PORTAL TWO OFFICIAL DISCUSSION

[Demosthenes]

the it's free so it's exempt from criticism argument, awesome

Except no. I tossed out a reply as palid as the one he broached. On purpose.

[#686578]

Not really

[Demosthenes]

Alright then, offer a better, faster, and safer method to get releases out in a single file format. One that is free and does not bottleneck distribution at the start the way every p2p client does.

[#686578]

Oh man you dropped 15 bucks, I can already feel the cheap ass melting off of you.

It was $10

[#686578]

Alright then, offer a better, faster, and safer method to get releases out in a single file format. One that is free and does not bottleneck distribution at the start the way every p2p client does.

Why does it have to be a single file format? Why cant you just download in the original format? ISO/MP3/etc? I dont see how the file format has anything to do with bottlenecking distribution and I dont see how p2p clients are related to the file format at all.

[Demosthenes]

Why does it have to be a single file format? Why cant you just download in the original format? ISO/MP3/etc? I dont see how the file format has anything to do with bottlenecking distribution and I dont see how p2p clients are related to the file format at all.

When I say single file format I do mean one ISO file vs multirar. You missed all the other points though.

[#686578]

Because all of the other points dont have anything to do with what I'm saying at all dumbfuck. I'm not hating on DDL or newsgroups as a distribution that's fine. It's the fucking archaic way of which they do it with multirars that pisses me off.

[Demosthenes]

Because all of the other points dont have anything to do with what I'm saying at all dumbfuck. I'm not hating on DDL or newsgroups as a distribution that's fine. It's the fucking archaic way of which they do it with multirars that pisses me off.

I explained to you WHY it was done that way. Then asked you to perceive a better option/alternative method that trounces said archaic ways. Quit being a little shit-stain.

[#686578]

And I already said in my very beginning complaints about it that it's archaic because it was used primarily because of the way the internet was back 10-15 years ago when connections werent stable, smaller bandwidths, and overall it was pretty shitty back then. You couldnt download entire files at once because wups it got interrupted, or wups one or two data transfers got corrupt. Today we CAN download entire ISOs all at once. I'll DDL a whole gig at a time, and you know what? IT'S FINE EVERY SINGLE TIME. I dont need to download it in 25MB rars.

[#686578]

And the fucking newsgroups themselves shouldnt even have multirar files anymore. Sure back in the day when the internet was kind of unstable and all it took to disconnect you was for someone to pick up the phone but today we have things like redundancy, file checking, and always on connections. You know what we also have? Download resumes. You can pause/resume direct downloads for a long time now (and resume interrupted downloads of course). There's no fucking reason for it other than being jerkbags and being stuck in your archaic ways

Look right here, I've already said this.

[#686578]

Today we can afford to just download the whole thing. If it's a program with an installation method ISO is fine, if it's already a precracked program one massive RAR is fine, the entire album in a single archive is fine. For torrenting you dont even need to archive it, just torrent the directory.

[#686578]

There's absolutely zero benefit at all to splitting your downloads into multiple archives today. And you havent even explained WHY it's beneficial either, you've just said they do it over and over again. That's all you've ever said is that they do it. Not why. You dont even go on to say they do it because it's always been done that way. All you keep saying over and over again is "they multiarchive files because they do."

[#686578]

Here let's just do this and get this out of the way before you respond with something like "that's not what I said" or some shit, though you'll probably respond while I'm doing this."

All scene releases show up on newsgroups first.

Sky is blue, etc.

That is the point a lot of newgroups have filesize limitations. People that distro anywhere else distro exactly as the scene puts it out. What makes me mad is when people rar movies up, because it only makes the file bigger.

Why? Because Newsgroups refuse to change? There's no reason this should be the way it is.

Newsgroup infra is not going to change anytime soon.

Because it's arcahic and backwards?

The reason you get multi still in other places for the most part is speed. Someone wants to be the first to share the torrent and get the most seed credit.

Yes I understand that. I know this. Sky is blue again.

Add the fact that it helps as a visual albeit weak md5. Means you can start your torrent somewhere and finish elsewhere.

Sky is blue.

I do that shit with blackcats all the time, dl from somewhere else, join 0 day seed party on blackcats.

Also complain about getting free shit.

Lol.

Agreed.

Lol.

Has anyone in the history of man ever paid for winrar?

Who won the rarzip war?

Stuffit expander that's who.

Dem sit files!

LOL

Lol.

Too busy not complaining about free shit.

Lol.

Hope your superior file management serves you well in piracy.

Lol.

Except no. I tossed out a reply as palid as the one he broached. On purpose.

Except no. You're retarded.

Alright then, offer a better, faster, and safer method to get releases out in a single file format. One that is free and does not bottleneck distribution at the start the way every p2p client does.

And from now on I'm just posting these to say I quoted all of your posts in this thread.

When I say single file format I do mean one ISO file vs multirar. You missed all the other points though.

I explained to you WHY it was done that way. Then asked you to perceive a better option/alternative method that trounces said archaic ways. Quit being a little shit-stain.

[Tajin]

"The definition of what posting size is too large can vary from news server to news server, and from newsgroup to newsgroup. But generally the maximum permitted post size has been slowly increasing for years, with servers in the beginning allowing perhaps only 32 kilobytes in a single post (as if a normal text message), to the largest commercial servers now permitting up to 50 megabytes per post for DVD/CD redistribution."

From wikithingie and why the split into multiple files.

[Demosthenes]

Why? Because Newsgroups refuse to change? There's no reason this should be the way it is.

You do realize what a newsgroup is right?

[Demosthenes]

Wait, let me complain to sono real quick about how we need attachments here and why they should be in the ballpark of 10GB per.

[Demosthenes]

There is no reason Google should have a file size limit on email attachments either.

[#686578]

You do realize what a newsgroup is right?

You realize the function that newsgroups facilitate right?

[Demosthenes]

You realize the function that newsgroups facilitate right?

Facilitation is neither here nor there. What they were built to do, they do excellently. The added ability to share files is just one gigantic cherry. Hence why the so called 'archaic system' is not changing any time soon.

[#686578]

Why not? It's completely backwards. Just because they were built to do something and they do it well doesnt mean that what they do isnt out dated.