybe I will email Emelie Rutherford to ask her if she's interested in it. She might have given an nice clean explanation of it all, but like I said...what does she think of the interrelational/ social aspect of the p2p technology?
Boase & Wellman (reader)
A. As a Kazaa and E-Mule user I only know the basics of p2p. I never download movies, only series and music which other people have offered to share. If a tv company broadcast a series, a viewer tapes them and puts it on the Kazaa network...why should this be a problem? Once a cd has been bought by one person and he or she decides that sahring is only a nice thing to do, there's no stopping to it. Once people start selling downloaded music (not to a friend for some euro's but let's say small time dealer-type-people or marketpeople) it's where the fun stops. Isn't this p2p type of filesharing not the result of the increased prices for cd's, dvd's etc? Not that those companies have that much to cry about: I recently read that the sale of music cds in regular stores didn't really decreased as much as people thought (with the coming of p2p). As far as the different systems to which p2p does or doesn't belong and why...it's here where I have to draw the line because to me it makes as much sense as trying to read Chinese backwards wile standing upside down. It is just that on MY LEVEl of 'peeriness' I don't get all the fuss that surrounds thisInternet movement.
Rutherford (reader)
Q. This text on p2p was has a more business like character and offers companies a short insight on this popular technology. The only thing that came up in my Hollywood-scenario-driven-mind was: what happens in the security area? Is there any trace thing that updates on who is looking into whose computer and for what?
A. p2p makes your company not only better and faster, it also makes your company more vulnerable. Well...according to me:) New technologies always bring negative sides with them. Information abuse etc. I was just wondering how this security aspect works with major companies like Intel and AOL that are mentioned in the article. Having the p2p in their own hands gives them a lot of power at the same time
Sorry but that was all I could come up with... wel not really.... there was ONE other tiny detail that I was thinking about was the instant messaging aspect in business p2p systems. I think people underestimate the immense outcome it has on relationships, both on the floor and off. (I'm being veeeeery serious here) Things that before would have been discussed during lunchbreaks or coffebreaks are now safely being talked about through the computer. Nobody ever finds out...or maybe someone does: if there actually is a p2p police officer that serves Intel or AOL. Who knows how many relationships have emerged, been ended, or how many internal take-overs have been planned through the messaging. To me, a research like THAT would be interesting to read. Maybe I will email Emelie Rutherford to ask her if she's interested in it. She might have given an nice clean explanation of it all, but like I said...what does she think of the interrelational/ social aspect of the p2p technology?
Boase & Wellman (reader)
Q. Was really interesting to read about viruses and their characteristics. Especially after my pc had been attacked by the evil Sasser virus and other worm type thingys that gave me some serious headaches the past few weeks. With all types of different viruses and so on, and alle these different virus removers (I recently installed an Avast shield: downloaded all the way from Czechoslovakia woohoo! because my Norton was killed. Avast was for free....talking about sharing:)
I was wondering though if there is a possibility that someone like Bill Gates gets bored, hires some freak to spread worms and viruses and then offers all 'victims' new software protection programmes?
A. I think that there are many people just like me who can be fooled easily when it comes to obtaining new software or such things. With so many viruses going round, it must be hard to track down where they all come from, even though there are hackers that are being traced down and punished. These mega companies as Microsoft can easily spread viruses among their users/clients that they themselves don't know of. I wonder if you can sue whoever is responsible for the virus that perhaps deletes your harddrive or other vital documents. I think there should be some law saying you can, but only if you had done your share of protecting first. I mean: if someone actually robs your store you can be either insured for it (or not) and the offender gets his (or her..but without being sexist it's usually a man;) punishment. Howver, whenever it comes down to the cyberspace or virtual space boundaries seem to be more vague. Governments could order for a lifetime computer insurance because you cannot weapon yourself (and your buddy the pc) against everything. And if this is just a utopia, perhaps the software sharing sites (p2p) like my own recently free downloaded Avast shield aren't that bad after all?? (www.avast.com)
I was wondering though if there is a possibility that someone like Bill Gates gets bored, hires some freak to spread worms and viruses and then offers all 'victims' new software protection programmes?
A. I think that there are many people just like me who can be fooled easily when it comes to obtaining new software or such things. With so many viruses going round, it must be hard to track down where they all come from, even though there are hackers that are being traced down and punished. These mega companies as Microsoft can easily spread viruses among their users/clients that they themselves don't know of. I wonder if you can sue whoever is responsible for the virus that perhaps deletes your harddrive or other vital documents. I think there should be some law saying you can, but only if you had done your share of protecting first. I mean: if someone actually robs your store you can be either insured for it (or not) and the offender gets his (or her..but without being sexist it's usually a man;) punishment. Howver, whenever it comes down to the cyberspace or virtual space boundaries seem to be more vague. Governments could order for a lifetime computer insurance because you cannot weapon yourself (and your buddy the pc) against everything. And if this is just a utopia, perhaps the software sharing sites (p2p) like my own recently free downloaded Avast shield aren't that bad after all?? (www.avast.com)
