Show upload / download ratio in tag

Archived discussion about features (predating the use of Bugzilla as a bug and feature tracker)

Moderator: Moderators

Locked
majinsoftware
Posts: 17
Joined: 2003-09-08 02:53
Location: NZ
Contact:

Show upload / download ratio in tag

Post by majinsoftware » 2003-12-27 05:06

It would be real good to show a upload / download ratio in the tag. Then you can give people that upload more than download slots over the ones that just leach.

GargoyleMT
DC++ Contributor
Posts: 3212
Joined: 2003-01-07 21:46
Location: .pa.us

Re: Show upload / download ratio in tag

Post by GargoyleMT » 2003-12-27 11:06

This is so easily faked that it's silly. Bad clients, in particular, have a real incentive to put a high number there.

Keeping track (inside your client) of your own personal upload/download ratio is a pretty decent feature, however.

jbyrd
Posts: 255
Joined: 2003-05-10 09:26
Location: no-la-usa-earth
Contact:

Post by jbyrd » 2003-12-27 11:16

Sounds great in theory, but here are some possible problems with it. You can decide if the PROs outweigh the CONs.
  • 1. It encourages people to share popular files, which are already plentiful, and not rare ones...which people won't download much.

    This will also encourage people to change the names of their files to popular ones...just so people will download them. This will obviously waste bandwith...and flood the DC community with bogus files.

    2. It would be unfair to people with asymmetrical lines, because by their very nature they download faster than they upload. Therefore someone with a quality share and plenty of slots would stand to not be able to download from others. That sucks, doesn't it?

    3. When you first begin using DC, you may not have much to share...you have to download stuff first. Once you have what you need to get into a good hub, no one will let you download from them because you have a low download:upload ratio.

    The result? I think there would be more sharefaking, because no one wants to "waste" their ratio just so they can finally get into some hubs.

    4. There would always be ways around it...like reinstalling the software when your ratio gets low or faking your tags. Therefore, IMO, only the honest users will suffer, and not the true "leechers".
I think that #1 could be overcome by hashing (not yet implemented). I see no solution for the other three (other than sloppy work-arounds for #2 and #3, which would seem to be easily exploitable).
Hehe.

Wisp
Posts: 218
Joined: 2003-04-01 10:58

Post by Wisp » 2003-12-27 11:44

I don't like the ratio feature, it would turn dc++ in another emule clone

I have 180kb/s download limit and 16kb/s upload limit, but I do have 130gb of sorted quality files, a lot rare files like self-scanned rare album covers which are often downloaded, but in filesize it is nothing compared to a popular divx rip. So i would get a very bad ratio, while i still have a lot of usefull files.

The essential point is that ratio only applies to filesize, and not file quality.

GargoyleMT
DC++ Contributor
Posts: 3212
Joined: 2003-01-07 21:46
Location: .pa.us

Post by GargoyleMT » 2003-12-27 12:02

Your Mileage May Vary (YMMV).

I'm on a 768/128 line, and my ratio is 7.84 (129 gb up, 16 down). i.e. I have no problems maintaining a good ratio with an asymmetrical connection.

Anyhow, this just brings up the Ratings System system talked about a while back.

If you want to kill/stop DCStealth, fakesharing, and some other bad client behaviors, this is the way.

majinsoftware
Posts: 17
Joined: 2003-09-08 02:53
Location: NZ
Contact:

Post by majinsoftware » 2003-12-27 18:08

I have 1mbit down and 252kbit up and i have no problem keeping my ratio over one.

all i do is download a movie and leave my computer on over night and my movie finshes in like 4 hours. I wake up in 9 hours and 2 people would of got what they wanted off me.

there will people that try fake it but that can be over come by turning DCPlusPlus.xml in to a more sucure file type like DCPlusPlus.xml.DcLst

GargoyleMT
DC++ Contributor
Posts: 3212
Joined: 2003-01-07 21:46
Location: .pa.us

Post by GargoyleMT » 2003-12-27 20:21

majinsoftware wrote:There will people that try fake it but that can be overcome by turning DCPlusPlus.xml in to a more secure file type like DCPlusPlus.xml.DcLst
No, that really wouldn't help.

jbyrd
Posts: 255
Joined: 2003-05-10 09:26
Location: no-la-usa-earth
Contact:

Post by jbyrd » 2003-12-28 21:45

Ratings systems are a joke.

Read Wisp's post again, and come to realize that there is really no fair way to implement them.

There are ways around the rating systems...

For instance, I have two computers on my network. I could very easily upload from my main computer to my other computer (which would transmit VERY fast ~100MB/s). Those uploaded bytes would go towards my Rating...and I would be a !@# leecher in no time.

And as I said before...
I wrote:This will also encourage people to change the names of their files to popular ones...just so people will download them. This will obviously waste bandwith...and flood the DC community with bogus files.
Have you ever used Kazaa? Then you would know. :|
Hehe.

GargoyleMT
DC++ Contributor
Posts: 3212
Joined: 2003-01-07 21:46
Location: .pa.us

Post by GargoyleMT » 2003-12-28 23:42

Cologic made the same point in that thread, or in private discussion. Yes, triads reporting excessive downloads could mess up some implementations of a ratings system. And fusbar brought up the point about popular files versus good/rare ones.

Even with those, ratings systems (even maintaining a local one) are quite far from being a joke.

averater
Posts: 2
Joined: 2003-02-28 17:53

Post by averater » 2003-12-29 07:31

the only way to make this unfakeable would be if every client keept its own ratio statistics.
so if someone i've downloaded a lot from want a slot i would autogrant him one. and if someone has downloaded a lot from me he dont get a new slot...

the first "rule" is still easy to fake, but the next one make good uploaders have more slots available than others...

hope you get what im trying to say...
dont know if i think its a good idea thou...

jbyrd
Posts: 255
Joined: 2003-05-10 09:26
Location: no-la-usa-earth
Contact:

Post by jbyrd » 2003-12-29 08:39

averater wrote:so if someone i've downloaded a lot from want a slot i would autogrant him one. and if someone has downloaded a lot from me he dont get a new slot...
Yes, this would be unfakable...and I like the idea.
GargoyleMT wrote:If you want to kill/stop DCStealth, fakesharing, and some other bad client behaviors, this is the way.
This is not the case if the feature, itself, can be exploited. Fakesharing is more tolerable to me than the prospect of having a feature that could hurt the average/good user. I know I wouldn't allow it in my hub.
GargoyleMT wrote:Even with those, ratings systems (even maintaining a local one) are quite far from being a joke.
There are certain considerations that must be taken into account or solved before I will be convinced that rating systems should be used in this client.

Obviously I don't have to be convinced for it to be implemented in the next/future versions, but myself and others like me must in order to allow it in hubs, and for the general users not to be unhappy.
Hehe.

GargoyleMT
DC++ Contributor
Posts: 3212
Joined: 2003-01-07 21:46
Location: .pa.us

Post by GargoyleMT » 2003-12-29 15:43

As cologic pointed out, Nicks are equally easily faked. (Same with GUIDs, used in many replacement protocol proposals.)

eMule has solved this problem fairly well.

jbyrd
Posts: 255
Joined: 2003-05-10 09:26
Location: no-la-usa-earth
Contact:

Post by jbyrd » 2003-12-29 16:02

Neat.

So, how do you keep people from simply deleting their key, resorting back to zero points (which would be beneficial if all you do is leech anyway) and begin downloading again (much like Kazaa's rating system vulnerability).

Sorry, but I don't use e-mule...so I don't know exactly how it works.
Hehe.

GargoyleMT
DC++ Contributor
Posts: 3212
Joined: 2003-01-07 21:46
Location: .pa.us

Post by GargoyleMT » 2003-12-29 16:09

The point really is reward uploaders for letting you download by advancing them through the queue more quickly than people with whom you have no experience. Here's the formula that eMule uses.

Of course, you can use it for punative measures as well... The position I represent is closer to what Sarf talked about, while I initially wanted to punish users like you seem to want.

jbyrd
Posts: 255
Joined: 2003-05-10 09:26
Location: no-la-usa-earth
Contact:

Post by jbyrd » 2003-12-29 16:15

Sorry if I'm asking questions that have been addressed in the Ratings System thread, but I am still treading through it.

Another question, do you suppose that such a ratings system attracts unwanted people (**AA) because we are rewarding uploaders, on top of having hubs that have share limits?
Hehe.

GargoyleMT
DC++ Contributor
Posts: 3212
Joined: 2003-01-07 21:46
Location: .pa.us

Post by GargoyleMT » 2003-12-29 16:37

jbyrd wrote:Sorry if I'm asking questions that have been addressed in the Ratings System thread, but I am still treading through it.
Naw, that's fine, it was months ago, and asking anything makes me rethink my position, since some things have changed.
Another question, do you suppose that such a ratings system attracts unwanted people (**AA) because we are rewarding uploaders, on top of having hubs that have share limits?
Perhaps... If it's centralized (even on a per-hub basis), that's a good question (as it at first seems like a weak point/target). I do like to assume that people are using the program for good (or awesome). I certainly don't force anyone to share anything that would get them in trouble... "Gee, wouldn't it be nice to scratch the back of people who have benefited us?" Is the level that I think of this feature on. Regardless of what is traded, P2P is about *sharing*.

Locked