I’m a pretty heavy torrent user, running a media server complete with sonarr/radarr for automatic downloads. I download a lot, and have multiple TBs of upload on various private trackers. I’ve been torrenting forever, but I’ve always wondered about usenet. Over and over on this, and other, forums I see people saying that usenet is way better - but why?
I understand what it is overall, but what makes it better than traditional torrenting? In my mind, it’s always just seemed like a different means to the same end. I pay for a VPN and torrent for “free”, or I pay for usenet access and download directly from there. As someone who’s “snobby” around the quality of the stuff I torrent, does usenet provide an advantage there?
Usenet fans, I’d love to hear what makes you love it! I’m always open to trying new things, and if It really is better I’d love to know why! (Plus, maybe what providers/tools etc you recommend).
Usenet is basically a forum so that’s where all the benefits lie. Files are split up into multiple parts and then propagated to various servers. So, just like BitTorrent, you’re downloading a file from multiple places at the same time and also are downloading multiple parts of the file at the same time.
The difference, though, is that, whereas with BitTorrent you’re reliant on the speed of someone else’s internet connection and the hope that enough people have enough parts of the file, Usenet files are hosted on dedicated servers and every file is mirrored to every Usenet mirror. These are typically dedicated connections too so the speeds are nice and fast.
The other less-used benefit is that BitTorrent files don’t really have a way to recover a download if the source file is corrupted or incomplete. If you download a file from a torrent and one of the users seeding has a corrupted part, you have to verify the contents of the file and then your client has to find a valid part to download from. This isn’t a big deal but can be a problem when a file or torrent has few seeds. With Usenet, your download comes with Parity (.par) files. These files are checksums that allow you to recover any number of parts or files so long as you have enough .par files downloaded to cover the number of pieces missing. This means that you can download incomplete archives at any point and you’re never reliant on other users since the .par files are also uploaded by the initial poster.
Both have their benefits and drawbacks but Usenet mostly wins on the first-past-the-post timeframe. BitTorrent probably wins as time goes on because it’s very rare for a torrent to have bad pieces or anything after the first day or 2 of the initial upload. Also, most scene releases are posted to Usenet first. So, if your concern is getting released as soon as possible, Usenet wins. If you want ease and not a lot of fucking around, BT wins.
Have been torrenting for over 20 years and never had a problem with corrupted files 🤷🏼♂️
I mean, that’s completely subjective since you just wouldn’t be able to download those parts from another seeder. You may have had issues and just never noticed because it shows up as not having any valid seeders. There’s a reason every torrent client has an option to verify your data, though.
Who is hosting the files that a person downloads from usenet? Isn’t there a concern someday that they’ll decide not to host anymore and now that media can’t be accessed?
You’re paying them money, so it’s in their best interest to keep hosting.
The uploader uploads their stuff to their own Usenet provider (whom they’re probably paying for). Usenet servers are frequently mirroring/syncing with each other. So very quickly after the uploader uploads, you will find their post on your Usenet provider, and you download directly from them.
If a Usenet provider someday decided not to host any more, they would be out of business (because who would use them), and so you’d switch to a different Usenet provider, where you’d find exactly the same stuff mirrored.
Usenet providers compete/distinguish themselves mostly based on:
What provider has such low retention? I’ve never seen such a thing. The lowest I can find is 600 days, with most being between 2000 and 5000.
Also some corrections, the provider doesn’t package anything together. The indexers do that in the form of an nzb file. Unraring is still necessary, but most download clients will do that for you.
Does the retention period mean that older content (say, a show from a decade ago) is less likely to be present?
Not really, especially when you use the 5000+ ones since that is nearing 14 years. Also, people re-upload old stuff all the time. If you want, you can give me some examples of what you think might not be available and I’ll let you know if it’s there.
I was assuming that typically people only post really in demand stuff, but if the period is a decade, someone probably posted I dunno Bucky O’hare or Street Sharks in that time.
Yup, found both of those.
Sweet. Thanks.
A Usenet server will typically host the files and then delete them after a set period of time. Most servers won’t typically go less than 30 days and a few will go for months. It’s what makes the OP question more of a decision between wanting something as soon as possible with quick downloads vs wanting it any time outside of that initial period at whatever speed it’s available at.
If your provider is only retaining files for a few months, you really should switch. Most are over 2000 days retention, with many being over 5000. Eweka, for example, is 5050+ and NewsgroupDirect 3500+.
I have no need for that. My use case only needs them for a week tops so retention is not my main factor.
I see what you’re saying, and if that fits your use case, that’s great. The main point is offering information to the OP though. We don’t want them thinking Usenet is limited to only downloading the latest releases.
Since they’re asking about usenet vs torrenting, this might be interpreted as usenet not being useful for older stuff. This is simply not the case with the vast majority of providers, assuming access to a good indexer or two.
That’s fine but retention means that, at some point, those files will be removed even if that means it happens after a time. There’s not really a fear of that for torrents so long as everyone seeds as intended.
Thanks! Good to know about the parity, I’ve never had issues with corrupted torrents algorithm I’ve heard before it can happen. The first-past-the-post bit is interesting, could be useful for stuff that’s much newer/ still airing…
It’s just a historical artifact. Most scene groups release to Usenet first and then, from there, it gets to torrent sites. If you’re also on Usenet, you can just grab the files right away and then start seeding a torrent immediately.