this post was submitted on 03 Oct 2026
111 points (100.0% liked)
Piracy: ꜱᴀɪʟ ᴛʜᴇ ʜɪɢʜ ꜱᴇᴀꜱ
70716 readers
399 users here now
⚓ Dedicated to the discussion of digital piracy, including ethical problems and legal advancements.
Rules • Full Version
1. Posts must be related to the discussion of digital piracy
2. Don't request invites, trade, sell, or self-promote
3. Don't request or link to specific pirated titles, including DMs
4. Don't submit low-quality posts, be entitled, or harass others
Loot, Pillage, & Plunder
We heartily recommend visiting the free port of freemediaheckyeah (aka FMHY) while you sail the high seas, for all the freshest links the ocean has to offer.
📜 c/Piracy Wiki (Community Edition):
🏴☠️ Other communities
FUCK ADOBE!
Torrenting/P2P:
- !seedboxes@lemmy.dbzer0.com
- !trackers@lemmy.dbzer0.com
- !qbittorrent@lemmy.dbzer0.com
- !libretorrent@lemmy.dbzer0.com
- !soulseek@lemmy.dbzer0.com
Gaming:
- !steamdeckpirates@lemmy.dbzer0.com
- !newyuzupiracy@lemmy.dbzer0.com
- !switchpirates@lemmy.dbzer0.com
- !3dspiracy@lemmy.dbzer0.com
- !retropirates@lemmy.dbzer0.com
💰 Please help cover server costs.
![]() |
![]() |
|---|---|
| Ko-fi | Liberapay |
founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments




Usenet is client-server, not P2P.
The issue with "good performance" on P2P systems is that you're reliant on other users' bandwidth, and there's a lot of people in the world that have slow upload speeds. Some users use a seedbox with a fast datacenter-grade 10Gbps or 40Gbps connection, but it's not common.
The obvious approach if you want to download something from people with slow connections is to download parts of the same files from a lot of them in parallel, which is exactly what BitTorrent does. That's good enough for plenty of use cases, which is why BitTorrent has been around for so long. The protocol is designed pretty well for this use case.
It's got plenty of legit use cases too, especially in research (where it's common to have data files that are tens or hundreds of gigabytes and need to be shared with other researchers) and in gaming (where it was common to use BitTorrent to download updates, at least outside of Steam).
usenet is p2p: server p2p. The servers share the articles between themselves in a p2p manner
That's not what P2P means though. With Usenet, the articles are stored on a server, and you download them from the server. P2P always means one peer directly connects to another. The reason P2P systems exist is that they avoid things like takedowns (since you'd need to take down every user instead of a central server), and Usenet doesn't have that advantage.
If Usenet is P2P, then every other system that lets people upload files is P2P, including things like Rapidshare, Google Drive, forums, etc. That wouldn't make sense.
P2P means peer to peer.
Here you have a graphical description of usenet: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Usenet#/media/File:Usenet_servers_and_clients.svg
From wikipedia https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Usenet
Please pay attention to: Each news server talks to one or more other servers (its "newsfeeds") and exchanges articles with them.
hmmm... it sounds like p2p.
Here you have the fucking RFC for the command to share articles between servers: https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc3977/#section-6.3.2
Even if you check the article headers you can see the path the article it took to reach to you. If the article wasn't uploaded to your server, you can see that some articles that you are downloading came from different servers until it reached your server.
Tell me, if rapidshare, mega, google drive, etc works like this. Well i don't think so, because first you don't even have different servers from different providers... You just have their servers, so they can't share shit with anybody else's servers.
It's not p2p for the enduser, but that's why i said it was server p2p.
OR maybe you operated a NNTP server with only 1 feed? (which i doubt).
If you had used usenet before obfuscation took place, you could see that some articles where removed from some server but still available on another ones. That's why there was a rule of having servers from different backbones https://cdn.rexum.space/usenet/Usenet%20Providers%20and%20Backbones%20%28Version%202025-06-30%29.svg
This is describing federation and decentralization, not P2P. The servers communicate with each other. P2P is when users communicate directly.
Would you consider Lemmy or email as P2P? They're also federated and decentralized.
Your definition of "server P2P" doesn't really make sense. Any CDN would fit this definition for example, because CDN edge servers fill data from origin servers when it's not cached locally, and a lot of that data would be user-uploaded, but I'm not sure anyone would describe Akamai, Fastly, or Cloudflare as P2P.
Usenet has companies running the servers, and you download from and upload to the company's servers. Nobody would reasonably describe that as P2P, regardless of how the servers are implemented.
P2P means peer to peer!
Definition of peer:
"The same status" , Synonyms: equal.
It's very similar but not the same. Using lemmy as example, when i request posts from another server, my server will request only those posts. It won't request everything. Do you see the difference?
A CDN is centralized in control but distributed in delivery: one content owner controls the authoritative data, while a CDN operator replicates it across its infrastructure. In p2p nobody controls the authoritative data - if one peer refuses to distribute the data, my server can still get the data from another feed.
Both federation or CDNs don't work in a P2P manner. They either have selective replication and/or centralized control.
Again this has nothing to do with being server p2p or not. And btw, stop moving the goal posts.
EDIT: because i have more than to do than keep replying to this. Here is the output of perplexity. Check the references. Maybe it will be enough for you:
That's just how activitypub works because the alternative would be too costly. But you could design a federation system that replicates everything.
Even your perplexity output admits that it's not fully P2P like bittorrent. And if we count "partial P2P", then activitypub would also count since even selective replication, is some amount of replication, and tbus "partial P2P"
I wrote p2p at server level. Ofcourse it is not 100% p2p, if it was full p2p then it would be just p2p. usenet is p2p at server level, and you have the references above to prove it (you don't need to trust me).