Programming

17364 readers

218 users here now

Welcome to the main community in programming.dev! Feel free to post anything relating to programming here!

Cross posting is strongly encouraged in the instance. If you feel your post or another person's post makes sense in another community cross post into it.

Hope you enjoy the instance!

Rules

Follow the programming.dev instance rules
Keep content related to programming in some way
If you're posting long videos try to add in some form of tldr for those who don't want to watch videos

Wormhole

Follow the wormhole through a path of communities [email protected]

founded 1 year ago

MODERATORS

[email protected]

More modern alternative to bittorrent? (lemmy.world)

submitted 1 year ago by [email protected] to c/[email protected]

8 comments fedilink hide all child comments

Hello. I remember a long time ago I found some protocol that was boasted as a less out-dated version of bittorrent. I think one of its features was that you could update a whatever-their-equivalent-of-a-torrent-is with small changes and those changes could be seeded.

If this sounds familiar, and you know anything about this, I would really appreciate pointing me in the right direction. Thank you.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] [email protected] 7 points 1 year ago (3 children)

I would also add IPFS, a REALLY cool piece of tech.

Some really interesting suggestions in this thread that i will definately look into when i find the time.

[–] [email protected] 7 points 1 year ago (2 children)

I think the problem with IPFS is it's terribly inefficient with large and or dynamic data storages, the exact problem bittorent tackles(large not dynamic).

IPFS does seem to provide great p2p functionality for small static files though, albeit pretty slow.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 year ago

Yeah, the discovery process is shite on IPFS. You kinda have to cheat it to get it to work with something like .

Idk if it's inefficient with large data, but it's inefficient with compressed storage, as it does block-level deduplication, which is very cool.

load more comments (1 replies)