Beta
×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Evolving Swarms with Swarmstreaming

CmdrTaco posted more than 9 years ago | from the the-next-logical-step dept.

The Internet 246

Orasis writes "Applications like Bittorrent have broadly validated swarming technology in the real-world. Now, the inventor of swarming has released a new technology called swarmstreaming that allows smooth progressive playback of content, skipping ahead, and random access without downloading the entire file. It's an HTTP proxy, so browsers, podcasting, and RSS apps should be able to use it transparently. "

cancel ×

246 comments

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

Forget about browsers and RSS (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#11076023)

Think about what this means for pr0n!

Re:Forget about browsers and RSS (5, Funny)

buro9 (633210) | more than 9 years ago | (#11076035)

Since when did you want to pause pr0n?

You must be doing it wrong... you are masturbating at the same time right?

Not pause! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#11076091)

Jump ahead! Haven't you ever seen a scene you wanted to skip past? Well, now you can... even before it's done downloading.

Re:Not pause! (5, Funny)

jester22c (613967) | more than 9 years ago | (#11076135)

So wait... you can pause bees in mid-air? Or are there bees in the pr0n that we're pausing? Either way this sounds dangerous.

Re:Forget about browsers and RSS (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#11076113)

Not pausing, but skipping the boring parts

Re: Forget about browsers and RSS (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#11076423)

Not pausing, but skipping the boring parts

You mean skipping the entire pr0n movie?

Re:Forget about browsers and RSS (1)

Televisor (827008) | more than 9 years ago | (#11076233)

Yeah, I find stuff like moving the mouse pretty much impossible anyway.

Re:Forget about browsers and RSS (1)

iamzack (830561) | more than 9 years ago | (#11076279)

Since when did you want to pause pr0n?

For the times when you stop and think, is he really peeing on that girl?

Re:Forget about browsers and RSS (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#11076419)

Hehe :)

Re:Forget about browsers and RSS (1)

evilmousse (798341) | more than 9 years ago | (#11076384)


since? the proper question is UNTIL. ..until they implement slow-motion, that is.

offtopic: (really though, why aren't more digital video players capable of slow motion? seems to me, regardless of format, it could be accomplished with an extra modifying value to set the played duration of a recorded second.)

Re:Forget about browsers and RSS (5, Funny)

buddhaseviltwin (786340) | more than 9 years ago | (#11076061)

Think about what this means for pr0n!

Is it just me, or isn't that the default implication for any new video streaming technology?

Oh wait... You must be new here.

In other news... (4, Funny)

k4_pacific (736911) | more than 9 years ago | (#11076031)

In other news, the inventor of swarming was attacked by killer bees.

Re:In other news... (1)

nofx_3 (40519) | more than 9 years ago | (#11076356)

Were they africanized bees?

-kaplanfx

Re:In other news... (5, Funny)

Anubis350 (772791) | more than 9 years ago | (#11076400)

get with the times, its obvious the bees decided that killing him wasnt enough, hired a lawyer, and are now suing. They are claiming that they own the intellectual property associated with swarming and use of the word. The are joined in their lawsuit by wasps, flies, and locusts who have all jointly formed the SIAA (Swarming Insects Association of America).

in a statement issued by the SIAA they call humans who use swarming technology of violating copyright and tarnishing their image as insects by using swarming for illegal activites......

fp (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#11076039)

=) first post. evar.

Well, the linked site isn't using it... (5, Funny)

datastalker (775227) | more than 9 years ago | (#11076044)

...since it's Slashdotted after one comment. :(

Google Cache [216.239.57.104]

The text... Google's cache isn't up to date. (0, Redundant)

DeckardJK (555299) | more than 9 years ago | (#11076173)

December 13, 2004 Swarmstreaming: Swarming Downloads Evolved I'm proud to finally unveil swarmstreaming our third generation of swarming algorithms that are designed for the fastest downloads of web content and multimedia without any special server software or silly .swarm files. This is probably our most exciting advancement since the original invention of swarming. The technology improves swarming by ensuring that the bytes that the user wants next are scheduled to be received next. So if they're playing back a video file, the bytes from the front of the file will be received first. If the user (or application) skips forward to the middle of the file, the bytes at the middle of the file will be prioritized. Thus, unlike first generation swarming systems like Swarmcast or Bittorrent, you don't have to wait for the entire file to download to do something useful with it!. Under the covers it is almost unimaginably more complicated than this because it also provides Self-Healing Downloads, implements a full-blown, scalable, Web Proxy Cache, and actively works to ensure that the video playback never studders or buffers by constantly monitoring and adapting to changing network conditions. For a raw feature dump, check out the SwarmStream SDK Feature Matrix Nowadays, because of its immense popularity, most people have only heard of swarming because of Bittorrent. I have no animosity towards Bittorrent because it has done more than any application to prove the value of swarming to the general public. But if people are impressed by Bittorrent, they're going to be absolutely blow away by swarmstreaming and how far we've taken swarming since its humble beginnings five years ago. The best source of information right now on swarmstreaming is Onion Networks SwarmStream SDK, so check it out and let me know what you think.

The text (formatted better) (4, Informative)

DeckardJK (555299) | more than 9 years ago | (#11076192)

December 13, 2004

Swarmstreaming: Swarming Downloads Evolved

I'm proud to finally unveil swarmstreaming our third generation of swarming algorithms that are designed for the fastest downloads of web content and multimedia without any special server software or silly .swarm files. This is probably our most exciting advancement since the original invention of swarming.

The technology improves swarming by ensuring that the bytes that the user wants next are scheduled to be received next. So if they're playing back a video file, the bytes from the front of the file will be received first. If the user (or application) skips forward to the middle of the file, the bytes at the middle of the file will be prioritized. Thus, unlike first generation swarming systems like Swarmcast or Bittorrent, you don't have to wait for the entire file to download to do something useful with it!.

Under the covers it is almost unimaginably more complicated than this because it also provides Self-Healing Downloads, implements a full-blown, scalable, Web Proxy Cache, and actively works to ensure that the video playback never studders or buffers by constantly monitoring and adapting to changing network conditions. For a raw feature dump, check out the SwarmStream SDK Feature Matrix

Nowadays, because of its immense popularity, most people have only heard of swarming because of Bittorrent. I have no animosity towards Bittorrent because it has done more than any application to prove the value of swarming to the general public. But if people are impressed by Bittorrent, they're going to be absolutely blow away by swarmstreaming and how far we've taken swarming since its humble beginnings five years ago.

The best source of information right now on swarmstreaming is Onion Networks SwarmStream SDK, so check it out and let me know what you think.

Re:The text (formatted better) (1)

dknj (441802) | more than 9 years ago | (#11076293)

http://onionnetworks.com/technology/swarming/#swar mstreaming [onionnetworks.com]

This sounds very useful, hopefully we will see these features adopted widely in the future

-dk

Re:The text (formatted better) (3, Funny)

DeckardJK (555299) | more than 9 years ago | (#11076382)

http://www.poe-news.com/features.php?feat=31845 [poe-news.com]

A nice link from April 29th on his site... just figured I'd share... picture intensive... but its the "Rumsfeld Fighting Technique"

Re:The text (formatted better) (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#11076428)

Great attempt at karma whoring twice there, buddy. It appears to be working.

Re:The text (formatted better) (1)

DeckardJK (555299) | more than 9 years ago | (#11076458)

Oh it'll be modded down in a couple minutes anyway... it was my first attempt at a nicely formatted post on /. Gimme a break...

No more slashdotting? (2, Funny)

X0563511 (793323) | more than 9 years ago | (#11076045)

So, if this works 'transparently' to browsers, ect, does this mean slashdotting a site will be much harder?

Re:No more slashdotting? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#11076066)

sure we only need a slashdot-effect-proof proxy server.

Re:No more slashdotting? (1, Interesting)

Pxtl (151020) | more than 9 years ago | (#11076385)

No. Heaven forbid anyone ever try and improve HTTP - that's blasphemy, even though it seems to be the source of most of the weakness of the internet (can't home serve due to lack of NAT traversal, can't serving large files is suicide because of lack of swarming, no way to differentially update content or inform the user of updates so you have users mashing "refresh" over and over again and redownloading the same goddamn html).

No, http is perfect, that's why nobody ever ever bothers to change it.

But I'm not bitter.

Re: No more slashdotting? (1)

Alwin Henseler (640539) | more than 9 years ago | (#11076395)

"So, if this works 'transparently' to browsers, ect, does this mean slashdotting a site will be much harder?"

Well... if you consider 'swarming' to mean: "every recipient is potentially a distributor as well", then yes. 100 Million downloaders/readers, a little time -> 100 million mirror sites. Slashdotting then becomes a non-issue.

Site getting slow... here ya go, you can use the copy in my browser's cache, if only I knew what URL it has.

Something like this (1, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#11076046)

is going to bring the internet to a grinding halt someday.

Re:Something like this (1)

jacksonj04 (800021) | more than 9 years ago | (#11076414)

Someone mod this one up - swarming is all well and good unless people start to use it for everything. When every machine is streaming copies of the internet (OK, bits of it) there are going to be so many packets flying around the switches are just going to fall over.

the right tool for the right job (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#11076538)

Some things are better served swarmed, others are better served whole.

I prefer single-source if the server can serve me as fast as I can download. On a modem, that's just about any non-slashdotted site.

For things like linux distros, a download manager using a system of mirrors is usually good enough.

I use torrents when demand swamps the ftp and http servers.

Inventor? (4, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#11076048)

Now, the inventor of swarming has released a new technology

Uh, so the killer bees are inventing technology now, and nobody is alarmed? I, for one, welcome our new technology-wielding killer bee overlords.

Re:Inventor? (1)

carabela (688886) | more than 9 years ago | (#11076497)

The idea of killer bees swarming software gives the phrase killer app a whole new dimension.

Is his real name ZIM! (1)

artoo (11319) | more than 9 years ago | (#11076516)

Obligatory Zim quote

TAK: I should have been an invader! I should have been part of the Great Assigning! I didn't HAVE to be stealing this planet from YOU!
ZIM: You're after my robot bee!
TAK: NO!!!

Fascist republicans. (0, Flamebait)

BushIsEvil (839548) | more than 9 years ago | (#11076050)

It's obvious the fascist republicans want to stop bit torrent. They can't deal with people sharing.

We all know George W. Bush allowed 9/11 to happen so that the Christian Coalition, Republicans, Ann Coulter, and Rush Limbaugh could kill liberals.

They can't hide the truth forever!

Re:Fascist republicans. (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#11076122)

I think that you have been watching far too much fox and republican parties. You have as many conspiracies theories as they do.

Re:Fascist republicans. (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#11076176)

"We all know George W. Bush allowed 9/11 to happen so that the Christian Coalition, Republicans, Ann Coulter, and Rush Limbaugh could kill liberals. "

Only liberals have abortions. You liberals are killing far more liberals than all of us right wing wackos put together.

Re:Fascist republicans. (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#11076196)

I think you are killing more potential people than anyone. Just think of all the jism you have swallowed over the years, you stupid ass.

Re:Fascist republicans. (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#11076241)

Question: Why do liberals and conservatives fight?
From my perspective it appears that liberals don't like rules and conservatives don't like giving things away.

Is there anything else? I mean really. For example, if you're talking about the environment, trees, or whatever, why don't liberals just buy up the property? Pay for it and be done with the discussion. You have _lots_ of money. You don't like what some businesses are doing? Buy them up and change their strategy.

The reason conservatives hate liberals is because liberals tend to just take things that don't belong to them. That'll piss off anyone. So stop it.

Re:Fascist republicans. (-1, Offtopic)

Hatta (162192) | more than 9 years ago | (#11076357)

Question: Why do liberals and conservatives fight?

Goebbles reportedly said, "The purpose of Nazi propaganda was to present an ostensible diversity behind which is an actual uniformity." Clear enough for you?

Uhoh (3, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#11076051)

This [unl.edu] is what his server looks like...

It's been done before. (1)

sakusha (441986) | more than 9 years ago | (#11076052)

I can't quite tell what this app is all about, this is surely a record, ZERO comments and the site's already slashdotted.

But all those features mentioned in the ./ summary are already available in QuickTime Streaming Server.

Re:It's been done before. (0, Troll)

ravenspear (756059) | more than 9 years ago | (#11076090)

this is surely a record, ZERO comments and the site's already slashdotted

You must be new here.

Re:It's been done before. (2, Insightful)

OblongPlatypus (233746) | more than 9 years ago | (#11076127)

Um... they're also available when I play a video directly from my hard drive, so what? The features mentioned are trivial when there's a single data source.

Either you missed the word "swarming" here, or I've missed what exactly the QuickTime Streaming Server does.

How is this new? (1, Informative)

ravenspear (756059) | more than 9 years ago | (#11076056)

smooth progressive playback of content, skipping ahead, and random access without downloading the entire file

Quicktime has had all that for several years. Apple called it "Instant On". I think both Real and Microsoft already use something similar.

Re:How is this new? (1)

Snarph (596331) | more than 9 years ago | (#11076236)

Quicktime has had all that for several years. Apple called it "Instant On". I think both Real and Microsoft already use something similar.

I may be mistaken, but I doubt those have anything to do with swarming. We're talking about swarming here, ie: the technique used by bittorrent.

Re:How is this new? (1)

ravenspear (756059) | more than 9 years ago | (#11076284)

Agreed but I was referring to the part of the summary that says "a new technology called swarmstreaming that allows smooth progressive playback of content, skipping ahead, and random access without downloading the entire file." The implication seemed to be that this "new technology" was giving us these new capabilities, which I was just pointing out weren't all that new. This is just a new implementation of those that happens to use swarming.

Re:How is this new? (1)

kakos (610660) | more than 9 years ago | (#11076247)

Jesus, man. Okay... so you didn't read the article because it is /.ed, but you can at least read the summary! It's streaming using swarming and it provides smooth progressive playback of content. Streaming itself is very old. But streaming while swarming is news.

Re:How is this new? (1)

mrvis (462390) | more than 9 years ago | (#11076251)

That's what it's called when your 1 computer talks to that 1 server on the internet.

The whole bittorrent thing is the new part.

Re:How is this new? (2, Informative)

Agret (752467) | more than 9 years ago | (#11076278)

Quicktimes "Instant On" doesn't let you skip to anywhere you want in the file until it has actually got to that part. It downloads it progressively.

Re:How is this new? (4, Informative)

ravenspear (756059) | more than 9 years ago | (#11076333)

That is incorrect. Instant On has to do with streaming, not progressive downloading. The two are different.

Progressive downloading is where you download something like http://www.whatever.com/movie.mov in a web browser and it starts to play as soon as part of it is downloaded. You can then skip to wherever you want once you have downloaded that part (because at that point all you are doing is scrubbing through a movie file stored on your local machine.)

Streaming is where you load something like rtsp://stream.whatever.com/something.mov into a video player and it streams it to you. At no time during that process is anything stored on your local mahcine aside from what you are currently viewing and whatever the client has buffered ahead of that. Instant On instructs the server to skip the stream to another section.

Wow... (1)

naztafari (696863) | more than 9 years ago | (#11076057)

Now you can click in the middle of the media player bar and play the streaming file and have it play from that point with less wait... amazing...

Here's a picture of their webserver (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#11076065)

here [whatintarnation.net]

So... (3, Funny)

Mindwarp (15738) | more than 9 years ago | (#11076086)

...will this become SwarmPorning or PornStreaming do you think?

Re:So... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#11076142)

I already do plenty of "pornstreaming"...

Re:So... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#11076145)

RealDollPlayer?

The Finale... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#11076332)

You can now easily skip ahead to the CUM shot!! :-)

Re:So... (2, Funny)

mollyhackit (693979) | more than 9 years ago | (#11076337)

I choose SwarmPorning... "Verbing nouns weirds the language"

How does this work? (3, Insightful)

koreaman (835838) | more than 9 years ago | (#11076088)

No amount of swarming will ever get around the fact that a piece of something has to be in your local system before you can view it. "Skipping ahead" Will skip to a part of the clip that you may not have. This=lag. What's more, usually you cannot download one second of movie in one second of time, unless you have a crazy tricked out connection. This means that if you skip to a part you haven't seen yet, you will have to wait even longer for buffering. This is hardly worth it.

Re:How does this work? (1)

OblongPlatypus (233746) | more than 9 years ago | (#11076201)

What exactly is your definition of "crazy tricked out"? You can easily stream movies in real-time on a common megabit ADSL connection.

(Most movie releases these days are Xvid-encoded to fit on a single CD. Assume 93 minutes of movie and 700 megabyte file size, and it works out to just about exactly 1Mbps.)

Re:How does this work? (1)

Pulzar (81031) | more than 9 years ago | (#11076325)

Most movie releases these days are Xvid-encoded to fit on a single CD. Assume 93 minutes of movie and 700 megabyte file size, and it works out to just about exactly 1Mbps.

Do you often achieve the maximum download rate, and then sustain it for an hour and a half? If you do, you have a much better connection than most average ADSL users.

Also, if we're talking about swarming, it'll be even tougher to sustain the max download rate while upload clients are dropping in and out of the swarm.

Re:How does this work? (5, Interesting)

ravenspear (756059) | more than 9 years ago | (#11076210)

"Skipping ahead" Will skip to a part of the clip that you may not have. This=lag

The technology to eliminate lag already exists and has been implemented. I have used it myself.

What's more, usually you cannot download one second of movie in one second of time, unless you have a crazy tricked out connection.

What nonsense. Have you ever downloaded a trailer from here [apple.com] ? If the trailer starts to play immediately when you start downloading (i.e. the gray progress bar proceeds faster than the location marker), then you are downloading 1 second of movie in a time faster than 1 second. I can assure you that millions of people have a connection fast enough to do this.

This means that if you skip to a part you haven't seen yet, you will have to wait even longer for buffering.

Again, not necessarily. Buffering is when the streaming software requires that you download x amount of content ahead of the time you actually view it to account for inconsistencies in the stream or packet loss. If those can be eliminated, and connections made fast enough, there is no empirical reason why buffering must continue to be utilized.

Re:How does this work? (2, Insightful)

Neophytus (642863) | more than 9 years ago | (#11076292)

But millions of people don't have large enough upload capacity to support millions of other people streaming at that speed. With many domestic broadbands the ratio can be as bad as 12:1.

And that's before you even deal with people needing to set up port forwarding.

Re:How does this work? (1)

Pulzar (81031) | more than 9 years ago | (#11076297)

The technology to eliminate lag already exists and has been implemented. I have used it myself.

Can you provide any details? I don't understand how you can see something without a lag if you can't download it in real time?

What nonsense. Have you ever downloaded a trailer from here?

Those trailers are reduced to very small resolutions, so that you can watch them right away. They are hardly good enough to replace regular TV or way off from DVD or HD content.

Re:How does this work? (1)

ravenspear (756059) | more than 9 years ago | (#11076387)

I don't understand how you can see something without a lag if you can't download it in real time?

You can. That was the point I was trying to make. There are plenty of connections out there fast enough to download video in real time, provided the data rate is reasonable.

They are hardly good enough to replace regular TV or way off from DVD or HD content.

Well that's obvious, but I wasn't referring to DVD or HD content. Streams at those data rates are basically nonexistent on the net today because very few connections can utilize them. I was referring to the more standard video formats that are used for streaming today, some of which can yield very good quality at a data rate far below what DVD or HD uses.

Re:How does this work? (1)

coldmist (154493) | more than 9 years ago | (#11076413)

The current (before today) tech could do it from one single fat source, ie one of apples server for example, with a scaled down video source.

This can be getting the bits from 100 different sources, achieving the same effect, for potentially larger (height/width, such as HD content) video clips.

Now, how does this "already exist"?

Re:How does this work? (1)

chris_mahan (256577) | more than 9 years ago | (#11076508)

from apple I can do the small and medium like you describe. Large view area doesn't download fast enough. I think full-screen is out of the question. Time Warner residential cable ISP in west san-fernando valley here.

Is there a divx player for firefox as a plugin? (please say yes)

I dunno... (1)

rackhamh (217889) | more than 9 years ago | (#11076097)

It seems to me that the types of media that swarming is commonly used for won't benefit much from being able to skip forward.

I mean, if you're downloading a feature film or TV show, do you really want to watch the middle before the beginning?

Re:I dunno... (2, Insightful)

dJOEK (66178) | more than 9 years ago | (#11076119)

no, you wanna start seeing it, then people bother you, then later when you have more free time you can watch the rest

Re:I dunno... (1)

rackhamh (217889) | more than 9 years ago | (#11076348)

I was referring to the part in the post that referred to "skipping ahead, and random access without downloading the entire file."

Congratulations on completely ignoring my point.

How to get it (5, Funny)

Kipsaysso (828105) | more than 9 years ago | (#11076105)

Does anyone have a Torrent link to download it?

Were we just beta testers? (5, Funny)

DeckardJK (555299) | more than 9 years ago | (#11076106)

If so... go back to the drawing board Justin...

i wonder how long (2, Insightful)

bill11082 (458037) | more than 9 years ago | (#11076118)

wonder how long until the RIAA/MPAA uses the DMCA to declare this technology illegal

Re:i wonder how long (1)

QuijiboIsAWord (715586) | more than 9 years ago | (#11076416)

Actually, this is a pretty good point, as I'm pretty sure the MPAA frowns on people even sharing trailers, considering how far they often go to try to make streams undownloadable. If trailer players using this swarming work similar to bittorrent, people viewing the trailer would automatically be sharing it to other people. I guess a trailer made availble from the MPAA through a player with swarming tech would constitute the author giving everyone permission to share. (Which in turn would make it unlikely to ever see this adopted for movie distrobution online, no matter HOW much it would save for online vendors in bandwidth costs.)

We have a new record! (2, Funny)

xv4n (639231) | more than 9 years ago | (#11076138)

16 mentions to the word "swarm" and it's derivatives in 4 paragraphs!

It needs work (1)

AndroidCat (229562) | more than 9 years ago | (#11076158)

The 400+ hits on my port 1147 today by that "validated swarming technology" show that it doesn't play well with the rest of the Internet. Poor social skills, needs more effort.

Deeper Link (2, Informative)

ethzer0 (603146) | more than 9 years ago | (#11076168)

Re:Deeper Link (1)

ethzer0 (603146) | more than 9 years ago | (#11076366)

If I could only express the look of horror on my face as I hit 'submit' without including the </a> tag. *sigh*

Translation: You got to pay to play (1)

denis-The-menace (471988) | more than 9 years ago | (#11076462)

If that is the case, the technology is DOA.
Especially if it's patented.
Nobody will want to touch it.

Server slowing down.. article text: (4, Informative)

Folmer (827037) | more than 9 years ago | (#11076174)

Swarmstreaming: Swarming Downloads Evolved
I'm proud to finally unveil swarmstreaming our third generation of swarming algorithms that are designed for the fastest downloads of web content and multimedia without any special server software or silly .swarm files. This is probably our most exciting advancement since the original invention of swarming.

The technology improves swarming by ensuring that the bytes that the user wants next are scheduled to be received next. So if they're playing back a video file, the bytes from the front of the file will be received first. If the user (or application) skips forward to the middle of the file, the bytes at the middle of the file will be prioritized. Thus, unlike first generation swarming systems like Swarmcast or Bittorrent, you don't have to wait for the entire file to download to do something useful with it!.

Under the covers it is almost unimaginably more complicated than this because it also provides Self-Healing Downloads, implements a full-blown, scalable, Web Proxy Cache, and actively works to ensure that the video playback never studders or buffers by constantly monitoring and adapting to changing network conditions. For a raw feature dump, check out the SwarmStream SDK Feature Matrix

Nowadays, because of its immense popularity, most people have only heard of swarming because of Bittorrent. I have no animosity towards Bittorrent because it has done more than any application to prove the value of swarming to the general public. But if people are impressed by Bittorrent, they're going to be absolutely blow away by swarmstreaming and how far we've taken swarming since its humble beginnings five years ago.

The best source of information right now on swarmstreaming is Onion Networks SwarmStream SDK, so check it out and let me know what you think.

He links to http://onionnetworks.com/technology/swarming/#swar mstreaming [onionnetworks.com]

Re:Server slowing down.. article text: (1)

Anubis350 (772791) | more than 9 years ago | (#11076421)

how far we've taken swarming since its humble beginnings five years ago.
you mean bees can now make honey and milk?

/.ed (1)

ProtoStar (575347) | more than 9 years ago | (#11076181)

Perhaps he should implement his own technology so he doesn't get /.ed. Oh the irony of an anti-slashdotting technology getting slashdotted.

THE ACTUAL ENTRY (missing from the google cache) (-1, Redundant)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#11076190)

I'm proud to finally unveil swarmstreaming [onionnetworks.com] our third generation of swarming algorithms that are designed for the fastest downloads of web content and multimedia without any special server software or silly .swarm files. This is probably our most exciting advancement since the original invention of swarming.

The technology improves swarming by ensuring that the bytes that the user wants next are scheduled to be received next. So if they're playing back a video file, the bytes from the front of the file will be received first. If the user (or application) skips forward to the middle of the file, the bytes at the middle of the file will be prioritized. Thus, unlike first generation swarming systems like Swarmcast or Bittorrent, you don't have to wait for the entire file to download to do something useful with it!.

Under the covers it is almost unimaginably more complicated than this because it also provides Self-Healing Downloads [onionnetworks.com] , implements a full-blown, scalable, Web Proxy Cache [onionnetworks.com] , and actively works to ensure that the video playback never studders or buffers by constantly monitoring and adapting to changing network conditions. For a raw feature dump, check out the SwarmStream SDK Feature Matrix [onionnetworks.com]

Nowadays, because of its immense popularity, most people have only heard of swarming because of Bittorrent. I have no animosity towards Bittorrent because it has done more than any application to prove the value of swarming to the general public. But if people are impressed by Bittorrent, they're going to be absolutely blow away by swarmstreaming and how far we've taken swarming since its humble beginnings five years ago.

The best source of information right now on swarmstreaming is Onion Networks SwarmStream SDK [onionnetworks.com] , so check it out and let me know what you think.

/.'ed already? Here's the article (-1, Redundant)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#11076202)

December 13, 2004
Swarmstreaming: Swarming Downloads Evolved

I'm proud to finally unveil swarmstreaming [onionnetworks.com] our third generation of swarming algorithms that are designed for the fastest downloads of web content and multimedia without any special server software or silly .swarm files. This is probably our most exciting advancement since the original invention of swarming.

The technology improves swarming by ensuring that the bytes that the user wants next are scheduled to be received next. So if they're playing back a video file, the bytes from the front of the file will be received first. If the user (or application) skips forward to the middle of the file, the bytes at the middle of the file will be prioritized. Thus, unlike first generation swarming systems like Swarmcast or Bittorrent, you don't have to wait for the entire file to download to do something useful with it!.

Under the covers it is almost unimaginably more complicated than this because it also provides Self-Healing Downloads [onionnetworks.com] , implements a full-blown, scalable, Web Proxy Cache [onionnetworks.com] , and actively works to ensure that the video playback never studders or buffers by constantly monitoring and adapting to changing network conditions. For a raw feature dump, check out the SwarmStream SDK Feature Matrix [onionnetworks.com]

Nowadays, because of its immense popularity, most people have only heard of swarming because of Bittorrent. I have no animosity towards Bittorrent because it has done more than any application to prove the value of swarming to the general public. But if people are impressed by Bittorrent, they're going to be absolutely blow away by swarmstreaming and how far we've taken swarming since its humble beginnings five years ago.

The best source of information right now on swarmstreaming is Onion Networks SwarmStream SDK [onionnetworks.com] , so check it out and let me know what you think.

Crichton (4, Funny)

bwy (726112) | more than 9 years ago | (#11076249)

Whenever I hear swarm in an IT context, I can't help but think about Crichton's Prey.

Re:Crichton (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#11076402)

When I hear Crichton in a writing context, I can't help but think Dan Brown seems a bit more talented

)/1 Killer Bees (1, Offtopic)

Roger_Wilco (138600) | more than 9 years ago | (#11076275)

The communal mind produces a savage strategy, yet no one could predict that this vicious crossbreed would unravel the secret of steel.

Lets not forget the price of entry. (5, Informative)

Bruha (412869) | more than 9 years ago | (#11076294)

SwarmStream Development Suite Features

* Object code for the entire suite of SwarmStream(TM) APIs, including WebRAID(TM), DirectCache(TM), Throttling, and THEX.

* Visualization tools to perform live inspections and demonstrations of what SwarmStream is doing during your application run time.

* One full license for WAN Transport(TM) Server (normally $2950), an HTTP server specifically designed provide advanced SwarmStream features such as self-healing downloads and automatic mirror discovery.

* One full day of developer training

* 20 hours of ongoing support

* One year of free upgrades for all of the above software.

* Unlimited right to use and implement SwarmStream technology for testing, prototyping, demonstrations, or creation of reference designs or applications. Production deployment requires an additional Deployment License.

* One-time fee: $25,000

Re:Lets not forget the price of entry. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#11076422)

Via his blog:

Swarmcast will be completely free and provides all of the functionality mentioned above since it embeds the full SwarmStream engine. So any user, blogger, or web server administrator that wants to use swarmstreaming doesn't have to pay a dime for it nor do they have to modify their web pages or generate .torrent files in order to swarm-enable their content.

The SwarmStream SDK package that you mention is our complete bundle including a day of training, support, and a whole suite of supporting technologies for application developers that want to add swarming capabilities to their own applications.

Posted by Justin Chapweske at December 13, 2004 04:13 PM

Swarmcast is Free (2, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#11076506)

The application itself is free for everyone to use, even as a proxy. The license above is if you want to develop an application that includes SwarmStream.

Orasis? (4, Informative)

EVuL_C (80873) | more than 9 years ago | (#11076308)

Anyone care that Orasis (the story author) = Justin Chapweske?

http://www.advogato.org/person/orasis/ [advogato.org]

-c

Re:Orasis? (1)

Mantorp (142371) | more than 9 years ago | (#11076470)

good digging, he could have at least made up a new ID for submitting this. What a slacker. No drive at all.

more linkage (2, Informative)

Glog (303500) | more than 9 years ago | (#11076335)

Here is some info on the new technology from the guy's company's website: http://onionnetworks.com/products/swarmstream/ [onionnetworks.com]

On a sidenote, I seriously doubt that he is the very first one to have thought of swarming. Swarming has been around since before 1999 (when he claims he invented it). He *may* be the first one to have applied it to p2p/networking however.

Re:more linkage (1)

Havokmon (89874) | more than 9 years ago | (#11076527)

On a sidenote, I seriously doubt that he is the very first one to have thought of swarming. Swarming has been around since before 1999 (when he claims he invented it). He *may* be the first one to have applied it to p2p/networking however.

I rememeber the CIO of the bank I worked for wanting to spread data around on everyone's HD instead of getting a new RAID for the server. People were getting 4GB HD's, and only using 500MB or so, this was probably back in '97.

It wasn't a bad idea, there just wasn't a good way to implement it (on Win95 desktops even - shudder).

Swarming + streaming (5, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#11076346)

When you download something via BitTorrent, it's downloaded in random order, as pieces become available. While this works, it means you've got a huge file on your hard disk, but it's completely useless because random pieces are utter garbage bytes. For example, unlike with a straight download, you can't start watching a video file that's still being saved to disk.

The only thing swarmstreaming changes is that it tries to download data in order, so you can use it more quickly, like any other conventional stream-oriented protocol (which is basically anything that uses TCP, along with various streaming media protocols). Now, the innovation is putting together streaming media with the power of swarming--imagine being able to feed a live TV feed from a single stream from the "seed". This is basically what multicast promised, but due to infrastructure problems, has yet to deliver.

Now, the devil is in the details. You're going to have problems with a distributed application that tries to deliver the same data to all nodes in the network at once, since you don't get all those nice properties of randomized distribution of different pieces. Some lossiness would definitely be desirable, meaning you don't really want to use it like a Web proxy. Furthermore, it's physically impossible to deliver data around the planet without many tens or hundreds of milliseconds of latency, so it's not good for interactive applications.

It might be a big win for TV-on-the-Web, though. Imagine if just anyone with a couple hundred kbps could serve a worldwide audience... all those Internet radio stations that are begging for donations to pay bandwidth costs could slash their total bandwidth needs, while upgrading service as well.

I'm not sure if this particular product is going to do the trick (swarmstreaming isn't a new idea, after all, and lots of people have been working on it), but anything that gets people thinking about it should help in the long run.

related presentation on javalobby (2, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#11076363)

There is a link to a presentation about this stuff on javalobby:

http://www.javalobby.com/eps/swarmstream/

What about the MPAA (1)

X0563511 (793323) | more than 9 years ago | (#11076394)

Have they had anything to say yet?

This would make it possible to watch a rip of some movie, without waiting to download it first. That is the cheif reason (in my impression) that they are not quite as bad as the RIAA just yet.

They may be able to use this to push some new legislation making it even more of a pain in the ass to practice Fair Use in the USA. I really don't care how it affects piracy, either way.

What i care about is getting caught in the crossfire.

Anyone notice the time this story was posted (4, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#11076434)

24 hour PST - 13:37.

Well, it looked fine (1)

Tjoppen (831002) | more than 9 years ago | (#11076446)

Until I tried the simulator running a T1 line at which point it chewed up a good deal of my RAM and 100% CPU. I gave up after a couple of minutes of waiting. Wonder what'd happen in real life in such a situation...
But if you can afford the 1Gbps line and $25k license fee - sure, why not?

It's quite similar to an idea me and another guy has had for a couple of years but never implented due to the time-bandit that is school. Except it wouldn't require static source material(which this does from what I've read).

Wonder how resistant it is to DoS attacks. Get a gang of people submitting false data down the line would certainly cause a lot of trouble before being detected..

similar (1)

minus_273 (174041) | more than 9 years ago | (#11076466)

I actually wored on somehting similar in college. The difference being that i trtied to pay attention to the netowrk structure and chose hosts close to me. I have noticed more than the avalibility of bandwidth, it is the usage of it that makes the big difference in networks like these. In other word the overlay topology should be such that it tries to find the host that is closest and tries to take advantage of existing connections on common links. Unfortunatly, so far, here is so far nothing that compares to multicast on the router level and most systems do not support it.

#irc.trHolltalk.com (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#11076507)

dim. Due to the To die. i will jam distribution. As
Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>