BitTorrent gets a whole bunch of things right, but it’s core fault (which I think is just an unfortunate case of its design predating cryptocurrencies) is that it doesn’t distinguish people who want to consume from people who want to provide.

This is something that Nostr gets right, and why it’s got a better chance of scaling vs scuttlebutt. There are people who run relays and there are people who use clients. And it’s possible economically because relay operators can charge for the service they provide.

For the BitTorrent network to be healthy users must try to balance what they take from the network by giving back to the network. This is hardly ever the case, so you end up with leeches on one side ruining the network, and lawful users who suffer for their good will.

If you can incorporate a currency to bridge the gap between consumers and providers you have yourself a much healthier system.

Reply to this note

Please Login to reply.

Discussion

We can make paid seeders with Lightning as a BitTorrent extension, but would anyone really use that?

Paid to host the seed? If so, yeah probably.

Only for niche content that's not available without incentives

The thing is that once you start re-jigging BitTorrent to adopt a paid incentive structure you might as well opt for a much simpler protocol altogether

It’s possible paid relays may offer seeding and hosting media content for their users. I see it as a value add service.

Mobiles can’t really seed, so torrents will need to defer to a server somehow.