Slashdot Mirror
DALnet For Chatting, Not File Sharing
PFAK writes "DALnet IRC Network, formerly the world's largest IRC Network has announced that the IRC network has implemented a new "policy" that will phrohibit "Using a channel for the primary purpose of facilitating the transfer of files", as of March 1st, 2003. This will be another staggering blow for the formerly largest IRC network in the world, this comes after one of the many suprises on DALnet, such as the recent DDoS attacks against the network."
Then what's the point?
Long Live EFnet!... not a troll.
EFnet for me.. from the start.. and always..
I thought it was for idling and sitting in DCC queues? What are these "chat" channels you speak of?
What do you mean, this will be another staggering blow? They're improving their service. IRC is for chat. I don't see how sending away warez kiddies damages their network, let alone how it deals them a "staggering blow".
I believe posters are recognized by their sig. So I made one.
someone's too used to typing "ph33r" on DALnet...
such as the recent DDoS attacks against the network
Well, of course people are going to DDoS them, if they're doing stupid shit like restricting file trading.
The theory of relativity doesn't work right in Arkansas.
Glad the shitty IRC network is finaly dying.
The smaller, more dynamic IRC networks have been widdling away at Dalnet for quite some time now.
Yay for Efnet, for enduring through much more crap!
Brent Jones
Like FTP, ICQ, NetMeeting, e-mail and P2P applications aren't enough? ChatZilla doesn't do file transfers anyway!
When I am king, you will be first against the wall.
As long as they leave #xxxpassworld up thats fine with me!
IRC sucks for file sharing anyway, so why would it be a blow to the network if they restricted it?
I fail to see the problem!
Free your mind!
It does not matter anyway cause any file server worth going on left dalnet a long time ago and they ain't coming back.
By "recent", he didn't mean "immediately following the announcement." I don't follow, nor have I ever used DALnet (I logged on once, and did a /list... bad idea), but I'm pretty sure these DDoS attacks have been going on for at least two months.
People will pass up steak once a week, for crap every day.
Since when does anyone has the "right" on filesharing over IRC??
Nobody expects the spanish inquisition!
Well, if there was no point, why would the (arguably) largest IRC network have a very strict anti-warez rules? That's Quakenet, by the way - and yes, it is my choice of IRC network.
Clearly there is a demand for a warez-free (OK, no specific file transfer channel) network. And yes, I've just continued the trend and said "Don't worry, the IRC network I use rocks, even if Dalnet sucks!" ;)
If DALnet comes back up because of a policy such as this, then doesn't it indicate that the DoS attackers would benefit by the elimination of file sharing?
so then, wouldn't the main groups that would benefit from this new policy the RIAA and the MPAA? hmmm... imagine that... DALnet goes back up, and no filesharing occurs, everyone wins. except the filesharers...
makes you wonder who was actually behind the attacks.
DalNet is like the special olympics of IRC. There's a lot of
drooling goin' on and everyone is a 'winner'.
---
Why is the word "policy" in quotation marks here? I assume these are supposed to be "sarcastic quotation marks", as in
or
or
But in this case, I don't see why you would sarcastically call the new rules a "policy". They are a policy.
(Oh, that's on top of misspelling "prohibit". Nice work, dude.)
TheFrood
If you say "I'll probably get modded down for this..." then I will mod you down.
As a former DALnet operator / administrator and a rather long time user I can say that DALnet is simply continuing to shoot at an already bloody and bullet-riddled foot.
Way back in the day there was a lot of talk about banning child pornography (which is something that everyone can actually agree is morally wrong, as well as illegal). It was decided not to, on what I think was good advice, because the second you become a moderator of content you open yourself up to legal trouble if you fail to properly moderate that content.
Now some might say that DALnet isn't actually moderating any content, because it's worded in such a way that it simply disallows the channels. However, to disallow these channels DALnet must explicitly moderate content. It must find this 'abusive' content and put an end to it, thereby making it a moderator.
It is, in fact, the official position of DALnet staff (or so I hear) that this is the belief on the network. That the way this clause in their AUP is written prevents them from being considered a moderator. I think this is a big mistake on their part, and will ultimately come back to haunt them.
That said, DALnet has a long history of being utterly incapable of enforcing their own policies, and this is just one more of them that will probably not ever see any real enforcement. For example, DALnet was (when people could get on it) the haven of mass advertising, not to mention a breeding ground for drones and IRC worms. Despite some futile attempts to stop these activities, DALnet has been basically completely incapable of doing any serious work on these fronts.
To add to this, DALnet and its sponsors have been beleaguered by kiddies with a massive array of DDoS weaponry. They have utterly failed to address the issues which have, in large part, led to their current troubles. The main issue is that DALnet harbors a group of extremely absuive operators who basically take enjoyment out of pissing off the kiddies because they feel "invulnerable." Instead of actually just removing these destructive individuals, DALnet has kept them on and "told them not to do it anymore." Basically tantamount to saying "we don't care, keep DDoSing us."
I don't think that the few people left on DALnet right now need to worry too much about this policy, it won't likely be enforced much, if at all.
you can take the road that takes you to the stars...
EFNet, hi, I've know you for a while... I guess I'm going to get to know you better now. ;-)
"Think F as in files... Think F as in files..."
Of course, on that note, I would have thought D in DALNet would be "downloading".
I'm a little confused by this step. Do they really think file sharing has anything to do with the DDoS attacks? Just who do they think DDoS-ed them all the time. My guess it's the kiddies that love file-sharing.
I'm not saying you should facilitate them but by pissing 'm off there's no way the DDoS attacks will stop. Ignoring just might be the way to go. But then again, that's just my 2 cents
/(bb|[^b]{2})/
The song does not go "You do the hokey pokey and you turn yourself around, and that is all that!"
Your sig should probably read "What if the Hokey Pokey really is what it's all about?" in order to make any sense.
This is me being helpful, not mean or picky.
These *illegal file sharing* channels to suddenly start saying they are Trivia channels, that just happen to share files secondary....
Because god knows every channel on Dalnet seems to have some lamo trivia bot or three....
"Computer games don't affect kids; I mean if Pac-Man affected us as kids, we'd all be running around in darkened rooms,
...as less files will be transferred and thus quick replies, which can be imp in formal chats
At this point it would be nice an interview to the IRC admins of DALnet to find out whether this is a result of a legal threat or just their opinion.
Maybe they got the attention of media after their DoS attack hence the attention of legal authorities? who knows, but I'd be really interested to find out.
And btw, yes, it is mostly warez what is shared on IRC.
To be honest, I've never seen "legal" anything being shared on irc except via DCC between users, on bots there is always some kind of illegal distrbution or just at the 99.9% of the time.
Well good on them. This is one small step in right direction. Now all they have to do is figure out a way to prevent all that unregulated "chat" sharing and rampant free exchange of "information" and the internet will, once again, be free for democracy and automatic shopping by net "enabled" refrigerators.
KFG
I thought EFNet was the largest IRC network? Or was it just the most popular? Grr it's been tool long since I've been on IRC...
CAn'T CompreHend SARcaSm?
Most people that share movies and stuff on irc are no longer using Dalnet or Undernet, not even EFnet or the most crowded of all, Quakenet(yes, it is the most popular). It is small well hidden or just not popular enough to get the attention of most people private servers of 5-10 channels that first hit releases.
Seriously, since when did DCCs impair or otherwise affect the normal operation of Dalnet? They don't run over the "dalnet", but apart from a few simple negotiation messages it runs completely separate of it. That D in DCC stands for Direct, you know.
And unlike Napster/KaZaA, IRC does not come with built-in search, a good file server, minimum shared, quotas or "ranking" of contribution. Nothing that should bring them at legal risk unless paper manufacturers gets sued for what you can write on the paper.
Also, will this mean that OPs will start logging DCCs and crossreference with the channels you're on to determine if a channel is being used to transfer files? Or is this some "Uh, yeah if we see 'em" policy? Because the first would be a rather big invasion of privacy, the second would simply lead to more hidden channels...
But I suppose everyone that cared about chatting has found a more stable home than Dalnet in the last month or two anyway (we did), why not scare off the file traders (that usually only care about making their sends/gets connected) too...
Kjella
Live today, because you never know what tomorrow brings
Everyone is starting to use bit torrent anyways. Sure, a lot of it goes on in irc, but also on websites, instant message etc.
"Computer games don't affect kids; I mean if Pac-Man affected us as kids, we'd all be running around in darkened rooms,
why everybody is moving to irc-chat.
Well most of the warez channels have left the network anyway. I guess they decided to take advantage of the opportunity to introduce this policy, without being faced with thousands of existing channels to shut down. Although it does seem a little weird for a network that has lost 100000 users in the past year to start kicking channels off the network.
the servers on dalnet used to have a little message in their motd's about irc being an "unmoderated medium". apparently, this is no longer the case.
i can only speculate about why this policy is being enacted, but as far as the result, wd had it pegged. they're shooting themselves in the foot. if it's enforced at all, a good chunk of the users that stuck around despite the recent attacks will abandon it without a moments hesitation.
as well, this will undoubtedly upset someone with the means to launch an attack equivalent to the attacks they suffered recently.
this is a bad idea, and they know it.
as a side note, support for this policy on the (moderated) mailing list is overwhelming!
-2 numpty.
and a smelling freek.
I drove my "car" to work today. (well most people wouldn't call it a car)
But the RIAA hasn't exactly taken the moral high ground in the file sharing wars. Did anybody consider that perhaps it was the RIAA or somebody hired by them to conduct the attacks on DALnet? I used to log in to DALnet when I could, and checked out one of the mp3 rooms and I could see where the RIAA would want to put a stop to them.
oh well. most chans i was in (chat and file) moved to other nets because of the downtime caused by the ddos...
does this mean they will finally crackdown on spam now? or is it "kill fileswappers, spam the normal chatters"?
if so, dalnet is just purely doomed. it was a good run anyways. cya! R.I.P.
Good reason to move towards secured chat networks.
SILC - http://www.silcnet.org/
Man! The more I read stuff like this the more I long for a society where information can be free.
Just think where we would've been today if we were allowed access to all and any information. Well, it would probably be overrun by porn and spam.. Nevermind.
Anyhoo.. I don't chat on Kazaa and I don't download on Dalnet.
"I used to have that really cool,funny sig
Evidently, a number of people peeved by all those warez channels pushing their cybersex channels thirty spots down in their channel list are getting upset, and have finally taken action.
Is DALnet going to form DALnet, Inc, start running ads, and do an IPO next?
May we never see th
And that's just DALnet.
Seems to me that the only real losers from this are the dudes who now have to add this moderation to their job description. DALnet won't miss the leechers, the leechers won't miss DALnet.
"If you create user accounts, by default, they will have an account type of Administrator with no password." KB Q293834
1. Create big irc-network.
2. Let warez-kiddez rule the net
3. Kick them all away
4. Create Warez-network, charge $10/month(/channel).
5. Profit!
Hey! That's my sig you're smoking there!
Seriously, when was the last time you saw a "Public domain graphics" channel or "0-Day Open Source Trading". If I do a channel list to find interesting channels, I really don't want to have my list filled up with warez crap channels.
So use openprojects.net...always fun techie people to chew the fat with.
I suppose there is one reasonable assumption -- most of the DDoSes that go on are likely warez-channel related, so perhaps it'll reduce warfare on DALnet...
May we never see th
What are these "chat" channels you speak of?
Oh, come on. Warez channels have had a major cultural impact on the world!
(AFAI can tell, warez speak came from people on AOL channels trying to avoid keyword-based systems for tagging warez channels, though I'd be interested if anyone knows that the source was other than AOL).
May we never see th
I see two possible reasons for the attack;
You're pissed with DALnet for closing your channel, suspending your nick, banning your clones, etc. etc..
DALnet is caught in he middle of a fight between two of these filesharing crews, and rather than attacking each other they're hitting at DALnet do disrupt their chance of serving any files. Nasty, but that's IRC. It isnt entirely impossible that the staff might have been involved in this aswell to warrant the insane ddos' (several GB/second) for the last months, but it started with a fight between two groups of l33t kiddies.
With the latest news it seems the latter is a very likely scenario, time will tell if I'm (and they?) right about this...
Anataka suki desu. Itsumo. Itsumademo.
Give me your lagged, your bored, Your huddled masses yearning to leech free, The wretched refuse of your teeming network.
BTW: Not a troll, I enjoy DALnet too...
-------
"In times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act."
-- George Orwell
This is me being helpful, not mean or picky.
thanks much apreciated!
let me explain thoe.. my sig is from a t-shirt i saw.. nothing special
The people running it decide to enforce a policy against channels designed exclusively for file trading -- chat channels not being used for chat.
Because someone has once again made it a little harder for people to steal software and music and exchange pornography (much of it going to under 18 year old children) these people are threatening to leave an entirely free network?
DALnet is provided as a free service to thousands using not-free bandwidth and servers and other resources of those that run and support it. "If you don't like it, go somewhere else" seems appropriate to say here.
Where is the legitimate complaint? They won't shut you down if you do a few exchanges of files (even if those files or that activity might be considered illegal by some). They are only shutting down channels that spew files and are not for the purposes of the network they built and offer. DALnet never claimed to be a file trading network and now they intend to lightly enforce their use policy. How is that unfair to the unpaying, leeching hordes complaining now?
Sounds to me like Napster whiners. Sounds to me what Kazaa users will be whinning about when it too is shut down.
Now... imagine; what if the usenet stopped allowing binary posts (ignore the technical aspect for a moment, assume it became a "policy" somehow). Ooohh.. I can hear the kiddies crying out as if a trillion posts were suddenly canceled.
DALNet has been heading down the tubes for so long now, the in-fighting amongst the server admins has become the stuff of internet legends, can't say I'm surprised or even worried. DALNet compared to other well run IRC nets, really is the pits, so many spammers and kiddies wasting everyone's time. Perhaps once those kiddies get onto other more strict networks, they will finally get slapped down and kept under control.
Good riddance to bad rubbish.
"I kill you! You no good 56'ing!"
'warez speak' very much predates the likes of AOL, although its forms have varied over the years. However, it was not uncommon in the bbs days (and particularly in the warez/hpac scene) to see people typing things like 'l8rz', 'm8', etc. I also well remember programs which would cHaNgE yOur tYpInG To LooK LiKE ThiS. Then as now, the more discerning users frowned upon such practices and preferred to type 'normally', though a few of the abbreviations did enter into the common vocabulary.
I see this as a huge breath of fresh air, after having to inhale the fumes of chain-smoking file-sharing 31337 script kiddies who clog the network with absurd questions about how to lock down their channel from other "haxors", so they can share the latest Britney and UT patch file.
;)
Biased? Just a little peeved?
You better believe it.
I spent 6 years as an administrator on Dalnet, in the #1 help channel, often spending as much as 8-10 hours at a stretch JUST TYPING.
I have helped literally thousands of anonymous (nicknamed) people come and go about Dalnet, from 1994 - 2000, and have watched with sickening disdain how polluted it got over time.
It was bad enough to have the hordes of AOL users find Dalnet when they first got on the "real" internet, but these days, it's chock full of kids who have NO IDEA how online communities -should- behave.
Those that used BBS's in the day (anything after 1992 don't even bother posting.) will remember what I mean about netiquette and online communities.
I stand up, and applaud DalNet for taking this action. It's about time the filth that has clogged a valuable service has been flushed out of the system.
And I know you're curious as to what nickname I used on DalNet.
I am Duranos. I was one of the original help crew who volunteered their time in setting up #irchelp on Dalnet, still miss quite a few people to this day. I still check in from time to time, but have moved onto other avenues of internet life.
Flame away slashbots.
user@host$ diff
DALnet's for regular IRCin', not fancy IRCin'!
Check this out, IRC / opennap hybrid server.
From opennap clients, such as Xnap, it looks as if it's Napster-compatible opennap server, and from all those IRC clients, it looks IRC server. In channels, they can talk each other. Sounds nice?
Try irc.scenecritique.com:6667/8888 (guess which is the port you like) for samples
And I thought I got pissed when File Sharing didn't work through the MSN Jabber Transport @ jabber.at.
/ctcp (nick name) (trigger name)
/chanserv again.
Is this the end of Specially modified MIRC DCC server software as we know it?. Isn't DCC a direct connection to the client, not through the Network?. (Because they say that DCC won't work through firewalls). Ahh the days of hanging around in #(anonymous) typing !list, finding something interesting it and triggering the connection by typing !(trigger name) or
"Now if you will download Exodus and sign up at jabber.org, we can get back to trading pr0n again!"
I don't think I'll bother to register with
Jabber. F**k those other protocols
Well, it seems no one remembers last year's rumblings of RIAA using technical means to kill the mp3 trading scene.
It looks like they kicked dalnet's ass, doesn't it. RIAA/BSA have no qualms about black hat enforcement. They've hinted as much several times and even asked for permission. So how can anyone be surprised when they went ahead did it anyway? It's not as though the FBI is going to go hunting them down, is it? No, not when there are easier, and poorer targets to look for.
Hell, even this was taken to court, they'd be there for years and then RIAA/BSA would simply ignore the ruling now that Microsoft has set the modern-day precedent (as opposed to the early 1900's magnates doing it).
DALnet has operators and admins that just dont care.
/.
Lets go back in history some.
Everyone knows that there are some DALnet admins that were also packet kiddies.
these admins basically tell the existing kiddies "you are free to do what you want, just dont attack my server"
meanwhile, dalnet holds the largest kiddie population and they dont do anything about it.
a network that I have a server on was attacked by these same kiddies. naturally, I find them on DALnet staging attacks.
I have told the admins, opers and the EB of DALnet about this.
I just get ignored or in some cases, killed.
they dont want to hear it.
a lot of the opers and admins have 'made deals with the devil'
I am labeled as a threatening user because I hate packet kiddies.
NOW, as far as the trading if files, that will never stop.
what are they going to do about it?
they cant possibly close all of those channels
or stop all of those people from doing it.
looks like another DCC restriction.
if you are looking for a network to put a server, dont even think about DALnet.
I can get into many, many things but this would turn into a flame war.
if you want to know more contact me off
I can fill your inbox with logs, and incriminating information.
such as, admins that ARE packet kiddies.
and I will leave it at that.
Now even more DALNet refugees will be joining my favorite EFNet and Undernet channels. As if it wasn't bad enough before with the once every five minutes (and usually repeating over and over in bold or colored text until answered) "What happened to DALNEt???" questions.
DALNet has always been the lowest on the IRC evolutionary totem pole, with all kinds of goofy restrictions on people, that's of course "for their own protection." Even before this you couldn't actually receive a file by DCC without first registering your nick, a process that was too long for me to bother with in the first place. Oh, and don't let me forget the asinine regulation added recently where only clients using identd may connect. Come on, please, what purpose does identd actually serve in 2003?
And if nickserv doesn't annoy you to all hell, the five hundred msgs from users of Turkish IRC scripts probably will. Literally, I've left my IRC client on DALNet idling for a little while and have come back with about 20 spam messages. And if you can somehow manage to bear the spam, you'll probably end up being annoyed by the other 50 morons trying to DCC you viruses, that, of course only affect Windows users.
Can someone explain to me what banning file-sharing channels over IRC actually does to make its quality any better? I seriously don't see the warez kiddies being the perpetrators of DOS attacks, that is until now. Warez on IRC isn't going to go away because of this regulation, it's only going to change form. Instead of offer bots you'll have individuals advertising their Hotline or Directconnect servers; I've already seen this on a certain unnamed Undernet warez channel.
People are talking about DALNet sucking now? It's sucked as long as I can remember. It's almost a perfect example of what happens when a government thinks improving life and security only occurs by creating more and more regulations (instead of changing the people themselves). What you end up having is a huge group of disenfranchised people who end up attacking you.
DALNet admins: can you make a splinter network especially for those people kicked off of DALNet, just so they don't fill up my queues on EFNet. Also, when I'm looking for movies to download I'd prefer to be able to actually read the offer bots, so can you inform your users that not everyone on IRC can view mIRC colors? Thanks, love you baby.
Oh, and if I offended any DALNet users out there, please try to resist the urge to begin your reply with "m/Turkish/25 ASL!!?!!???"
What does this have to do with "YOUR" Rights Online? It's THEIR network. I think this would have to do with DALnet's rights online.
/kill'ed with a 10 minute ban against relogging in), and banish any clients that automatically respond to anything.
I'm sure that DCC bots generate quite a bit of useless junk traffic on their network.. that sort of thing didn't exist when I was big time into IRC development.. in fact, DCC was a brand new capability, and didn't include file transfers at that point.
I was against even having the clients having the ability to script responses to certain things. Unfortunatly, people went through with it.
Next, they should make an idle time-out (anyone idle more than an hour gets
"Champagne for my real friends - and real pain for my sham friends!" http://ericblade.postalboard.com/
Who is going to police this and how, its pretty hard to tell if a person is talking, transferring or a bot..
.. sort of hard to track, and sort of hard to complain..
Transferrs are done via DCC and dont even go thru their servers its direct client to client
---- Booth was a patriot ----
I had the right, and I excercised it. They have now removed that right. This is their right. Notice how this is all about rights.
Sure they have a right to do what they want with THEIR network.. They can censor it if they want, even though that does get into a sticky legal issue. Once you start, you are libel for content under your control.
Personally I think its a moral mistake to enforce their beliefs on others when they offer a free service, but that is their choice.
But you sir are an ass for your attitude toward people that do things other then simple chat.
Not all 'transfers' are illegal in all parts of the global network. If they are in your area, then consult your legislature, that's not my problem.
People that do use IRC for transfers don't leech any bandwidth, the key component to DCC is *DIRECT*, it does NOT load the IRC network at all. In reality they use LESS resources then a 8 hour a day 'chatter'.
Whiners? Not really, just people that would like to keep what they have now, ( or expand features )if you don't speak out you loose it, regardless of the topic.
---- Booth was a patriot ----
DALnet belongs to NO ONE! How DARE anyone tell ME what I can do there? IRC Belongs to NO ONE! How DARE anyone tell ME what I can do there? The INTERNET belongs to NO ONE! How DARE anyone tell ME what I can do there? The day that ANYONE thinks they OWN ANY PART of the 'net is the day that the 'net effectively DIES! I guess it's well on its way to death then, isn't it? Get it?
>'l8rz', 'm8'
This is London, especially Black, speak. Nothing to do with the Warez scene whatsoever.
despite their claims to the contrqary this was done to satisify RIAA..notice that it does nothing to solve the DDOS problem..
Don't Tread on OpenSource
MIRC. Simple as that. Take a look at most zombie packages and MOST will install a MIRC client, hide it in the background and then the join some botchannel to await the command for another DDoS. Eithet that, or it's used as some sort of FTP server (fserve) to host various kinds of crap that shouldn't be on the internet. (emule is much better anyways) Also, MIRC is one of the most vile and annoying programs I have EVER encountered, ranking with stuff like RealPlayer and Quicktime, mainly because of the bloat and the fact MIRC never does ANYTHING that it should. That, and the fact it's one of the biggest threats to internet security due to the fact it makes an excellent DDoS zombie, makes me hate that program and it's creators. I hope RI/MPAA will press charges against the programmers of MIRC to get them out of business and that IRC servers will be hardcoded to refuse MIRC clients.
End of rant.
Hate me!
Sorry - I don't see how this is a 'moderation'
To me moderation in the technical sense means one of two things.
1) Messages are reviewed by a moderating team before being publicly posted such as mailing lists
2) Messages are freely posted but a moderating team montiors them and removes ones that do not abide by the terms of use.
Since when did restricting what services your users can use become 'moderation'?
DALnet is still an unmoderated medium for CHAT - you can say what you like, organise a bank heist, tell all your l33t friends about the latest hijacked webserver your using to serve your warez. Nothing in this policy implies any moderation of speech.
I can speculate why they are enforcing this policy. When you run a community service where time, money, resources and effort are donnated by a large number of people for a certain purpose and a large number of the users use it for an entirely differnet purpose, costing you a lot of resources, and then also attack the service so that user you want to support can't use it, I guess I personally would be a little pissed.
The users they want are the users that want the services DALnet was originally designed for.
Do you think losing lots of hangers on is really going to worry them - every user on the system costs some supporter of DALnet money somewhere, its not like a membership site where they get revenue. Explain to me if I run a DALnet server why exactly I should be worried about losing users that use my box to swap warez, p0rn or coordinate a Sub7 attack on another machine?
When I find my webserver compromised and used as a warez server, are you saying I shouldn't lock it down because this will " undoubtedly upset someone with the means to launch an attack equivalent to the attacks {I} suffered recently"??
DALNet is a free service, they are not required to provide YOU with what YOU want, they are not a government aganecy or a paid membership site. YOU have a choice of IRC servers, and if you don't like any of them go ahead and set your own up.
They say that now that all the tv episode channels that made DalNET so (in)famous have already left for other networks - what a joke!
Empty words from people who administrate an IRC network that has lost all meaning in the illegal communities. Every major channel (and not only the illegal ones) have left for one of the other networks, like Efnet, tv-eps or irc-chat. I bet the only people who still come to dalnet are the ones that are looking for their old buddies and then leave pretty quickly when they learn from the channel topic to which network their channel has moved.
DalNET administration: you're just being pathetic now.
If a train station is a place where a train stops, what's a workstation?
you know its funny Dal-Net isnt even on the top 30 Irc networks. this place monitors them http://irc.netsplit.de/networks/
Dal-Net Became a haven for Script kiddys, and so called haxors Very early on, I Don't like the polocy of no file trasfurs but if thats what it takes to save IRC so Be it. I always viewed the Dal-Net network as a lessor network, as it was always were the rotten users semed to origanate from..
perhaps this will spur IRC like file sharing system such as Direct Connect (DC++) on..
R.I.P. IRC.dalnet.com
I used to love to chat. On my 2 node BBS back in '92 to around '96 I used to frequently get paged by a few of the regular users just to shoot the breese.
I never liked IRC from the moment I first tried it. Happen to get into an argument with someone who is buddy-buddy with the admins in a channel? Wham, bam... banned. If you can play by the rules and not upset anyone (or you're lucky enough to be in a channel that actually has some mature admins), you'll probably enjoy IRC.
---
DRM is like antifreeze, to the MPAA/RIAA it's sweet, to the consumers it's poison.
if idiots could fly, dalnet would be an airport
Ahh.. the word "mate" (especially as spelled "m8") originated with Black people in London? Mmmmmmmm....
When faced with the problem of DDoS attacks, why would DALNet admins choose to disable file-swapping? how is it relevant to addressing the "root cause" of the DDoS?
Unless the perpetrators of the DDoS has something against file trading specifically... Do they know something we dont?
I like techno/euro/rave/house music. There's not a very big shelf for that kind of thing down at the local CD shop. Much of the best of this kind of music isn't even available on store shelves anywhere. But it *could* be found, lurking on the Internet. Like many others, I tried Kazaa, and was immediately turned off by all the adware and spyware. I uninstalled it, ran AdAware, and did the best I could to clean up my system.
That's where IRC came in. I really liked getting my underground music through DALnet's IRC network. Sure, it took a little more work than using Kazaa, but I liked knowing that I had complete control over what was being downloaded onto my computer. DALnet's network was always pretty well stocked. However, as the DDOS attacks persisted, it became more and more difficult to get onto DALnet at a convenient time to find the latest tracks from the likes of Mistress Barbara, Carl Cox, et. al.
I view this as a loss. I've gone ahead and installed KazaaLite on my desktop, but I'm still leery about software that indiscriminately writes to my disk and offers up arbitrary folders for sharing. I don't have the source code for it, so I don't know what it's doing.
Flame away,
Kombat
Like woodworking? Build your own picture frames.
Actually, you couldn't be further from the truth.
I AGREE WITH THIS POST!
Freenode, formerly OpenProjects, which is an excellent network, albeit one that focuses on the support and building of free software, has a policy of no "excessive" file sharing and mp3 trading. This policy doesn't seem to affect the network negatively. If anything it improves the quality.
I can speculate why they are enforcing this policy. When you run a community service where time, money, resources and effort are donnated by a large number of people for a certain purpose and a large number of the users use it for an entirely differnet purpose, costing you a lot of resources, and then also attack the service so that user you want to support can't use it, I guess I personally would be a little pissed.
DCC sends don't use up any of the server's resources, and saying that people downloading warez are behind the attacks lacks proof.
Do you think losing lots of hangers on is really going to worry them - every user on the system costs some supporter of DALnet money somewhere, its not like a membership site where they get revenue. Explain to me if I run a DALnet server why exactly I should be worried about losing users that use my box to swap warez, p0rn or coordinate a Sub7 attack on another machine?
Did it not occur to you that the users who might download warez might be identical to those that chat? Not all 'leechers' are just leechers, a lot of them do chat. And why should they be worried about losing users? Well, normally, I'd say there is no good reason. But Dalnet opers and admins have always been known to be very vain about stats, especially user numbers.
The point is: you can chat on every network, but you can't leech on all nets (anymore). So what criterium do you think people who occasionally leech will use when they pick their fav network?
That said, I think this whole fuzz is just a PR stunt - "Look, mom, we're still alive!" - after all it's not like dalnet is crowded with warez kids right now (not anymore).
If a train station is a place where a train stops, what's a workstation?
That would make 'chatting' rather hard too.
If they were to enforce a 'open channel chat only' rule.. there wouldn't be enough users to even care about.
---- Booth was a patriot ----
News of DALNet's decision rocked the NASDAQ exchange today, with Adobe, Macromedia, and Microsoft taking huge hits in value. Stockholders feared that the companies would have to find a new distribution model for their product to make up for the loss of this valuable product channel.
DALnet was 10 channels and 30-40 people on a Saturday night!
And this move is bullshit. Tell me how they're going to stop it? Will they set up a few thousand new IRC ops? A move like that is just asking for trouble.
Will they automatically K-Line anyone who joins #0-d4y-l33tn3zz? Gee, they'll all start trading on #fluffy-kittens.
Due to the nature of IRC, I can't see how they could possibly stop such rampant theft of IP. Sad, really, because DALnet was once a great network.
I don't remember saying it originated there.
Face it - bars are for chatting, IRC is for new Farscape episodes.
Besides, does anyone else think that DALnet's terms of use are somewhat irrelevant since you can't connect to the damn thing? The IRC state of affairs is sad indeed.
sic transit gloria mundi
Could somone explain to me why the warez kiddies are (were) on DALnet in the first place after all this time?
... you had to wait in line for hours to get a DCC "slot", and when you did, the server usually transferred to you at 56k modem speed.
... "bring the files to the masses!" ... But now that there are clearly more efficient ways to move the bits around, it seems like a relic.
IIRC, the last time I checked out a DCC channel, it seemed like the most inefficient and slowest possible way to transfer files amongst people
Hasn't Kazaa/eMule/Overnet/etc. made the whole IRC file-sharing thing completely depreciated? I mean, sure, back when the only way to get warez was to have access to a private FTP site or a BBS, the public warez movement on IRC made sense
Are we talking about kiddie porn, then? And if so, good riddence!
nlh
Ferrari and other exotic car rentals in New York
So, they are more concerned about RIAA coming after them than about distributing pornographic picture of children. Time to reconsider priorities.
i agree in prohibiting transfering of files... do they prohibit sharing/trading of credit cards? they cant even stop credit card trading channels let's see if they can stop file sharing..
DALnet's dying faster than BSD :P
Game... blouses.
DALNet has always been the shittiest and most fascist of the IRC networks.
They allow you to register nicks, don't allow nick collides/server desynchs, prohibits bots, etc. It's like white bread.
I'll stick with EFNet -- that's REAL IRC.
Fuck DALNet.
Really? Me too!
/dcc get TeenDJ *.mp3
Do you have a sister?
Yeah? Right on! Does she have any decent music?
Modest doubt is called the beacon of the wise. - William Shakespeare
And for a variety of reasons. Other posts have mentioned the benefit you get in bandwidth from kicking out the MP3 hogs. But I also think there's another motivation for DALnet, one that will push other networks to follow suit.
Legal Action.
Surely, the RIAA knows about the abundance of MP3 and warez sites on IRC. They've gone after everyone else. It stands to reason that they'll come after IRC sooner or later. And like Napster, they have a central authority they can go to in order to take action.
This policy is a smart pre-emtptive move on DALnet's part.
Life is hard, and the world is cruel
If you can't swap in a channel, then have them sign on to AIM, or MSN, etc...
Will is shut DALnet down? certainly not! I've learned more on IRC than I have in most of my computer classes. People will still use it, as long as there are dorm rooms.
thelikesofwhich.com
Yes, this decision sucks, but it is DALnet's network, and they can do what they want with it. Our rights are not affected by the owner of a network deciding that a certian activity is prohibited. We can go to another network, or start our own.
"Do I dare disturb the universe?"
I wore out the fun of looking at dots on tape working at a Western Union telegraph office is Des Moines.
And it won't just be the warez kiddies leaving in droves. Their friends, friends of their friends, and people just looking for the 'popular' IRC network will find themselves somewhere other than DALnet.
Trying to get fuckers on IRC to switch networks is like pulling teeth. They act like you've asked them to switch blood type. A few people might leave, but people on IRC are so lazy, shiftless, and stupid in their network-loyalty that getting them to move would require tactical nuclear devices, not simply the removal of a few large fserv channels.
- A.P.
"Remember when the U.S. had a drug problem, and then we declared a War On Drugs, and now you can't buy drugs anymore?"
It doesn't matter whether or not they are the actual transferers of content. If I run a BBS that facilitates the conversations of criminals and moderate content in any way then I am shown to be aware of any and all criminal activities discussed on my BBS. Therefore I'm liable for their content if they say, "We're gonna knock off the bank on 34th street" if I don't make an effort to inform the proper authorities that there is a crime about to be taking place. Of course, that's US law and IRC has always been one of the more multicultural places I've ever hung my hat so YMMV.
Part of the beauty of the network that Kazaa has started is that theoretically it's impossible to shut down Sharman networks and kill Kazaa itself.
What Dalnet is essentially stating is that they're now able to moderate content enough to kill individual channels, which leaves them open to legal questions on whether or not they could moderate individual users or groups of users. Now, everyone has learned by now that judges read cases by the potential campaign funds and slogans that might be involved right?
The question I have is, if goes Dalnet because of this nonsense, when does the rest of IRC hit someone's radars and get sued into geek history also? And before I hear another "Good! Serves them right for having crooks on their computers!" arguement I'd like to remind everyone that tyrannies are made of strong police forces.
Well how's this IRC/Opennap hybrid server.
It seems that the one responsible for what service to serve is the admin of servers.
I just wanted to clarify something here... you're suggesting that if someone provides a free service, they have a moral obligation to open it up to anything at all, no matter what?
Morally, they give up the right to determine the uses their network and servers are put to?
Ludicrous.
Why is this post under "YRO?"
Using DALnet (or any other IRC network) isn't a RIGHT. It's a privilege.
DALnet is simply saying, "This kind of behaviour is not what we want on our systems."
Now, if they can ever get out from under the DDoS attacks, we'll see if this makes a difference anywhere.
"Sometimes the truth is stupid." - Lawrence, creator of Prime Intellect
Seems to me someone with a few name morphic bots and access to some extensive chat logs, you could spoof this easily... ie scan a chat log establish a bot log on for the top 5-10 msg generating ID's in the log and then have them doll out the chat log along with the other 'occasional' msg's advertising FTP server access etc...
In fact someone could simply mimick the chat going on in several channles at once and make it semi-sensible if they bothered to figure out a conversation following algorythm.. but purely random would work too for the most part for anything but close scrutiny..
I don't ask you to be me. I only ask you not expect me to be you.
I guess not. I'll miss those old channels, we actually share lots, and buy even more.
Berto
The internet was just fine before IRC, I remember.
Gee... I've been on the internet longer than
AOL and I've used IRC what... 3 times?
I understand you retards think it's the greatest
thing since High School (another retarded concept
these days) but you're really off track.
I can't imagine anything that would "disgruntle" warezers quicker than kicking them off the network. Not only that, but it seems to me that this move will also:
a) focus the spotlight on Dalnet as The Enemy, encouraging disparate groups of warez kiddies to unite and attack Dalnet when they might otherwise be busy attacking each other
b) be construed as an implicit challenge, at least by types who are accustomed to thinking in the territorial/anti-authoritarian terms of 13-year olds ("You can't use our servers for this stuff anymore." "Oh yeah? Take *this* then.")
It's a lose-lose. By taking this active role, Dalnet has simultaneously identified itself as a responsible party and moderator of content (to copyright holders) and an enemy to be defeated (to the warezers).
Because of recent difficulties maintaining a connection to Dalnet, and because of the (understandable) wish for discretion on the part of Dalnet management, some of the assertions in this posting are unconfirmed and unsupported. This nonwithstanding, the following speculation is offered in the hope of illuminating to the best of my ability to percieve it, what's been really going on:
At about the middle of January this year, Dalnet servers were hit with a wave of massive DDoS attacks, quantified as greater than 1G per second per server with sweepingly damaging results.
There never were that many Dalnet login servers to begin with. The attack wave was successful in disabling all of them, and keeping them out of service entirely for over 7 days.
To complicate matters further, there have been credible reports on ircnews.com, irc-junkie.org and elsewhere of a certain degree of dissention within Dalnet, and the senior sysadmins and management of the companies providing server hosting. I mention this with reluctance, because the problem is bad enough anyway, but it is nevertheless true that the operational list of Dalnet servers available at this moment is quite different from the array online before the attack wave began, and that some of the defections are permanent, including some of the largest hubs.
Dalnet have commented officially on their website newsletter that the volume of DDoS garbage going into their hosts' servers was sufficient to not only knock Dalnet offline, but bad enough to interfere with the hosts' other (revenue earning) internet services.
At present also, login servers are resolving under slightly different names, making joining problematic for large numbers of users still, but as of last week at least, the expectation of a reasonably reliable login is plausible.
Dalnet is probably correct in having determined that their attackers method of acquiring zombies is by the use of worms, trojans.......use your favorite term - by sending files like XXXSallyXXX.GIF.vbs, or whatever, and that these OwN3d systems are the ones being enlisted to carry out DDoS waves.
They note with equal accuracy that a handful of filesharing channels are some of the most crowded on their network, and may be not carefully enough managed, and have hypothecated these as being most likely sources of widespread damage and infection, to several thousand users' systems, to Dalnet, other IRC networks and the internet overall.
The sociology of a filesharing channel is also a factor in this policy change. Where else in the world wide world would a user be so inclined to accept, click on and tinker with a file they acquired five minutes ago from an anonymous stranger with absolutely no verification? Windoze users are requested to NOT post lengthy replies babbling on and on about their firewalls. They're meaningless in this context. The file transferred and was run. Think about it.
All Dalnet have done, is announce they intend to shut down these channels. They had to do something.
Does this mean they're trying to ban filesharing via Dalnet alltogether? No. Even if the IRC protocol permitted this, which it doesn't, their response at server level is thought through and restrained in scope, and respected here accordingly.
Elsewhere on this thread it has been suggested that this decision is motivated by the desire to take away IRC users' freedom. I refute this with the comment that the freedom to unknowingly download a trojan to allow your billyware to be used in DDoS attacks is an unfortunate and unsuitable choice for a cause to defend in the name of liberty.
give me a
Morally: give it away and dont bitch about its use..
Legally: they have control of course.
Reality: i will do as i please, regadless.
---- Booth was a patriot ----
Doesn't matter what you're transfering, if you set up a channel soley for the purpose of transfering files it will be closed. You could be tranfsering family pictures, banner ads, open source proggies, your massive collection of SPAM emails, doesn't matter, they are all forbidden under this new AUP.
There is no content filtering here.
IRC is my primary source for downloading ROMs for emulating games. While I wait for my dowloads, I chat. I used to use dalnet, but I will take my traffic elsewhere now.
"They can censor it if they want, even though that does get into a sticky legal issue. Once you start, you are libel for content under your control."
I see this a lot on slashdot, but I have never seen any evidence to back this statement up. What US law or legal precedent states that a moderator of a public forum is liable for what the public says? Provide a link.
I am not saying it is false. Bot MANY arguments on slashdot start with this as an axiom, however the trugh of this axiom has never been shown here, to my knowledge.
A slashdotter who didn't build his own computer is like a Jedi who didn't build his own lightsaber.
I haven't been able to log onto DALnet for a few weeks ( Network Unreachable ) I wonder if the worm/virus/whzatever has anything to do with it or if it's just a dns problem of my ISP. I've had ( a different ) ISP totally banned from DALnet before. I dunno if someone using my ISP has been a bad boy. Maybe that's it. My ISP sux.
MAN! the lameness filter made it hard to post the name of that channel.
Eat at Joe's.
Uh, maybe because they don't want people sharing Quake ISOs?
/load nail_in_coffin.rc
Sure they have a right to do what they want with THEIR network.. They can censor it if they want, even though that does get into a sticky legal issue. Once you start, you are libel for content under your control.
It's not censorship if the government doesn't do it, but your point is well made - if they decide they're going to crack down on illegal file traders, they become responsible for all illegal file traders. Thing is, they don't care if it's illegal or not, so I don't think that applies. You could be trading pictures of kittens, homemade kitten.mpg movies you made of your kitten playing with string, they'd still boot you off (sadly so).
Personally I think its a moral mistake to enforce their beliefs on others when they offer a free service, but that is their choice.
Your pronoun use is a little ambiguous, but I take this to mean that it's a moral mistake for Dalnet to enforce their beliefs on others when they (Dalnet) provide a free service, which doesn't make any sense, because, to be cliche, 'beggars can't be choosers' - if you want to use the network, use it for what it's provided to you for. Perhaps you meant something else, but who knows.
People that do use IRC for transfers don't leech any bandwidth, the key component to DCC is *DIRECT*, it does NOT load the IRC network at all. In reality they use LESS resources then a 8 hour a day 'chatter'.
Except that file sharing channels, if you've ever been to one, are always flooded with text. I find it hard to keep up personally, and I only go to the smaller ones. The larger ones are even worse. Combine that constant advertising of your fserve with the trivia bots, and send that to a dozen or a hundred or two hundred people (depending on the channel), and that's a lot of traffic, a lot of memory for the servers to store userdata for, a lot of bandwidth to share that user data around whenever a netsplit occurs (you can send gigs of traffic a day just syncing, since the new link has to carry data about half the users one way, and half the users another way, and then the two servers have to route it to every other server on the network).
Whiners? Not really, just people that would like to keep what they have now, ( or expand features )if you don't speak out you loose it, regardless of the topic.
Whiners? Definately. They don't pay for it. They don't contribute financially. They just use bandwidth and cpu time and memory of people who felt like being nice and linking servers to Dalnet to provide a service to people. You'd have to be a pretty big jerk to throw that in their face because they're not giving you enough for free. Take the service as it is given, or don't take it at all, but no one is 'entitled' to anything on Dalnet any more than they are entitled to anything in my home. It's a private domain, not a public one, and that's all there is to it.
--Dan
Disclaimer: I opered on an IRC network once, and got a little bitter about people demanding that I fix what was 'wrong' with the network, or insisting they had 'a right to free speech'. IRC networks are private property, you're not entitled to anything, and you have no rights.
Before the storm...
some of the servers are working. try misc-e.dal.net.
my blog
Personally I think its a moral mistake to enforce their beliefs on others when they offer a free service, but that is their choice.
By the same token, you fully support companies that take OSS code, make changes, and lock it down tight?
You're all for Microsoft coming out with their own Linux Distro, that has changes, that are totally closed source, etc?
Personally I think it's a moral mistake for Stallman et al, to enforce their beliefs on others when they offer a free product, but that is their choice.
"Politicians are interested in people. Not that this is always a virtue. Fleas are interested in dogs." P.J. O'Rourke
Look at the DDoS attacks that crippled DALnet. This is not the first time this has happened to DALnet or any other IRC network, hell even my network. They want to try to solve the cause of the problem (problem=DDoS) since they can't stop the problem itself. Sorry to generalize, but these huge warez chans are a breeding ground of kiddies who have egos bigger than Quakenet.
No one is about to prosecute an IRC network, your reasoning is totally offbase and just more anti-RIAA rhetoric.
Furthermore, I'd like to believe that DALnet is a bit happier that they don't have to deal with 90% of the kiddies now that they'll find somewhere else "better" and move there.
IRC: Where men are MEN, women are too half the time, and children are most certainly FBI agents.
"No problem. I have the capacity to do infinite work so long as you don't mind that my quality approaches zero."-Dilbert
Since DalNet has issued statements regarding this matter on their site, quote; "A person or group of persons unknown are using Distributed Denial of Service techniques to litterally destroy our network. In doing so they are causing great inconvenience to our hosts as well as to us and our users. By the very nature of DDoS it's almost impossible to trace and impossible to defend against." I wonder how it is then that they can now say that they will implementing new rules come March 1st. Are they suggesting that by March 1st the denial of service attacks are going to stop? If so, how do they know? Why change the rules if barely anyone can access their servers anyway? Maybe they know why they are being attacked, by whom and changing the rules will stop the attacks. I for one have considered the attacks were done in a way to stop file-sharing. A possibility anyway.
DALnet hardly exists anymore, so whats the point?
- the goatiesex, but thx for restating stuff we already know and should all practice
Unfortunately you don't understand the technical aspects of what it takes to run filesharing channels.
1) each person logged into the room takes up bandwidth on the irc server.
2) Each broadcast to the channel saying "I'm a fileswapper trade with me" requires bandwidth.
3) Now multiply this many times due to the fact that the "person" logged in is actually a bot thats designed to do all of this automatically and can keep doing this indefinitely for weeks.
A single person chatting does not take up as much bandwidth as a bot being a bot, but a bot that is on 24/7 saying the same thing over and over takes up more daily bandwidth than all but the most hardened IRC chatters.
Some irc servers actively drop people who "idle" on channels all day as well so that they don't waste bandwidth even though they don't want to be disconnected.
"All great wisdom is contained in .signature files"
The immediate response from every bot-kiddie who finds themselves unable to trade warez and pr0ns will be to launch a DOS attack on the network -- and the IRC protocol is notoriously susceptible, so even the legitimate users will find themselves unable to use the network until the furor dies down.
If I were running an IRC network, I'd disallow DCC entirely - filter out the handshake packets before they ever even get to their destination. IRC is for chatting, not for file transfer.
People would have to uuencode files and post them line-by-line into the channel to swap files on POOTnet!
well, dalnet has now just died, i used to support warez kiddies, etc... I have changed my views since then (piracy is wrong, however, self regulation is proper) in my warez days, the irc operators used to close down channels at their whim, and not just warez chans either, even chat chans not related to warez, but not "Family Friendly" thats why dalnet is is being ddosed. some people (such as i) would like to CHAT and maybe offer a few files to share (i do on efnet now, but its not warez, or pirated mp3s) this seriously impedes this. and also, the family friendly chat idea brings up a bunch of channels with power-crazy operators with stupid scripts and people that dont know how to use irc using ugly colors and stuff. thats why i no longer use dalnet (and those colors are ugly in xchat) Efnet is a much better enviroment for me at this time.
I've been in file sharing channels before, and heavy use chat channels. Both have similar amounts of data.
Ill give you that perhaps OVERALL the bandwidth for chatting is less then bots chatter.
But the fact remains that once the connection is in use, the irc network sees no degradation due to the transfer.
If the network cant deal with the bots, then they don't need to be offering services in the first place and should stick with something a bit easier for them to handle.
---- Booth was a patriot ----
The mark of a good troll is that you can't tell if it's really a troll. With that in mind: How do you think a DCC connection is negotiated? By telepathy? A DCC request is a private CTCP, which is encoded as a private message. DCC, by definition, does use the server.
"We didn't deal crack out of your house; we just met here several times a day to arrange our crack deals, and the crack deals wouldn't have gone through unless we met here first-- but we have a right to use your house." Why do people persist in claiming they have the right to use private property (like a DALnet server) to do something the owners don't want?
I've listened to all of Revelations and Dark Poet, and didn't catch that on any of 'em. What am I missing?
--grendel drago
Laws do not persuade just because they threaten. --Seneca
I like to think of it as a great pyramid of communications. With the lowest forms of communication first:
=============
AIM
ICQ
IRC
Web-based BBS
Usenet
=============
There, my creation, perfect and holy in all ways.
--grendel drago
Laws do not persuade just because they threaten. --Seneca
So the Internet was fine up until 1991?
Taking this all in the context of the DDoS attacks that DalNet has been suffering from I have two theories on why they did this (neither have to do with so called morals).
1. The DDoS attacks have something to do with these file sharing channels. Perhaps one group doesn't like another one so they DoS the servers to deny them the ability to serve files. Getting rid of all of the channels makes the problem slowly fade (hopefully).
2. They want to lower the load on their servers because many of them have left (due to the mentioned DDoS attacks). If they get rid of the file serving channels then a lot less people will be on their server, and a higher percentage of them will be there for chatting. The file serving channels are the obvious fat that they can get rid of; they are very large and use a ton of traffic, plus not required for chat portion of IRC.
If they wanted to ban these channels for some moral reason then why didn't they do it before? Also this isn't the RIAA we're talking about, irc operaters are a diverse group, and I doubt that they would do this unless they felt they had to.
-a
eBay stops unpleasant stuff too. Do you really think that saying "venue" is what saves them, or do you think it has something to do with eBay completely bending over for all the right people?
As you yourself stated, it is their network. They can do whatever they'd like with it; INCLUDING enforce their beliefs ESPECIALLY since it's free. If you don't like it, don't use it. If it changes and you don't like what it's become, go somewhere else. You didn't pay for it, you don't support it, you just USE it. You are a USER and bound by their policies, like it or not.
Look, try to be honest with yourself at least and hopefully with us too; of course there are some "legal" transfers too but we all know (or should know) that the vast majority are easily identifiable as illegal by most definitions. And, this network is based in the US so it's going to get sued in the US if it comes to that so it's US laws that apply. I suspect you are a US citizen and are likely more often than not trading with other US citizens. Lets not play the "it's not illegal in zambobwe so I'm fine" game - that's just lame. It wasn't about bandwidth and we all know it so that isn't it.
In my opinion, when someone loses the ability to get away with something they have been getting away with that happens to be illegal - and they complain; I call them whiners. That's MY right to my opinion I'm expressing there.
Why dont you ask WEBMASTER INC?
> IRC: where men are men, women are men, and children are FBI agents.
Really? I always pretended to be a girl. People seemed more willing to help when jill_17 or cindy_23 asked questions.
Maybe instead of blocking 'file share channels' from their net, they ought to consider blocking DDoS attacks? Hell, just because there's a law against speeding certainly doesn't stop it, and last time I checked politicians were still dirty fucks. Will they succeed in getting rid of file-shares? Nope. Will they simply be ridiculed and laughed at? Already were, and I see that as a continuing trend.
So far we've already seen some of the refugees (?) from Dalnet on the other nets, and I expect that if they do put some measures forth to end file shares it will continue, along with the people who are migrating for the simple reason that Dalnet sucks...
but that's just me.
-HobophobE
Nothing laughs forever.
I was an oper. Lets leave it at that. I wouldn't
want anyone to think I'm like the typical ex-oper
admin and have any illusion that IRC wasn't anything
but an incredible waste of time.
This is pointless. This policy change. The kids
will figure out they can do all of their filesharing
inside an Eggdrop bot (or whatever they use now
it's been a while) and quit advertising it in the
channel. In a way, Dalnet wins anyway. I don't
think they REALLY want the bullshit involved with
having to kill off 100 channels a day with the
SAME group of people over and over again. Talk
about work. If they do go all rambo, they'll just
get their network attacked again. Once the kids
figure out they can allow TELNET backdoors to
their bots, dcc connections to the bots, and
handle ALL transfers inside the bots, you'll
have a bunch of channels with unsuspicious names
and a ton of people sitting in them saying
absolutely nothing with no screen scroll.
So basically it will look like your average efnet
(I'm so leet cause I've been on IRC for 5 months
that I don't talk anymore and anybody that does
is a loser) channels. Once
again, what does dalnet care. Out of site (pun
intended), out
of mind. What's curious is that by setting this
policy, it could be interpreted that they now
have a legal obligation to stop illegal file
trading. Couldn't this potentially open them
up to litigation? I honestly don't know, I'm
asking. Their biggest hope though is that
the kids figure out they aren't wanted, and
take off for browner pastures. I left IRC
about year and some change ago, and have only
looked back a few times. Before that I got
involved around the time that the #afd and
#trek channels on efnet got sick of getting
picked on and the morons there and
Dalvenjahahahahaha saddled up his horse and
started a new network. I doubt there are any
#real-regs left, but hi if'n yar around.
The most important thing any republican needs to know.
I dont Trade on IRC.. dont assume anything. However I dont bash people that do. If they want too, more power to them. Legal files or not. I dont personally care.
Facts? In this case its mostly concepts and ideas, not much real facts to go on. Thus me stating my opinions.. Including my opinion of you.
Tho i am sick and tired of people always ASSUMING that a file transfer HAS to be pirate material if its on a network.. the last file *I* transferred was a distfile for FBSD.. 100% legal.
---- Booth was a patriot ----
Last I looked, the 'C' in IRC stood for chat... DALNet's always been my IRC network of choice, and the recent DoS attacks have really been pissing me off. So, kudos to the DALNet brass for making a tough decision and acting to save the network - and eternal damnation for the little bastards responsible for trying to destroy a cornerstone of the 'net (may they be forced to live out the remainer of their skript-kiddying lives with 2400baud modems) I know the fileshare chan users aren't going to like the new rules, but hey - that's what P2P is for, isn't it? Flame On!
The issue is that they are *taking away* what was available. The fact is, DALnet would not be as big as it is now if it weren't for the file traders. If DALnet had said from the beginning--no file trading channels, then sure they'd have a nice healthy chat environment. But the network can't just suddenly screw users who have been with the network for years just for filetrading.
1. spyware (hint: IRC clients generally have none)
2. the RIAA/MPAA (hint: they've never successfully sued an IRC network, afaik)
3. XDCC (incredibly fast file transfers from multiple sources)
4. no requirement to share to others (helps if your ISP tracks this sort of thing)
5. dedicated servers for content. sure it may be slow, but you likely aren't going to have some idiot waiting until your movie is 99% done, then cut you off at the last 100 bytes - only to find no one else on Kazaa doesn't have the exact rip of that movie
anyone else?
Endless arguments over trivial contradictions in books written by ignorant savages to explain thunder in the dark.
This is a good move for DALnet. If anything's going to help stop being blasted in the ass by every group with a botnet, it'll be this.
However, I couldn't imagine why anyone would be angry with this. DAL was never that good for warez in the first place. I can equate it to getting angry with a movie place for taking out arcades. Sure, the option to play them was there. But they were all 10 year old machines that were even bad for THEIR time.
I've heard of it. Don't think I need it though with this Linux thingy I use..
is it warez distributed by Buckwheat? shouldn't it be O-Tay warez in that case?
a better policy would be to require that you be this tall to ride this ride. but i guess kids need a place to learn the ins and outs of the net too.
i don't agree with shutting down legal file transfers though. surely these occur infrequently and pose no threat to their funding and donations.
Evil is the money of all root....
I find this to be a very good move on DALnet's part, not because it will help them, but because it will mean less people going to DALnet.
I write an IRC client for the mac, and I have to say that I positively loath DALnet. Close to half the support questions I get from my users are people complaining that they cant get on DALnet, and many of them blame me for it. Every single time it is ALWAYS DALnet's fault. If it isn't because of the ident enforcement, it's because of some other stupid abuse prevention method.
I say let DALnet die, good riddence.
Yes, in an ideal world the internet (as a whole) belongs to all - but at this point in history, the individual boxes that link to make the internet belong to private citizens and businesses, and they sure as hell don't like having their bandwidth killed by a senseless DDoS.
IRC (as a community) belongs to all of us, m'man, but the actual servers belong to someone(s) and we have to be good guests - or find somewhere else to play.
I've seen rants like yours before "how DARE you kick me out of channel for "
FYI, I know of some DALfolk who may not be pleased with the new rules, but are at least relocating their fileserv chans to another network, with nothing but good grace
I suggest all we can do is make the best of a bad situation caused by an outside party, and if DALnet admin's new policy saves that network, so be it (IMO).
BTW do you have to *shout* in posts? Learn some manners, and you may go far, dude :)
I don't see how eliminating file sharing would help DALnet unless the DDos attacks were being caused by the RIAA. Maybe they wised up and figured out that there was a lot of song trading. Maybe they caused the DDos.
There's more. Anyone who keeps up with IRC news knows that other networks such as IRC-Chat were very recently contacted by the MPAA, who asked them to take an active role in stopping file distribution. At this very same time, DALnet announces a nearly identical policy out of the blue, while claiming that it did so purely voluntarily.
If nothing else, that seems a little odd.
I made a PHP/MySQL library that prevents SQL injection & makes coding easier!
Goodbye, DALnet. It was nice knowing you.
The only way the typical /.er can pick up a chick is with a forklift. -- AC
Now the time has come to "chat" in sourcecode, and compile the logfiles afterwards..
A horse can't be sick, you know, even if he wants to.
Only an asshole would tear a page, blank or not out of any bible or any book to have a smoke. You are pathetic. How many millions wish they could afford a book? Maybe you just worship open source. I am no bible thumper but that is just bullshit. Better stop polluting yourself and my environment before you truly get to be "closer to God"
Go on, tell me I'm wrong, I need a laugh.