Talk:RTorrent

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

[edit] The screen dump

I suggest the screenshot be replaced with one that doesn't show the rtorrent tool being used for potentially illegal activity. One or more of those downloads it shows is a copyrighted work. This doesn't necessarily mean the act of downloading it is illegal, but a screenshot showing copyright-free downloads in progress avoids the whole political/legal piracy issue surrounding BitTorrent and isn't any less informative for encyclopedic purposes. Just a suggestion. --Ds13 01:20, 28 June 2006 (UTC)

Plain censorship; I don't think this is a good idea. What is illegal for you might not be illegal somewhere else, and in any case hiding the whole Copyright social conflict as if it didn't exist not only will not solve it but it'll do harm because it'll give a fabricated image of reality. -- Roc Vallès^Talk|Hist - 17:58, 31 August 2006 (UTC)

"Censorship" is not possible here and a "fabricated image of reality" is not necessary to present a neutral image, in line with WP's goals. But your point about not biasing the article to the point of "hiding" an issue is good. Every user has different goals in mind with RTorrent, so if we think the screenshot is representative, then so be it. --Ds13 21:54, 31 August 2006 (UTC)

Having a screenshot that shows the user downloading some copylefted content wouldn't hurt, but sure that's a thing and replacing the screenshot just to hide the copyright conflict is an entire different one; I was tempted to do so when I saw that the image that was in the article was too big, but at the end I just gimped out the window frame and indexed the image instead.-- Roc Vallès^Talk|Hist - 03:16, 1 September 2006 (UTC)

Here is a screendump that I just took of rTorrent 0.6.0 downloading an ubuntu installation cd: [1] Battra 01:24, 22 September 2006 (UTC)

I didn't see this talk page before I uploaded a new image containing FOSS torrents, although I did post to the talk page for the image itself. If there is reason to discuss putting the old one back, let’s take a look at the advantages of doing so. My feelings are that we don't need to show content that could be illegal in context. However, I also realize that downloading media may or may not be illegal depending on jurisdiction and any applicable laws. There hasn’t been any recent activity on this talk page, so if anyone feels that replacing the image was not appropriate please let me know and we can discuss it. I will say that I did not replace the old image in an attempt to “hide” the copy infringement issue. I simply feel that replacing the image with content less likely to be viewed as borderline illegal benefits Wikipedia in the long run. Plus it’s a new version in the screenshot (0.6.4). Newer is better, right? ;) Pekster 21:58, 9 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Personal experiance

I've got a 100 mbit connection, and yet torrents never leach or seed in more than around 500 kbit/s. Not in any client except rtorrent, which mostly reaches around 1500 kbit/s, three times the speed! It does eat system resources though.

It shouldn't. A RAM usage limit can be set and it shouldn't affect throughput if the HD can keep up... if you mean CPU, if you do some profiling (with, say, oprofile) and determine where the time is spent it'll be very helpful. Btw, I'm not a rtorrent developer or anything, just very curious. -- Roc Vallès^Talk|Hist - 17:53, 31 August 2006 (UTC)

Aha, thanks. That is beyond my knowledge in Unix though. Anyways, I've reached 2500 kbit/s nows, five times the normal speed! I'm sure it can go even higher (can download in around 9000 over FTP/HTTP etc).