Slashdot Mirror
Decentralizing Bittorrent
An anonymous reader writes "Exeem is a new file-sharing application being developed by the folks at SuprNova.org. Exeem is a decentralized BitTorrent network that basically makes everyone a Tracker. Individuals will share Torrents, and seed shared files to the network. At this time, details and the full potential of this project are being kept very quiet. However it appears this P2P application will completely replace SuprNova.org; no more web mirrors, no more bottle necks and no more slow downs. Exeem will marry the best features of a decentralized network, the easy searchability of an indexing server and the swarming powers of the BitTorrent network into one program. Currently, the network is in beta testing and already has 5,000 users (the beta testing is closed.) Once this program goes public, its potential is enormous. "
If it's allowed to be reached anyhow.. I have a feeling it's going to be tied down if it's the "next" big thing..
I'm not the devil.. just his advocate.
It's only for legitimate trade of legal files you own, kids.
Do Not Eat iPod Shuffle
I hope empornium.us adopts this. They slow down frequently also.
~S
Hey! I have this great thing, but you can't see, use, or otherwise evaluate it on your own. But it will be great when it's done!
Didn't realize these guys were hackers, too. Wonder how many RIAA/MPAA scum got in on the beta test?
just the end was affected. the correct version is
its potential for lawsuits from 'artist' organizations is enormous
vodka, straight up, thank you!
For a frenzied orgy of illegal downloads!!!!
"There's no set architecture in Linux. All roads lead to madness" -Microsoft
Just imagine the benefits of the system, with so many new trackers, the RIAA/MPAA will demand even more when they haul you into court.
"Your honor, the defendant wasn't just a person sharing the file, our records indicate that he was the person sharing the file, running a server, not just a client on a network with files to share"
Help Brendan pay off his student loans
There are just so many different P2P products these days. Doesn't each new one subdivide the market more? If half of the torrent folks use the new thing, and half stick with bittorrent, don't both of them become less useful? I'm not sure what can be done about that, and I'm not saying there shouldn't be progress. But I miss the days when there was only Napster, and you never came up blank on your search terms. -Lep
I am allowed to criticize you: you are not allowed to criticize me. Sorry, that's just how things are.
I think the biggest win is the ease of finding files. Theoretically this would allow file information to propagate, and I tihnk the most interesting problem that will be faced is stability. How do you make effective searches that do not loop around the network?
This could be a really cool development, and there is a lot of research in the EE/CS community right now going in to studying these decentralized networks. They show great promise!
With the IP addresses still out there, wtf is the point?
The ultimate network admin tool needs HELP!
sounds good. it has my p2p traffic when it comes out. hopefully it will catch on. if it is backed by suprnova no doubt it will.
leprkan...
The only time I ever had a problem with torrents is when downloading something very timely and popular, and the tracker would get soaked. This happened with both Fedora Core 1 and 2. Take away this one tiny problem, and you have a perfect technology.
So BitTorrent took the whole "everybody's on the same network" and converted it into "one network per file".... and now this new system puts it *back* like that? How is this different from every other p2p filewhoring system?
Doesn't Shareaza already do this?
How can you truly decentralize P2P? Don't we still need to hit up a server that has a list of all the people? How can you track the trackers if you don't have a list of who is sharing? The only way I can think is just crude port scanning across subnets...can anyone clarify this for me?
Publishing a torrent is incredibly easy, drag the folder in, pick a category, click go. It hashes it and it starts seeding within seconds.
It still (obviously) needs some work doing to the app to make it more friendly but it's shaping up well.
Get paid to search..It's geniune and
Just because you have the client installed, dosen't mean you're doing anything bad with it.
- Just my $0.02, take with a grain of salt, your mileage may vary.
This is excellent news from a user standpoint. I use Bittorrent for just about everything - downloading Linux distributions, game betas and, uh... other commonly downloaded files. But I always seem to be a bit behind the tracker, and when I go to download there are hardly ever more than 5 peers at a time.
What I want to know is: basically, this is an indexing server that will allow torrents to be searchable. What happens with multiple versions of the same torrent? For instance, let's say there are 2 torrent distributions of Gentoo, identical files within the torrents. It would seem this server would ideally be able to recognize the similarities and kind of 'merge' the files - is this possible?
M
this sounds to me like a combination of the bittorrent system with the built-in searchability of p2p networks. am i getting this right?
I'm not seeing the big deal here.... it's basically a version of Kazaa where everyone is considered a 'supernode' and are forced to share files when downloading.
Just a minor thing - if half use each, then bittorrent becomes LESS useful and exeem becomes much MORE useful than with only 5000 beta testers.
I say let's give it a chance - never know, it might make up for what you miss:-) Worst case, no one will use it and everyone will stick with regular bittorrent.
picpix image polls. create - share - vote. fun!
"[...]its potential is enormous. " ??? Don't we just need an evil "MU-WHA-HA-HA-HAAaaa" now?
What would really matter these days is anonymity. It's a bit late to develop yet another non-anonymous network, when the real problem is the risk of lawsuits...
I realize that full anonymity is going to be a problem, but at least some degree of deniability and limited IP address propagation would be a boon. SuprNova might have the name recognition to really give something like that a good start.
Save your wrists today - switch to Dvorak
Pirates will be able do download their illegal wares much faster, without the inconvenience of web mirrors going offline by pesky interference by law enforcement officials.
Let's just be clear: BitTorrent is legal, and can be very useful
but the trackers on suprnova.org pretty much all link to ILLEGAL pirated files.
I am the maverick of Slashdot
So, that means I can now download BitTorrents with all the fun of completely mislabeled torrents, incomplete versions being passed on, and seeing 50 slightly different versions of the same things available with only a couple people offering up most of them, so you end up with a ton of half-downloaded versions of things because people went offline, and you finally give up and try another version, only to see the same thing happen?
Gee, where do I sign up?
"You know your god is man-made when he hates all the same people you do."
Is this gonna be open source? If not, I predict it will have enough accompanying suckage to be not very usable. But if it is open source, cool!
My bicyles
How is Freenet not mentioned in this context. It is decentralized and other than the dropped packets / routing needed for anonymity it is swarming dowloads since any node might have the data you need.
RudeDude
Perl/Linux/PHP hacker
People might think that the parent post is just mindlessly repeating a cliche, but in fact I've been to Korea many times and I have never seen anyone beloe the age of 50 decentralizing BitTorrent.
The real Ralph Yarro posts as Anonymous Coward. Anyone else is an impostor.
...can I run it on a Phantom?
Another one bites the dust
I wonder how they will solve the issue of slow searches because it is a decentralized network. Do I have to propagate my search through several users, who may be really slow, before I can find what I want? One of the good things about a centralized list of torrents is that you can find the results really quickly even though the central tracker is the key vulnerability in the network. If the searches don't propagate fast enough, not enough people will get into using this new network unless they are forced to (if all the major popular tracker sites got shut down).
Maybe what they can do is propogate torrent lists too, but then they would have to make sure they are properly signed, or else anyone can simply start propogating false lists.
Is uploading a torrent of itself!
MUAHAHAHAHA then nobody will be able to shut them down! MUAHAHAHA!
I think they're ignoring the fact that to be the "next big thing" requires being more than just incrementally better than what it replaces. Bittorrent itself is exponentially better than a FTP or HTTP server when demand is high. And Suprnova works quite well as it is, so I think it will be interesting to see whether Suprnova holds tough if people don't switch to the new technology fast enough.
Bittorrent needs a replacement that adds security. The protocol's creator has gone so far as to voice that doing illegal filesharing on torrent is a dumb idea, due to its utter lack of any security features. That said, Once you add this kind of capability to torrent as mentioned above, well, it will have become kazaa's replacement in every way. Let's hope the signal to noise ratio for downloads stays high.
------- "From bored to fanboy in 3.8 asian girls" ----------
Decentralized everything
I am a beta tester of eXeem, and it works out great. It is simple to publish a torrent, which will undoubtedly cause more people to publish more torrents. Currently the only thing I dislike about it is that there is a slightly small selection of torrents due only 5,000 users being on. They recently gave everybody an extra serial number to use for eXeem and encouraged all users to invite one more person.
On a side note, unlike suprnova, eXeem allows pr0nz.
IMHO having a tracker is a good thing. My problem with kazaa, emule and the like is, in fact, that you can effortlessy search the whole network. With BT, there is no such thing as 'The whole Network'. When you download stuff using a small tracker that only tracks like 10 files, what is the chance of having it scanned by the *AA? True, this application will make it easier to find soething, but that also makes scanning the network easier.
for bittorrent would prevent this: attack on BitTorrent servers
SLASHDOT: news for people who can't concentrate on work or have no life at all and got tired of yelling back at the TV.
This practically reminds me of the first reports about the the uber network called Gnutella and how it was supposed to own all other p2p networks. It worked well for awhile when it was small but then, at least IMO, became more of a hassle to use as it grew then the programs it was designed to replace.
I wish the SuprNova.org people the best of luck with there new program but I'll wait for the finished product before I start thinking its the Holy Grail of file sharing. The one thing though that is a big plus for them is how BitTorrent has developed to this point, on my torrents for UT2004 upgrades I've gotten 300-400k second which I'll take any day of the week.
sweet!
what are the stipulations on its use? (i'm at work so i can't really check it out)
If you don't know what AltaVista is (was), get off my lawn.
always produce the best software!
1)With all the lawsuit attempts and legislation in the works, we still haven't seen filesharing development dwindle as much as one would expect.
2)The RIAA and their comrads are lawsuit crazy, but you haven't seen any "cease and decist" orders issued out to projets like this. A bigger thing to note is the fact that everyone seems to be a target - except companies like LimeWire who actually sell the P2P service and make money off of it (they get paid for the ads in the free version as well).
3)How the heck can any judge take these cases seriously, when, like one of my fellow posters made notice of, companies like Sony pratice the business tatics that they do. Their electronics division sells the mp3 players, but the record companies that they own forbid you to transfer the songs to mp3 players.
Go Figure...
One: Will the torrents be Bittorrent torrents, or some other type. The last thing we need are 18,000 different Bittorrent-like torrents, and none of them working together. That doesn't help produce a huge, decentralized network, IMO, which I thought was one of the Bittorrent goals. No?
Two: Will it be encrypted? Or something similar?
Three: Will it be free and open sourced?
I realize there may not answers to my questions at this time, but I still thought I'd ask. I did not get the chance to RTF Web Page, since it already appears dead and gone. Go us!
When are the links going to be CORALIZED, you KNOW the site is going to get /.'ed.
Is it made in a cross platform programming language, or at the very least have a open protocoL? I have a nagging suspicion it does not!!!
Until they release some info about the inner workings of this app, there's not much to talk about.
There are serious problems with decentralising BitTorrent. One of the reasons that people have such good transfers on BT is that there is central tracker supervising particular file and knowing all users serving bits and pieces of this file. This way in case of high demand/high popularity files I achieve speeds over 1MB/s (yes, that's megabyte).
Depending on design choices you can have couple of trackers with subset of users on each of them, or every user seeding file has his own tracker. In first case your client wouldn't be able to use all cloud, and in second tracker would disappear when original seeder turned off his computer.
You can of course design some communication between trackers, or elections or some other magic, but it's too early to tell at the moment. I'll wait for more information.
Whatever they do, I hope that there will be some console based client for this, because asymmetric connections at homes plainly suck at upload (hence on torrent at download too), and I'd rather keep running my torrents on the server plugged into the fast network.
Robert
Bastard Operator From 193.219.28.162
"Once this program goes public, its potential is enormous." - As is the potential for lawsuits.
You see, by assigning an IP address, we can easily track who owns what IP. Then we know if it's an IP violation or not: if you have a valid IP address, you can't be violating IP laws.
right?
Decentralized Bittorrent? Wake me up when they have secured Bittorrent and then I'll listen.
My ISP, Mediacom, scans my network packets to determine if I'm grabbing a torrent of questionable nature. If they see it, they'll send me a nasty email. Hence, I'm on the edonkey networks now because BT is clearly not an option at the moment. I'm sure they'll scan those packets, too, at some point.
Unsecured BT is fast, sure, but if your ISP is snooping...well. And illegal or questionable content aside, it'd be handy for distributing other files to people in a more secure manner.
Or is this out there and I'm just missing something?
Blog,Twitter
The great thing about BitTorrent is that you are being pointed to a known file. You can judge for yourself who points you at a given file by what website is hosting the tracker. This is one of the reasons you don't get the spoofed files on BitTorrent. The fact that you can tell who is offering a tracker also means that the RIAA can. Thus the RIAA can sue this person. I see a distributed bittorrent being useful for non RIAA protected files. Once bittorrent is distributed though, the RIAA will start spoofing it.
"brxref
it's anonymous. I don't want to get sued for downloading the Seinfeld Reunion special. They should use a protocol like herbivore to guarantee anonymity. Then I'd be set!
What everyone seems to be confusing is that the website that lists the torrents that you download is not necessarily the tracker. The tracker keeps track of who is involved in the swarm, not any kind of search/indexing of torrents.
Hopefully this doesn't make the same assumption that most people do. I'm not involved in the beta, so I don't know.
Give me a decentralized tracker. Don't give me a search function.
It's potential is enormous!! It would make everyone liable for content as everyone is part of the distribution of the content. In case you haven't noticed the RIAA and MPAA tend to go after UPLOADERS more then downloaders. Now this new decentralized version makes us all active uploaders (or maintainers of the content) rather then downloaders and uploaders (Obviously with a torrent you already are an uploader, think like a lawyer and you see what I mean.) I'm not impressed. Even if the tracker is not maintaining data, you are effectivly, by law, Aiding in the Distribution of Stolen Merchandise on a higher level then before. Now you are potentially tying all the uploaders together. Now your starting to get into rackeeting territory. I am not a fan of P2P technology not for what it does, but I just find it poor technology. Giving users plausable deniability in the distribution is the best solution. It is what protects an ISP, why not use the same logic with end users.
-=[ Who Is John Galt? ]=-
Exeem will marry the best features of a decentralized network, the easy searchability of an indexing server and the swarming powers of the BitTorrent network into one program.
(Score:-5, MPAA Lawsuit Lightning Rod)
All joking aside, I'm curious to see which audience's problems it will solve. Will it suit the MPAA's goals of control by eliminating competing networks/protocols (less to monitor) or will it suit the pirate's needs for anonymity and valid content (non-faked-files)?
Any new big thing needs absolute anonimity. I already worry for all of the innocent civilians out there using bittorrent now to get their favorite shows and movies. I'm sure their transgressions are all being logged for future lawsuits.
And yes they are INNOCENT. Here's one good reason why. We first must ask, why did the founders of the US constitution feel it was important for accused criminals to be convicted only by a jury of peers?
I believe this is because they knew that honest citizens doing honest activities will often run afoul of the law, especially in a broken government where England (back then) or corporations today make all the laws. The jury of the peers is built into our criminal justice system in order to prevent just this kind of thing. I mean the hope is that a jury of bitorrent users will never convict a fellow bit torrent user. That's probably why we're only seeing civil lawsuits today by the RIAA and the like. I think I criminal jury trial for file sharing would be quite interesting.
.. it's still just a bunch of scr1pt kiddies who want's to share warez. No good comes from the poison minds of the warez'ers.
Want to Join the revolutionary Exeem network? Please click here and visit our sponsor.
Believe me, it will break. And it will not be free as in beer.
Girls are strange. They don't come with a man page.
-- Michael Mattsson
"...being kept very quiet" (until now)
/.ed, so I can't speak directly to Exeem, but it sounds from the blurb like these features are a possibility. Hope it's free in all senses.
This should be good... BT is without question the fastest p2p app (in fact, the only thing that has ever topped out my 'net connection), but it needs two features to kill off the others in my book:
1. Search - it's no fun to rely on third party websites to find things. Hopefully now we'll be able to do this.
2. Anonymity - BT could use an option for a system like Freenet's for making it really hard to tell who's serving who. Combined with the distributed nature of BT, it would be difficult to prove anything at all about BT users.
The article is
Here's another thought: the current BT system is really good at dispersing new content, like distro ISOs and TV shows, through RSS feeds from central websites. It would be cool to be able to subscribe to network-wide custom feeds, to stay informed about new files that match certain criteria.
perl -e 'foreach(values %SIG){$_="IGNORE";}while(){}'
The only problem I see is validating torrents. The system needs a way to validate if the seeded torrents are good or bogus (ie extra metadata). There's nothing to stop the RIAA and MPAA to releasing bogus material online as it is. This will just keep things working faster in general.
.torrent files, not the files the torrent represents. This results in huge performance increases. Also, if .torrents contained more detailed metadata about their contents, this could really improve the reliability of a search on the eXeem network.
:) This takes the burden off of a seeder to serve up a whole community from their own machine.
What I really like is that when you search for files that you want, you're searching the
Don't forget that bittorrent it is a very efficient protocol for P2P. Even if you're not finished downloading, you can be uploading to someone else
It's just a pet peeve of mine, but copyright infringement and theft are two distinct crimes.
I hate it when people equate copyright infringement with stealing. Illegal downloading is more like sneaking into a movie, concert or ballgame without a ticket than it is like theft.
MM
--
By including this sig, the copyright holders of this work or collection unreservedly place it in the public domain.
i'm ready to try out this new p2p, i've tried many others, often when they were new... irc, usenet , ftp groups, winmx, cutemx, napster beta 2, scour media agent, scourmx, gnutella, morpheus, kazaa, audiogalaxy, soulseek, edonkey, direct connect, mute, bittorrent, freenet, WASTE, winny, and i'm not going to stop any time soon. just gotta watch for what riaa/mpaa are looking for, and not share thier crap.
security? just think! when you are the tracker on the file, you can set passwords for the file (per user/ip passwords!) so that they cant share thier passes with others. of course this kind of defeats the purpose of more people=faster torrent, but at least it will be more secure.
this could be great, like what downhillbattle wanted with GAIM, a friend p2pnet , except this time (unlike waste), blocks are shared as soon as they are complete (kind of like edonkey), but faster.
it could be horribly slow (like edonkey), you can only have as many torrents as your bandwidth allows, more torrents open = slower torrent speed, torrents were faster because it was only a few files at a time (i havent heard of anyone running more than 10 torrents on cable upload) vs people who are on p2p with 1000's of files and slow upload/few upload slots
only time will tell, heres hoping its an open network and not ad-ridden with suprnova advertisements.
I completely agree with the statement made that the tracker/non-tracker distinguishment is a problem in bittorrent. Each participant in the network should have full power to include new members to the network. An outside member should be able to point at any of the existing members and get whatever initial setup information is needed to join.
It sounds like Exeem is also addressing the cataloging/search problem, which grows the scope from file transer to a distributed filesystem. Gnutella's flood searches may be less than optimal but they're great for adapting to changes in the topology.
the funny thing is these problems have almost certainly been solved by the almighty p2p protocol: freenet.
waste is also interesting because it provides a "walled garden"/native application approach to a distributed filesystem.
This is great news!
Its been a bit of a pain the last week with suprnova on the fritz. I was just saying to a friends yesterday bittorent needs to make itself completly decentralized, without the need to go to a website and link to a tracker, it sure is a bit of a bottle neck.
Without knowing all the details of how it will all work together, i wounder if its technically possible for a completly decentralized P2P network to be shut down? With all the talk of a 35% internet bandwidth market share, suprnova website would be an obvious target at the moment, but moving in a this direction like this seems very appealing for the longterm survival of the network.
Anonymity is probably the most important feature of modern P2P applications and crucial for their survival. From my understanding the first version of Exeem does not guarantee anonymity yet. How soon will it be implemented? A great distributed P2P application is Freenet: http://freenet.sourceforge.net
I don't agree with the all-in-one idea. It seems to me the problem would be better solved in a more modular way.
(1) having a search that only indexes trackers, and can then launch an external app of your choice to do the torrent download
(2) improving the bittorrent protocol so anybody with a seed can failover as the tracker
When I want to download torrents, I want to use Azureus, regardless of whether it was a P2P searched torrent or one off a website. I don't want to have to use some all-in-one app that decides for me the One True Way that downloads shall be handled, merely because it implemented the search to find them.
So....In Soviet Korea...you are old?
"If it sucks without butter, it still sucks with butter, only creamier." - AC
Half the fun of suprnova is checking and rechecking the websites all day to see what is newly released. After you search through all the files, you find go only have to stay on top of the new stuff.
Where is the fun in actually finding what you want?
Already done with Ants p2p that uses a torrent type protocol for file trasfer it also encrypted end to end and point to point and uses Virtual IP's who needs exeeem.
n /h ome.jsp?page=custom&xmlName=ants
http://www.myjavaserver.com.nyud.net:8090/~gwre
So will this network finally be what I think every P2P network I read about is?
I mean, look at gnutella. Look at fasttrack. Look at ed2k. Features:
- Decentralized
- Swarming
So you think that you can search for files without overloading some central server, and that you can download files with decent speed.
In reality, gnutella searches are dog slow, ed2k sits for 2 days before it even starts downloading, and all of them give you slow downloads. Where does it go wrong?
Please correct me if I got my facts wrong.
Not if it's on Slashdot!
I signed up for their beta a while back and have 1 or 2 reg numbers to get me started. However, I decided I wasn't that interested in participating in the beta. First person to message me gets the reg numbers....
-*The above statement is printed entirely on recycled electrons*-
According to them no linux version for a long time. This probably means no open source either. Forget it.
/. will give eXeem a pretty big audience though."
Some other stuff:
"The main problem with kazaa is that it doesn't have hash system which means that if you make MP3 with same name and same size that's already on the network and someone downloads one part of this file from you the MP3 will be corrupted. (This is exactly what RIAA did to kazaa). And since people don't delete bad MP3's from their computer you have more and more of this files in the network. And here is where our client is different you wont be able to corrupt files in the network because they have hash.
One more difference from kazaa is that we wont have entire folders of files on the network only those that will be manually uploaded from users. Kazaa has so many viruses because users don't even know they have them on there computer. So I personally think that we will have a lot less fake files on our network and we also plan to implement rate system so that if people find fakes,
viruses, spyware in one of the files they will vote it as bad so hopfully not many people will download that file.
What we are trying to do is bring best of P2P world and best of bittorrent together."
About eXeem replacing suprnova:
"That's a reporters view on it. Remember, they probably know next to nothing about eXeem, and are doing what reporters do best: bullshit.
I'm an Exeem beta tester that's been trying to give it a fair shake. I'll probably get banned just for this post, but here's some general details about the new client.
First off, it's in beta testing, but it's not ready for beta. It has some serious isses at the moment. Torrents disappear off the network for no reason is just one of them.
Second, they don't have 5,000 beta testers. They sent out 5,000 serials, but my best guess by looking at the network is that there are less than 1,000 actually testing it and never more than 200 or 300 people running it at the same time. They actually sent out new serials to all the 5,000 beta testers because they didn't have enough people.
Third, it lacks the details. With most BT clients, such as BitTornado and G3 Torrent, you can see all kinds of details about the file you're trying to acquire, how many seeds, portions of seeds, how many complete copies are distributed amongst the peers if there are no seeds. Exeem lacks all of these details.
Fourth, it doesn't use bitTorrent. It's based on bitTorrent, and uses libTorrent, but it's not a torrent. It's their own unique format. Exeem will not be compatible with other BT clients. It's use their client or don't connect. It almost appears to be a Kazaa rip off with bitTorrent features.
Fifth. 'But it's open source? Why can't we just write our own clients?' From everything I can tell, they have no intention of making this an open source project. They're talking about the type of ads they want to put in it.
Sixth: Pr0n. A lot of people like Suprnova.org and other torrent sites because there is no pr0n. Exeem has an adult filter, but 'Adult' is one of the more popular categories for Exeem users at the moment.
Exeem will not replace bitTorrent. The problem I see is that Exeem is being developed by the same guys that run suprnova.org. Whether Exeem ever works or ever becomes popular, will they take down what appears to be the most popular torrent site on the web because of it?
There are more problems with Exeem, but these are the major ones that I see. I'm sure some of the coders of Exeem will be reading this post. Please feel free to tell me where I'm wrong and why.
Aero
Please stop hurting America -- Jon Stewart
keep bit torrent like it is, if you make it as easy to use as napster, kazaa, whatever, it'll take off mainstream & next thing you know **AA will be going after it.
god i hope noone makes an easy to use usenet searcher/downloader program.
I was wondering what would be the difference with what we have today with eMule/aMule and in general the eDonkey network.
Where is the torrent for this beta program?
Hacker Media
Tied down by what?
Tied down by Internet Service Providers that choose not to be full Internet Service Providers. Watch ISPs, especially those run by universities, block or severely throttle it just as they have blocked or severely throttled Gnutella, FastTrack, eDonkey, G2, and BitTorrent.
Client application (psuedo-server as well) sends out constant "seeker" packets blindly
To whom? On IPv6, just guessing an IP address will almost never reach another host, and protocols that are limited to IPv4 become useless in a few years once the major ISPs feel pressure from ARIN to start routing IPv6.
Congradulations! You've just reinvented a hash-based filesharing network. You're not the first, though:
.torrent block hashing thing. Most of these networks deploy swarming, too.
* Gnutella (BASE32 SHA1)
* eDonkey/Overnet (Tiger Tree Hash)
* KaZaA (KZHash)
* Freenet (CHK)
* Mnet (?)
Mnet even does the full
The coolest thing is magnet-uri's. I've even written a redirector for SHA1 links here.
http://pixelcort.com/
... you can't get Exeem on suprnova? Doesn't it strike you as a bit hypocritcal when no-one on the damn site will stick a tracker up for it?
One of the penalties for refusing to participate in politics is that you end up being governed by your inferiors - Plato
Sorry, I won't let this one slip by.
ATM suprnova is illegitimate, yes. But despite this it is a clear demonstration of the business model of the future for popular media.
Radio when it first came out gave the masses the ability to listen to music for free and is a profitable venue.
TV when it first came out gave the masses the ability to watch video programs and even movies for free and is a highly profitable venue.
Internet distribution of media is the next logical step. But TPTB refuse to embrace it.
You know what? Fuck that. I'm not waiting for them. Many thousands of others think the way I do and that number is steadily growing. When their fun little game of suing people for copyright infringement involves them needing to sue millions upon millions of Americans, I think they just might get the point.
*Downloads today's TV shows*
You're right, I wouldn't steal a car. But if it were possible, I sure as hell would download one!
Well, first, the existing leechers can failover to the new seeder/tracker, and that's still useful to let them all finish even if nothing else.
Second, whichever seeder is elected as tracker can advertise itself for indexing onto the "tracker search" network I proposed in my upthread post. So then new searches find the new tracker.
Third, the web pages or whatever that are linking the torrent can (manually?) re-link a generated new torrent for the new seed, which has meanwhile kept the torrent alive rather than letting it all fall to pieces.
Theres already English patches for Winny and Share
<URL:http://www.winny-english.tk/>
<URL:http://www.uguu.org/share/>
outside [the USA], you have REAL FREEDOMS
Not necessarily. USA has bullied the EU and Australia into adopting counterparts to the DMCA and Australia into adopting a counterpart to the Bono Act (see "free" trade act), and it looks like Canada's next.
If you aren't willing to pay for something, then you should just live without it!
Good point, but i just don't want to.
Also, this new tech does actually have legitimate uses, stuff like allowing low bandwidth sites to host extremely popular torrent files, and i'm sure many others. I would suggest that there is no reason to be ignorant of things simply because they deal with things you disagree with.
This is a joke. I am joking. Joke joke joke.
The summary is about a new P2P application which is an extension and possible improvement of an already popular P2P application. It happens that the people writing it run a big site geared to piracy, and they intend to us this software to ease the load on their site. But that doesn't really matter.
/. is that it's a new P2P app. The rest is just background material.
If a group of people came up with a better search engine operation than Google would you object to that news just because they were planning to use it to search for porn or warez?
The reason it's on
Is to use spoofed source ip's. But how? I'm not good at explaining things and this is just theory but here goes....
if we were modelling a torrent style p2p app
each download would require 4 parties involved:
1) Leecher
2) tracker
3) uploader
4) proxy uploader
and here's how it would work:
1) leecher starts to download the torrent and contacts the tracker
2) tracker contacts the uploader and proxy uploader and specifies the leecher's address the uploader's address and the proxy address. This info is given to the uploader and the proxy.
3) the proxy is not told about file names or anything, just ip's and ports
4) the uploader sends the torrent to the leecher with spoofed source ip's, the spoofed ip is the ip of the proxy.
5) uploader keeps sending data packets to leecher, if the leecher loses a packet, it contacts the proxy to resend the packet, the proxy notifies the uploader and the uploader resends the packets with the spoofed ips.
hehe just a thought, I could be totally wrong. I haven't thought more in detail than this.
What I am missing from the enormous array of file sharing tools is a simple one. Sharing a virtual LAN with your friends. There are many VPN server/clients out there, but they are all point to point. What I would like is some software that emulates a workgroup LAN, so you could use simple SMB or FTP filesharing over a trusted, encrypted, distributed network. The tricky part would probably the broadcast packages and the IP range.
The only people who see disadvantages to the current system are people who would like to use Bittorrent to distribute illegal content.
For those of us using Bittorrent for legitimate purposes a centralized tracker is a wonderful thing. We're able to keep track of how many users are downloading the content while also getting the benefits of reduced bandwidth load and scalability that Bittorrent provides.
There is no gain here whatsoever for the legitimate content provider. Ideally all of the illegal traffic will move to Exeem. These copyright infringing pirates have been giving the legitimate Bittorrent _protocol_ a bad name for far too long.
Too many leechers... I love those private trackers that log what u upload and delay access for leechers.
First they should get their website up on BitTorrent, instead of the client/server HTTPd we've already Slashdotted. Does anyone have an HTTPd behind BitTorrent middleware, that any browser (Mozilla, IE, etc) can hit transparently?
--
make install -not war
SSL is encryption, too. Forbid encryption and that lock icon gets broken on every site in compliance with the law.
But there are plenty of outcomes short of that which can interfere with our civil liberties. And more importantly, our ability to do business. You want to send NDA information in plain text over the Net, you go right ahead.
Tech Public Policy stuff
News like this sometimes sparks memories of the past. It seemed like yesterday when I was perusing the local BBS for their demos, games, and apps. My how times have changed -- so quickly.
Linux at home
IMHO, what make BitTorrent so good is how fast it is to download files from the network. And the reason for this is that the average user isn't seeding tons of files at the same time and because of that, their upload bandwitdth is concentrated in just a couple of files.
.torrents here, I don't seed them. By doing that, the .ISO is spread much faster, because I'm using 95% of my upload speed to send that and only THAT file. And yes, I wait until I have uploaded at least the same ammount as I downloaded before canceling the task.
For example: when a legal downlodeable ISO file is released, I open BitComet and start downloading only that file. Although I have plenty of other
The opposite happens to Emule. Since the average user has loads of file in his download queue and all that stuff is automatically "seeded", the upload speed is distributed among so many files that it is difficult to get a decent download rate.
I think that the beauty of BitTorrent is to help people distribute NEW content quickly. If you want a searchable and descentralized network, stick to emule.
Jh00
You find a new way to recruit talent and raise the bucketloads of cash needed to produce a series like Firefly and then we can talk about outdated business models. But not before.
So my ISP says to me that they will 'speed shape' BT default ports (6851 - 6859?). So I think to myself that I will tell my BT client (Azereus) to use port 80. Being a non-technical person, what is the downside of my decision to use port 80 for my BT traffic?
A dream is good. A plan is better.
Thanks for comment.
USA assymetric speed poses a problem for TeeVee but it should be fine for radio. 128kbps on a 384kbps uplink plus the overhead would allow a 1:2 ratio. Even if the uploading nodes only made 1:1, it would take enough load off the server to lower the cost of 'broadcasting'.
SUccessful products are seldom built for 'the current environment'.
Now I'm the grandest Tiger in the Jungle!
Ok, so if I delete the movie I downloaded after viewing it is not stealing, but if I save the movie, it is?
That must be one of the worst arguments I've heard for calling it stealing. (well, I've only heard one more, and that was bad too)
It's just a pet peeve of mine, but copyright infringement and theft are two distinct crimes.
Good point. Furthermore, Copyright infringement is not a crime[1] whereas theft is. Copyright infringement is against the law, but it's a civil rather than a criminal offence.
In other words, copyright infringement will not get you arrested by the police or get you a criminal record. It may get you a fine or other punishment from a court if a copyright holder sues you however.
[1] At least in my country this is true (England)
-- MartinG To mail me: echo kewyjlcxyzvjfxbqwh | tr bcefhjklqvwxyz
Remember that the purpose of freenet was NOT to share a bunch of binary files.. .
Its intent is to allow people to publish *information*, ( i.e. WebPages ) in an anonymous fashion.. So judging it by 'speed' of your file downloads is an unfair judgment
Anything else that is grafted on, such as p2p type downloads, chat, etc is just that.. stuff grafted on.. and veers away from the original intent.
---- Booth was a patriot ----
Just email me at hoovernj /-\T gmail.com
(replacing /-\t with @ of course)
They just sent a new key so all I'll have to do is give you the link and key. (I've been testing since the day it began).
If this program isn't open source and under a decent licence (GPL, BSD, MIT, public domained, etc) I'm not going to use it.
The official free software version of bittorrent and the many available derivatives are good enough for me.
Given the name, (Exeem), should we assume it is an exe file for running on Wintel platforms?
Suprnova used to have a significant collect of Macintosh resources listed.
Sara
Designer, Gamer, Macgrrl in an XP World
Um, I think I'll fall somewhere in the middle. When you sneak into a movie, you haven't cost anybody anything in the sense that the movie was playing anyway, and the seat was empty, and nobody is harmed. However, you theoretically "steal" the income that you would normally have paid to see that movie.
The problem with that argument in any form is that as soon as you make it, you owe me money. Why? Because you are buying things right now. I am offering to see you those very same things at twice the price. By not buying a more expensive version from me, you have theoretically "stolen" income from me that you could have paid me, but didn't. Do you see how that works?
What I would do here is have the "super-generous" nodes distribute pieces in a round-robin fashion, rather than letting a single person monopolize the node.
Unless, and I'm bitter about this happening so often on eDonkey, only one person has all the pieces of the rare file I want, and all of the people asking for the file are four-figurth in line.
It has to be centralized somewhere, how does your machine know where to connect to start searching? Random IPs?
As acknowledged by Bush Jr., but denied by Franklin Graham, who had the nerve to criticize Bush's understanding of theology for saying it. I'm an atheist myself, but that sort of thing annoys me. I hate to give Bush credit for anything, but at least he's less of a religious bigot than many (other?) so-called "evangelicals".
Share and Enjoy: 09 F9 11 02 9D 74 E3 5B D8 41 56 C5 63 56 88 C0
That made my day. It would also make your modpoints, if I had any. :)
Defenestrate Windows...
One is that the Bittorrent protocol is thusfar the best protocol for transferring large files. The clients are designed to transfer large files. The Edonkey/Kademlia protocol exists to transfer large files as well, but it is just not as good as Bittorrent. It is much slower.
p2p has to be looked at as a process. There is the search for information. There is the response to the search. Then there is the request to download a file. Then there is the download of the file. Each of these parts is separate and important. In Bittorrent, only the last part, the download is decentralized. The prior parts are not decentralized, are not p2p - even the request to download goes to a centralized torrent.
Despite this, Many people figure that Bittorrent's partial file sharing, protocol attributes and program attributes are what make the downloading good. Of course, having a good source of current holders of the file - partially or fully, is important, as is having a good hash of the file, or multiple hashes in the case of Bittorrent. But this can all probably be done via p2p as well.
As far as the comments on hashes and file integrity, this is not a problem at all. There are many ways to deal with this. If you want, you can still have a central torrent, but you could only check it once instead of many times. Or maybe there could be distibuted PGP signatures of the validity of certain hashes.
As far as other comments, I'm interested in this so I'm glad to know, although I agree its vaporware until release.
As far as Freenet, encryption, IP addresses and so forth - I think for technical innovation reasons, unencrypting, non-masking p2p technologies need to be developed for now. I'm also glad, alongside this, anonymous, IP masking, encryption-capable p2p networks like Freenet are being created. And once p2p becomes mature, I hope the technologies implement any encryption and anonymity that does not put in too much overhead. Turn it on by default, and let people manually turn it off if they want.
As far as copyrighted material and so forth, I really could give a damn. Big corporations hate the idea of sharing, and trying to kill something like Linux or a GPL open p2p protocol and client is instinctive to them, just like the enclosure of the commons was.
And as far as non-centralization being one of the benefits of Bittorrent, and decentralizing ruining it, I completely disagree. As I said before, file integrity and hashes are not a problem, you can do PGP signatures on hashes or something. Any problem can be dealt with. Bittorrent is good because it is the best protocol to deal with partial file sharing of large files. Any of its centralized features can be decentralized, some of them very easily, as I'm sure Freem is doing.
Have you ever seen the amount of data a packet analyzer puts out? Most ISP's will either outright block ports associated with P2P programs or throttle them (but prefferably: neither).
Besides, click-through licenses aside, that would be something of a privacy issue. Like a lawsuit.
Quack, quack.
Viva la revolucion! :-D
So many people on slashdot, home of "the creator should be compensated" jizzing so hard about a bit of software being made by a group of people dedicated to ripping every creator that exists off.
So... what? Is slashdot loaded with hypocrites?
Do you ENJOY giving the RIAA and MPAA excuses to point at as reasons they need $big_bad_law that we'll have to fight again later to get knocked back?
Why is it that so many people here feel ENTITLED to the works of others for free? If you don't like how copyright has been changed, then fix it and compensate the creators fairly.
Don't give them excuses. Beat them down. But no, slashbots would rather spend their time and effort creating methods by which creators can get fucked and the powers that be can even more effectively influence legislators with bad laws.
I am a beta tester, and one thing that I do not like about eXeem is the fact that you have to know what you are looking for. One of the reason I like suprnova more, is because you can browse for the files you want. Also, eXeem is plagued with a interface not as clean as Azureas. Suprnova is better than eXeem.
Don't let the door hit you in the ass on your way out.
It means that your skin is going to peel off when you use it.
Trolls dont like to be Flamebait, because they burn so well. Protect our Troll heritage!
Wait, isnt edonkey/overnet already doing this ??
I mean I think the reason bitorrent was faster was indeed because of the tracker that would keep track of seeders and leechers.
So what's the point - except to mutate the same software so that MPAA cant keep up ?
As a beta tester for exeem.
This news is way premature.
Exeem wont be out of beta for a year given how its going so far.
And by then we'll have something better.
yes someone could do that. I get my bit torrents from small websites that I'm reffered to by friends. I often know the owner of the site that has the tracker on it. Given that I know and trust that person, I can download their trackers without fear of white noise.
"brxref
So the *AA can see that is being transmitted. Big deal. If they can't figure out where the data is coming from or where it is going, who can they sue?
Otherwise they would simply sue the transfer points they see. You're "knowingly" trafficking in illegal goods. Encryption is the wrapper layer that gives you plausible deniability. It is the difference between couriering white bags of drugs (Federal offense) and transporting a packet from source to destination (US Postal Service, UPS, ISPs, every day).
Kjella
Live today, because you never know what tomorrow brings
...this is basicly the eDonkey/eMule system in a microcosmos. But pick a reasonably popular download, say 2-300 peers. Grab 1-1.5mb from each (you'll get that pretty quick before they choke your connection, someone has to start sending a few bytes), and you'll have your file.
In this system, it is too little (you just "owe" a lot of people credits when you quit). Pretty much the same problem as eMule, except there you work up a "due" to thousands of people across all files - then switch identity.
Kjella
Live today, because you never know what tomorrow brings
So, lets just clear all this up:
copyright infringement != theft
copyright infringement != trespassing
trespassing != theft
Makes sense to me.
"But I'm still right here, giving blood and keeping faith. And I'm still right here."
Sneak into a ballgame, and explain this to the security guard as he throws you on your rear on the pavement outside.
Copyright infringement isn't stealing, but its not legal either.
um
"stealing" GPL code is when you take something that eeveryone can use and tell them they can use it anymore. "stealing" music is taking something thatt should already belong to everybody and listening to it without permission.
A blog about stuff.
try responding to the rest of his post now.
A blog about stuff.
Exeem is a decentralized BitTorrent network that basically makes everyone a Tracker. [...] Exeem will marry the best features of a decentralized network, the easy searchability of an indexing server and the swarming powers of the BitTorrent network into one program
IMO, the best feature of Bittorrent is precisely that tracking is not an intgral part of it, so the protocol and clients themselves are not tainted. It is basically just distributed FTP and actually makes sense for legitimate uses.
The combined solution will basically have "illegal file trading only" written all over it and will be treated as such. This is of course fine for suprnova et.al. but not for everyone else.
sudo ergo sum
...annoys me. What is wrong with the already existing decentralized KAD network? It seems to work fine with me, and the non-centralized e2k precursor is easily the best non-centralized protocol.
The idea behind bittorrent, that you have one program downloading one file and sharing it at the same time is cool. But I can't see why it necessarily have to use it's own protocol. It would be cooler if I could choose to use the multiple downloads client I might already have running.
As it is now, when there are big game-patches to download for my games, bittorrent is needed. If I want to find unusual music, I need soulseek. To find be able to see Time Team shows, I need to download them with eMule. These all do the same thing: download and share. But of course, they have different protocols. MERGE! Please...
They don't have to win in court, they merely need to threaten you with court. They have much bigger pockets than most people, and know that most people could not afford to risk a costly court case. Therefore they say "We'll sue, unless you settle out of court for $3,500" and many will just give in and pay up.
I wish I could mod up.
Bravo!
Sorry to interrupt, but this is barely even a theological issue - it's more like a historical one. Much as it pains me to admit it, GWB is perfectly right on this one.
Abraham's younger son Jacob, as the Bible says, had twelve sons (Asher, Benjamin, Dan, Gad, Issachar, Joseph, Judah, Levi, Naphtali, Reuben, Simeon and Zebulun) who were the founders of the twelve tribes of Israel. The Jews are supposed to be descended from Judah.
However Abraham's eldest son Ishmail is said to have fathered the Arab nations.
Whether you believe this as historical fact or not, what isn't in dispute is that the God of Abraham is worshipped as the one true God not only in the Christian Bible but also in both the Torah of the Jews and in the Koran of the Muslims.
What you need to understand that even the Jews and Muslims agree on this, and they surely wouldn't if there was any way out of it. However, its a matter of historical record as far as they are concerned.
It's well documented not only in the holy writings themselves but on theology sites all over the internet so you can check this out for yourself without even getting up.
The part that really gets me though is (and here I'm only reporting what I've been told by some Islamic students of the Koran, so don't blame me if this is wrong) that the basis of the hostility between Muslims and Jews is, they say, the fact that God named the Jews as his "chosen people". The Koran actually acknowledges this, apparently! Obviously the Arabs weren't too happy about it.
Taking a hybrid centralized/distributed protocol and making the centralized parts distributed piecewise is so obvious that any clueful person who ever looked at BitTorrent would have thought of it already. Heck, I was doing it before there even was a BitTorrent, taking a hierarchical caching system and creating a distributed version of the root server. It's nice that someone's really doing it for BitTorrent, but unless they're soliciting developers or have a prototype working I wouldn't call it news.
Slashdot - News for Herds. Stuff that Splatters.
The penalty for sneaking into a ballgame is being thrown out, maybe being blacklisted. The penalty for getting caught with mp3s is having to settle for a $10,000 fine. The value of the ballgame is higher than the value of at least a couple of albums monetarily, and it's infinitely more valuable than any number of mp3s in the sense that the ballgame occurs only once. Is it just me or is there a certain level of disparity here?
"You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
This sounds good and all, but how is this system different from other decentralized P2P systems? I mean, think about it: on any P2P network, the up/dn ratio is 1. I.e. there are as much downloaded as uploaded. Then the question becomes: why do we think that the other decentralized networks are slow? And what does eXeem have that the others don't? During the beta-testing stage the speed might be ok, since the number of files on the network is very limited, so it's easy to search for other peers, but what happens when there are millions of files on the eXeem network? Again, the question is, what advantage does eXeem have over other decentralized P2P networks? I always thought that, though a little on the vulnerable side, but far better then the other completely centralized networks, since there *are* thousands of trackers out there. I think that BT as it is overcomes the problem of speed (or rather, let's you get download speed faster) by forcing the number of files shared (each file represents a connection to a tracker; if you have too many and no upload speed you won't get any download speed), and making it very easy to find all the other peers. It's hard to see how this works with completely decentralized P2P networks... Any ideas?
"At this time, details and the full potential of this project are being kept very quiet."
Which is why we're talking about it on slashdot...
You connect the dots, you pick up the pieces.
But baseball is kind of boring. Unless you're a real hardcore baseball addict. And if you're a true baseball addict, being blacklisted is way worse than a $10k fine.
“Common sense is not so common.” — Voltaire
Oh you're quite right. Copyright is not literally stealing. Because you are not denying someone else the ability to use it. I suppose if you downloaded some stuff and deleted the master copy that would almost be stealing (although I think in the US it would be some sort of wire fraud, not sure). Copyright is literally what it is, the right to duplicate a work. You can copyright a dance, a song, a comedic performance, a book, whatever. So if you violate a copyright you are duplicating without permission. Although it does impact a copyright holder in a simular way as shoplifting impacts a shop owner.
Copyright infringement is simply side stepping paying the holder of the copyright for permission to use the material. And you are legally bound to follow the terms set out by the copyright holder whenever you make a copy or perform it publically. This can include paying money, following the instructions in the GPL, sending a postcard, etc.
Sure, it's not theft, but pirates do impact the copyright holder(s) of the material they pirate. And honestly, I believe, that people who actually pay for it end up picking up the slack. If the evil music industry didn't spend huge amounts of money fighting piracy they could afford to lower the price of CDs and still make more money than they do now. Of course people would rather get something for nothing. That's obvious. And it's certainly the same mentality as stealing: Let everyone else pay, I'll just take what I want.
“Common sense is not so common.” — Voltaire
... are not about inventions, those are patents.
Intellectual "Property" Laws:
Copyrights (or Author's Rights) works of technique or art
Trademarks Marketing marks
Patents Inventions (INDUSTRIAL Inventions [*])
Trade secrets Something (secret) that gives one a trade advantage
[*] hence software patents being insane IMHO. Good thing they are illegal down here.
It's better to be the foot on the boot than the face on the pavement. ~~ tkx Kadin2048
You can your money by actually performing to an audience. What you're trying to do is to make something once and then get paid for the same thing many times. The copies can serve as advertisement for your next performance. I repeat: I have to show up for work! You should to! I can't get a copy to perform my job. Why should you? If I want to get paid, I have to perform. It's too damn simple. Your other comments about doors and locks are just plain silly. If a door or lock was to become obsolete, it's because somebody made a better door or lock. A response about GPL has already been made. Suffice it to say that without copyright, GPL wouldn't be necessary. GPL is just a response to the copyright situation we are in.
What?
They can reclassify Encryption as a munition and require an expensive license to use it. Would you pay $10000/yr for an encryption license? A Bank would and so would the MPAA.
My God, it's Full of Source!
OUTSIDE_IP=$(dig +short my.ip @outsideip.net)
Your right about the history. Actually at Purdue University, they have a class called the Philosophy of Western Religions that cover the roots of Judaism, Christianity, and Islam. They are also often called the Abrahamic Faiths, becuase they believe in the God of Abraham. Linguistically Allah actually mean "The God". As in the one and only God.
But your point about the hostality is wrong. Actually throughout most of history, the presecuted Jewish people found safety with the Muslims. One example being the Jews who left Spain during the Spanish Inquisition, fleed to Muslim run areas. The "conflict" started after one of the world wars, where the then province of "Palestine" in the Ottoman empire was given to Brittian as a Mandate (similar to a colony). They intern had promised that they would make it a "Homeland" for the Jewish people. Tons of Jewish people from Europe migrated there, too many people, not enough jobs, that led to civil unrest, the Brits left the mess, and the Jewish people declared it a sovern country. Then every Arab country around them attacked and subsequenty lost.
So yeah, religion isn't really at the core of the conflict. Its politics. Yes people may use religion to rally people to do immoral acts on both sides, but haven't tyrents always used religion for their evil purposes?
Amen! Running bittorrent via console is one of the things that makes it wonderful. :) I hope the programmers of Exeem keep that in mind.
"What do you think?" "I think 'What, do you think?!'"
What if none of the bits you downloaded were encrypted?
Suppose I want to download CrappyMusic.mp3. What I find in the network is a document of instructions that tells me how to put that file together. Suppose CrappyMusic.mp3 is made up of 100 K blocks. The list of instructions might look like...
- 1st 100K = Block185737829 XOR Block5872812887
- 2nd 100K = Block877388228 XOR Block2875734882
- 3rd 100K = Block578378298 XOR BLock57818723 XOR Block21857893
- 4th 100K = Block587378928 XOR Block28757893
- etc., etc., etc. for the rest of the file.
In effect, I must download two or three times the amount of data that makes up CrappyMusic.mp3, but none of those bits themselves are copyrighted. Each block may be available via. many sources -- giving you a torrent-like advantage. Each block has an MD5 sum, which is included in the instructions. That way, when you go out to the network for Block285738278, you know that you actually got that block, according to your re-assembly instructions.Now, the MPAA/RIAA might argue as follows. The first 100K of your download file was made from Block101 and Block109. Therefore, Block101 and Block109 must both be copyright material. But then what if Block101 combined with Block207 gives you the first 100K of The Bible, and Block109 combined with Block224 gives you the first 100K of The Declaration of Independance? So is Block101 or Block109 copyright infringing material?
Suppose each Block is a single request out of a large p2p network. Each block can be tracked to a particular IP address it originated from. i.e. if your node asks my node for Block28957839872, I'll give it to you, and it came from my IP. But that block is not copyrighted bits. I have other bits on my system that when combined with that block result in perfectly legal material.
When you do a search in the network, for a title, such as CrappyMusic.mp3, what you get back is a list of reassembly instructions. Now the problem becomes, how to protect the distribution of lists of re-assembly instructions? Of course, the list itself is not copyright infringing. It merely points out that certain blocks in the network, when recombined in certain ways, result in copyright infringing material. You could take this to the Nth degree. Maybe the reassembly list is itself distributed through the Blocks system and you have to first get a reassembly list that tells you how to obtain blocks and assemble a set of reassembly instructions, that when followed, would result in CrappyMusic.mp3. The software could automatically recurse, if the reply stated that what was reconstructed was actually another re-assembly list. (Of course, this opens up potential DDOS possibilities.)
The premise behind this idea is not to try to keep you anonymous, but make the blocks you are distributing not be copyright infringing.
Maybe each block should be properly sized such that a single block can fit into a UDP packet?
The price of freedom is eternal litigation.
Here's an overview of the program, fairly simple.
Sorry about the wierd interface, I just copied it off their site and the owner has some wierd windows theme hack:
eXeem HOWTO
sig? uhh, umm, ok
Well, that part of history everybody knows. But I still thought it was fascinating that the Muslims acknowledge the Jews as God's chosen. That still hasn't been repudiated, not to my knowledge.
(It reminds me, for some reason, of an old science fiction novel - Robert Silverberg I think - where humans find they've been forsaken by God for an exaterrestrial race, and humanity declares war on God).
You're a tremendous fool if you think that being an atheist means knowing little about theology.
Share and Enjoy: 09 F9 11 02 9D 74 E3 5B D8 41 56 C5 63 56 88 C0
What if P2P was integrated into a major OS?
Like, the next Windows... And more than 60% of all users had it, and it was fully standard and transparent.
Yumm...
Let's say you're using your P2P client to operate as a node (sending and receiving). You get a request for a particular file. You don't have the file, so you send along the request to other nodes on your list. Somebody, somewhere has the file. It passes pieces to all it's known nodes, and they all relay parts of it to the original, requesting node, or relay their part to another node which can send it to the original requestor. The relaying nodes are merely proxying the data; they didn't have the file to begin with, but this effectively hides who DID, originally, have the file.
Since every node on the network can function as a proxy, EVERY NODE ON THE NETWORK IS EQUALLY LIABLE. Will the *AA sue multiple people who provide a copyrighted file over a P2P network? Sure. But CAN THEY SUE EVERYONE ON THE NETWORK? Tracking down who originally provided the file, to sue them, is basically impossible; you'd have to have logs from all of the proxy nodes (if they are keeping logs to begin with) or you'd have to have the cooperation of ALL the ISP's involved, analyzing the traffic. This would be difficult, but not impossible.
If the data going in and out of nodes is encrypted, and there's no way to tell whether data going into a node was copyrighted material, illegially shared, or legal material. If the data is decrypted and re-encrypted at the node (with a different key), there is now no way to tell whether data which went in was destined for that node, or proxied out shortly thereafter. It becomes impossible tell where the file originated. As long as the pieces are encrypted, on the final hop, in a fashion the ending node can decrypt, the system works.
The only way to shut this down is to sue ALL NODES ON THE NETWORK. I can see the *AA filing a couple thousand lawsuits against people who provided copyrighted files, but would they be able to get away with suing everyone on a network, because they MIGHT, potentially, be involved in sharing copyrighted data?
Much more difficult, legally, physically and financially.
... by the Dew of Mountains the thoughts acquire speed, the hands acquire shakes, the shakes become a warning
I'd say one of the biggest problem with decentralizing BT is creating a well connected network.
You see, the tracker knows all peer in the mini-per-file-network, and can easily select a random subset of them, when recieveing a peer request. This way the network avoids being partitioned, and pieces progate quickly through the whole network, without bottlenecks between sparsely connected parts of the network.
In a decentralized system, it is much harder (and expensive) to select a random subset of (all) peers, instead of the peers that happens to be readily available.
Too bad then that speed and anonymity doesn't go hand in hand. I've yet to see an anonymity system (mind you, that's untracability, not plausible deniability) not based on mixes, i.e. where data is forwarded between several peers. E.g. two extra hops per packet obviously means at least 1/3 (global) effective bandwidth. (Each packet consumes 3x bandwidth.)
Gahhh, I missed a close-itallics tag and I forgot to use the preview button.
- - You can't take something off the Internet! That's like trying to take pee out of a swimming pool.
A lot of things have changed at Slashdot in the last four years. I suspect that this change in viewpoint is among the least of them.
Self-referential sigs are rarely entertaining.
Time Shifting is considered Fair Use!
;-)
Under the Sony/Betamax case they determined that you can record something being broadcast intended for general reception for the purpose of time shifting it (watching/listening to it later).
This is how one can record their favorite tv show during the day and come home at night, rewind their tape, and watch it then.
Oddly enough, this also means you are allowed to hook up to Apple's iTunes radio stations (or anyone else streaming 128/44 audio), and record it onto your computer for use at a later time. This of course assumes you do not distribute it (except for maybe a few friends and family members) and that you do not use it for a commercial purpose.
So therefore, one could simply listen to Internet streamed radio and build an entire collection of MP3s based off of the "Industry" giving it to them for free.... pretty nifty eh?
The interesting part of this is that the DMCA prevents copyright circumvention. However Fair Use is still a right as well as Time Shifting. So even if you break their protection schemes for the purpose of time shifting, you should still be in the clear.
My law professor keeps saying that "things are many many many shades of gray in this business..."
BTW - I am attending MTSU's Recording Industry Management program earning a BS as an audio engineer. Copyright Law is a course that is required and I take the final for it next week. http://www.MTSU.edu/~record/
Libertas in infinitum
No, being an athiest makes it more probable and your foolish post confirms it.
Besides, your experiences seem quite secondhand as well.
> Whether you believe this as historical fact or not,
> what isn't in dispute is that the God of Abraham is
> worshipped as the one true God not only in the
> Christian Bible but also in both the Torah of the
> Jews and in the Koran of the Muslims.
That is true. But it does not mean much.
To draw a stark contrast, the followers of David Koresh likely said that they worshipped the God of Abraham as the one true God too. It does not guarantee the theology of that cult.
And besides, there are tons of differences between the Bible and the Koran.
For instance, the punishment for adultery in this world according to the Koran (execution, IIRC by stoning), and according to Jesus, as said directly to the adulteress: "go thy way, and sin no more" . The punishment for blasphemy in the Koran (execution), and according to Jesus: nothing in the world, and in the world to come: "every blashphemy against the Father and [Jesus] will be forgiven man..."
The Koran also claims the Jesus never died (instead that an illusion put someone else on the cross -- Judas IIRC).
In the Bible, the old testament makes claims that the messiah would come while the temple still stood, and would be executed wrongly. The new testament makes it clear Jesus died, and rose, and if that this did not happen, Christianity is vain.
> But your point about the hostality is wrong. Actually throughout most ...
> of history, the presecuted Jewish people found safety with the Muslims.
> The "conflict" started after one of the world wars,
That is wishful thinking on your part. Jews were much persecuted under Islamic rule as well.
As this link documents:
When Jews were perceived as having achieved too comfortable a position in Islamic society, anti-Semitism would surface, often with devastating results: On December 30, 1066, Joseph HaNagid, the Jewish vizier of Granada, Spain, was crucified by an Arab mob that proceeded to raze the Jewish quarter of the city and slaughter its 5,000 inhabitants. The riot was incited by Muslim preachers who had angrily objected to what they saw as inordinate Jewish political power.
Similarly, in 1465, Arab mobs in Fez slaughtered thousands of Jews, leaving only 11 alive, after a Jewish deputy vizier treated a Muslim woman in "an offensive manner." The killings touched off a wave of similar massacres throughout Morocco.(6)
Other mass murders of Jews in Arab lands occurred in Morocco in the 8th century, where whole communities were wiped out by Muslim ruler Idris I; North Africa in the 12th century, where the Almohads either forcibly converted or decimated several communities; Libya in 1785, where Ali Burzi Pasha murdered hundreds of Jews; Algiers, where Jews were massacred in 1805, 1815 and 1830 and Marrakesh, Morocco, where more than 300 hundred Jews were murdered between 1864 and 1880.(7)
Decrees ordering the destruction of synagogues were enacted in Egypt and Syria (1014, 1293-4, 1301-2), Iraq (854-859, 1344) and Yemen (1676). Despite the Koran's prohibition, Jews were forced to convert to Islam or face death in Yemen (1165 and 1678), Morocco (1275, 1465 and 1790-92) and Baghdad (1333 and 1344).(8)
Jews were persecuted in the middle-east, north Africa, and in Europe.
IIRC, one of the few countries where Jews were not persecuted is India (specifically South india), where a small Jewish population has existed since 300-500 AD.
IIRC, the punishments you mentioned are prescribed in the Hadith, not the Koran itself which is fairly benign.
I wish I could mod up.
Why not produce a logical response, instead?? Hmmm? That shouldn't be so hard now, should it? Or do you prefer to judge others anonymously, without fear of retribution? Is that how you prefer to advance your argument? Fear not. I'm sure you'll get your chance. This is why I won't moderate. I prefer to discuss the issue. Heh...to each his own, I guess.
What?
Thanks for the correction, it's the Hadith (sayings and teaching of Mohammed), and not the Koran, that seem to mention stoning. However, both comprise Islamic law.
For adultery, the Koran says:
Chapter 24 of Islam's holy book, the Qur'an, explicitly instructs believers to whip those found guilty of adultery.
quoting from here
As for apostacy, here's quoting from Answering Islam website
A. The Proof from the Qur'an for the Commandment to Execute the Apostate
Here I wish briefly to offer proof that will quiet the doubt in the hearts of those who, for lack of sources of information, may think that perhaps the punishment of death did not exist in Islam but was added at a later time by the "mawlawis" (religious leaders) on their own.
God Most High declares in the Qur'an:
But if they repent and establish worship and pay the poor-due, then are they your brethren in religion. We detail our revelations for a people who have knowledge. And if they break their pledges after their treaty (hath been made with you) and assail your religion, then fight the heads of disbelief -- Lo! they have no binding oaths in order that they may desist. (9:11,12)[1]
The following is the occasion for the revelation of this verse: During the pilgrimage (hajj) in A.H. 9 God Most High ordered a proclamation of an immunity. By virtue of this proclamation all those who, up to that time, were fighting against God and His Apostle and were attempting to obstruct the way of God's religion through all kinds of excesses and false covenants, were granted from that time a maximum respite of four months. During this period they were to ponder their own situation. If they wanted to accept Islam, they could accept it and they would be forgiven. If they wanted to leave the country, they could leave. Within this fixed period nothing would hinder them from leaving. Thereafter those remaining, who would neither accept Islam nor leave the country, would be dealt with by the sword. In this connection it was said: "If they repent and uphold the practice of prayer and almsgiving, then they are your brothers in religion. If after this, however, they break their covenant, then war should be waged against the leaders of kufr (infidelity). Here "covenant breaking" in no way can be construed to mean "breaking of political covenants". Rather, the context clearly determines its meaning to be "confessing Islam and then renouncing it". Thereafter the meaning of "fight the heads of disbelief" (9:11,12) can only mean that war should be waged against the leaders instigating apostasy.[2]
B. Proof from the Hadith (Canonical Tradition) for the Commandment to Execute the Apostate
After the Qur'an we turn to the Hadith. This is the command of the Prophet:
1. Any person (i.e., Muslim) who has changed his religion, kill him.[3]
This tradition has been narrated by Abu Bakr, Uthman, Ali, Muadh ibn Jabal, Abu Musa Ashari, Abdullah ibn Abbas, Khalid ibn Walid and a number of other Companions, and is found in all the authentic Hadith collections.
Second response:
...when all those comforts in their lives exist because of a system built on copyrights and trademarks.
...you're violating my rights as a content artist?
...and I can steal any old GPL code I want and sell it as a completely new product and claim it's my own.
I don't get this whiny sense of entitlement...
You should. That's what copyright is. A gov't entitlement. In the belief that it will advance the sciences and creative arts. Once copyright is gone it will be proven to be a mistaken belief.
"Lots of other people at Slashdot say it a lot too...
And my argument has been backed up many times by many people. And that's just here at Slashdot. I put this here to give you a chance to re-read it. This time try to read the whole statement. What you're not hearing is that these ideas exist outside of slashdot, also. And they have existed long before slashdot, or even the internet. The internet just provides easier access to these ideas. As more people understand the real intent of copyright(all IP laws actually), our voice will only get louder.
For the record, I've NEVER heard people like you offer a valid reason why piracy or copyright violation is a good thing.
You probably have heard it. You just chose to ignore it. You should know that many publishers use piracy to move their product. It's similar to price dumping to wipe out the competition. Microsoft is a good example. If it weren't for piracy, they would be as small as Apple. In fact they probably wouldn't exist at all. Piracy is what got them the market share they enjoy today, but that still doesn't say that piracy is a good thing, but it can be good business. Adobe employs the same tactics. If copyright violation helps to get these laws off the books, then that will definitely be a good thing.
I know the ACTUAL HUMAN BEINGS MAKING THE CONTENT don't ever seem to come up in these discussions, so I'm making myself known.
You have just proven my point. To you, it's all about the creator. That's what the Jesus freaks are about. They love Jesus, but they conveniently ignore his teachings. I'm here to tell you that the creation is what's important, not the creator.
Yes, and for now, I can only imagine how much better the system would be without copyrights or trademarks.
They aren't rights. They are special privileges provided to you by the gov't.
Without copyright that would be impossible.
Here's the part where you claim I should restrict my career to live performances.
That's what I have to do. What makes you so special? If that's the way you want it, then I want royalty payments for every mile you drive your car after I fix it. If I build your house, then I should collect some rent. It doesn't work that way for us, does it? We get paid when we do the work. Don't expect me to put your kids through college just because you provide me with a few minutes of entertainment. I'll pay you if and when I go to see you perform.
And they may never get that amazing, revolutionary album off the ground that music listeners deserved to hear but eventually didn't get to...
Under the present system of payola, etc. that's what's happening now. The publishers are controlling what gets heard under this system. They hate P2P because it's killing off the publishing middleman. P2P provides for self distribution. It has a chance to take away the control enjoyed by the privileged few. All info can be accessed by everybody, that is definitely a good thing.
Fuck you.
You wouldn't like it. My sister might be interested though...
It's late. If I think of anything else, I'll formulate a third response.
What?
Hmmm.
You know a well as I do that in any substantial body of holy writing support will be found (via a certain amount of logic chopping and twisting of words) for any proposition under the sun. Right wing Christian fundamentalists do exactly the same thing with the Christian Bible, using this technique in effect to turn Christianity into its exact opposite.
Different Muslim sects interpret this in different ways. It's unlikely that the Koran itself is evil, The evil adheres only to those branches of Islam that preach and practice such barbaric traditions.
My initial aim was to show the differences and fundamental distinctions between the Bible and the Koran. I hope I succeed in this.
Yes, different Muslim sects have different characteristics. The Sufis place an emphasis on mysticism and are relatively liberal compared to the Wahabis and other mainstream Muslim sects that place emphasis on literal enforcement of the Koran and the Hadith.
As you pointed out, this leaves us with the question of whether the Wahabis and their ilk are as wrong, as say, the Roman Catholic church was found to be in the enlightenment.
To answer this, I'll just point you to the fact the Koran encourages war and killing under certain circumstances. The New Covenant, which Christians are bound to, has no such encouragement - rather the encouragement is to "turn the other cheek". For instance, Paul and the persecuted Christians could have aimed to form a guerilla army to oppose Roman and Jewish persecution, but didn't - they decided to suffer persecution and left it to God to pay the persecutors back.
Mohammed on the other hand had no qualms about spreading Islam by the sword. Unlike the New Testament which is only concerned with spiritual matters and not with temporal power, the Koran and Hadith require the setup of an Islamic states with Islamic laws.
To see the fruits of this belief, consider that there are today no Jews in the Arabian peninsula. They were "cleansed" in Mohammads era. As this source reports, this violence is held as a sign of machismo in modern Muslim belief - here a modern Indonesian Islamic terrorist on trial taunts Jews about this historical battle from Mohammed's era.
This is responsible for outrages in this day and age like:
-- terrorist murders and bombings (like the Indonesian one above)
-- suicide bombings
-- murders and the ethnic cleansing of 200,000 Hindu Pandits from Kashmir valley
(which used to be a stronghold of Sufism)
-- 9/11
-- Beslan
-- decapitation of aid workers and other non-combatants in Iraq
Let me leave you with these quotes from the Koran sourced from here. I'm sorry, I do not have a copy of the Koran easily available now, so I cannot verify them readily. However, they tie in with what we discussed this far.
Make war on them until idolatry is no more and Allah's religion reigns supreme." (Koran 8:37)
The Koran instructs not to make friendship with Jews and Christians (Koran 5:51) but to war against them: "When the Sacred Months are over, kill those who ascribe partners to God wheresoever ye find them; seize them, encompass them, and ambush them; then if they repent and observe prayer and pay the alms, let them go their way (Koran 4:5). "Fight against those who believe not in God nor in the Last Day, who... refuse allegiance to the True Faith from among those who have received the Book, until they humbly pay tribute out of hand." (Koran 9:29) Note: These verses distinguish between warfare against pagans, and against Jews and Christians.
"...kill the disbelievers wherever we find them" (Koran 2:191); "fight and slay the Pagans, seize them, beleaguer them, and lie in wait for them in every stratagem" (Koran 9:5); "murder them and treat them harshly" (Koran 9:123).
"Seize ye him, and bind ye him, And burn ye him in the Blazing Fire. Further, make him march in a chain, whereof the length is seventy cubits! This was he that would not believe in Allah Most High. And would not encourage the feeding of the indigent! So no friend hath he here this Day. Nor hath he any food except the corruption from the washing of wounds, Which none do eat but those in sin." (Koran 69:30-37)
"Strike off the heads of the disbelievers"; and after making a "wide slaughter among them, carefully tie up the remaining captives" (Koran 47:4).
"Instill terror into the hearts of the unbelievers"; "smite above their nec
I also highly recommend this article which I just came across. It is a scholarly debate on "The Koran and Anti-Semitism" and involves Jewish, Christian and Islamic scholars.
On the second page of this article, the Jewish scholar says:
I certainly do not deny the numerous borrowings of the Qur'an from Jewish and Christian scriptures. I only underlined their re-interpretation, and application in theological and legal constructions entirely unique to Islam. For instance the Hebrew Abraham is not the same as the Muslim Abraham who prepared to sacrify Ishmael (instead of Isaac), and built with him the Kaaba. And the same goes for other biblical figures mentioned in the Qur'an including Jesus, the Muslim prophet, Isa.
The Muslim scholar responds:
To state that the Abraham of the Qur'an is not the Abraham of the Torah is so ridiculous that no scholar of repute would dare say something like that.
The Jewish scholar counter-responds:
I am surprised by the diatribe provoked by my remark on the different identities of the people named in the Bible and in the Qur'an. The Qur'an states in several verses that they are the same people and therefore this is a matter of faith. But Professor Muhammad will allow Jews and Christians to have another view on their own Scriptures, and, in fact, most of their scholars do not adopt the Muslim interpretation, although there is a tendency now in interfaith dialogue to avoid the matter. I have created no new fact and I do not understand Prof. Muhammad's irritation if I say for instance, that King David was an Israelite King of Israel and not a Muslim prophet - although I do acknowledge this Muslim belief which I do not share.
FM Radio - A man working for RCA demonstrates how he can transmit audio over radio signal much further than with AM technology using frequency modulation. He patents his discovery and tries to get it adapted by radio stations. RCA sees this as a threat to its stranglehold over radio broadcasting business, and gets the FCC to place restrictions on broadcasting that make it effectively illegal to use FM technology. The keep this strategy up until the man's patent expires, and then they rollout the same technology without having even given the "inventor" a dime. In fact, he dies pretty much penniless from his court battles with RCA trying to remove the artificial restrictions they put in place. I heard that "FM" technology did pretty good in the marketplace, funny how the inventor died in poverty.
Hollywood - A man, lets call him Edison, has patented techology to capure moving pictures on film, lets call this a "movie". Many budding directors/etc want to use this technology to make movies, but, gosh darn it, they don't want to pay those licensing fees! Since the US Marshal's are on the east coast of the US, they go to the west coast ( Californa ), and start making movies using this technology without paying a cent to Edison. This is how Universal, Fox, and other studios got started.
Cable Television - A company gets the bright idea to broadcast movies and content from all over the US via a land line instead of the airwaves in order to ensure higher quality. They sell this as a service to many many residential customers, but never pay a cent to acquire this content,nor do the networks they are copying this content from get any percentage of the profits the "cable" company is making. The cable company is taken to court 3 times before it is decided they will have to pay for the shows/movies they are redistributing.
Disney - copied Steamboat Willie's story and just changed the name of the characters. They made a good deal of money from this "Mickey Mouse" character, but never reimbursed the creator. Took a Japanese cartoon about a white lion king, changed the name, changed some of the story, and called it "The Lion King". The writer has gotten nothing but the cold shoulder from Disney.
I took all of this from Warren Lessig's book on copyright, and it shows just how lopsided things are. Current MPAA/RIAA actions are simply a case of "Calling the Kettle Black", and I personally think the entire philosophy of "Intellectual Property"(which I believe does not exist ) needs to be re-evaluated in USA's society. Not just a small revision here and there to current law, but complete separation of physical property and ideas within the legal system. Shoe-horning the thoughts in people's heads so it fits into physical property-based laws is simply a bad idea.
They are two different things, treat them that way, no matter how many dollar signs you see in your future if you can somehow convince people you "own" something that is un-unownable.
I can't afford a sig!
There is another side of this, being handicapped I find it rather mute to have to pack my arse up which takes me 3 times the amount of time and 5 times more effort than the normal person to end up in a place where I either get a stiff neck being in the front row or get looked at like a retard as people walk buy and I'm kind of blocking the isle. Copyright infringment is a civil matter, throwing someone in jail over it is just insane, especially for those without a profit from it. The music industry making a big deal out of it is a joke, they shovel out crap and basically force popular culture down your throat, talentless twits released daily, more one hit wonders than in any other time. What's really hypocritical is when some dumbass like Eminem gets up to call the people who do this loosers and thieves, well let me be the first to hand him the good samartain award. You would have to be blind to think he wouldn't do exactly the same if he werent rich. There's a xerox in the library to copy what? Is the library guilty of distributing copywritten material?
I take the point about the identity of certain characters in the Abarahamic faiths. Likewise it seems the Islamic prophet Isa who was intended (by Mohammed) to represent Jesus, was misreported in the Koran owing, presumes, to a faulty knowledge of Christian and Jewish scripture on Mohammed's part.
Your reply prompted me to do some further reading - not least the thread that you linked to. This conversation spun off a whole series of searches which turned up (mixed in with a certain amount of hopeless drivel) a lot of serious theological analysis on both sides of the issue.
I was astounded in particular by historical accounts of the practice of dhimmitude, as documented by BAt Ye'or. It seems that Islamic scripture, - including even parts of the Koran - sets a precedent for the subjugation of non-Islamic populations, deprivation of their human rights, and ultimately genocide.
There are also parts of the Jewish Talmud which encourage the same kinds of treatment of gentiles, and even paedophilia (in ancient Jewish law, a girl of three years old can be wed).
Lets not forget also the atrocities that have been perpetuated in the name of Christianity, most notably during the Crusades and also the treatment of supposed heretics and apostates during the centuries of the Inquisition.
Frankly the message I take from these readings is that all organized religion is something to be reviled by all civilized people.
It's often been said that because the Muslim faith is some 600 years younger than Christianity that it is unfair to compare contemporary Islam with contemporary Christianity, that Islam now more closely resembles what Christendom was up to during the late middle ages - not long out of the crusades, with the whole of Europe under the dictat of the Papacy and the terror of the Inquisition. No doubt these institutions managed to find scriptural justification for their actions too.
However I think this argument is a dangerous diversion. Even if Islam does reform successfully at some point in the future, any of the three Abrahamic faiths has sufficient precedent in its scripture to justify the mistreatment of fellow human beings. And as social circumstances change, any of these three religions could just as easily undergo a fundamentalist revival at any time. Today for example Islam has its Hamas (and those scary guys who whack themselves on the head until they bleed - I forget what they call themselves); Judaism already has its Zionists; Christianity has its right wing fundamentalists.
If we ever allow one of these faiths to take control of a state even in its seemingly most benign form, we are therefore risking future inhumanity on a massive scale: torture, murder, war and genocide.
You can't even trust Buddhism, peaceful though those folks may seem; they are just as guilty - q.v. the feudal system in pre-Chinese-invasion Tibet.
thankfully this feature methinks wud help those leechers seed more than leech to their hearts content
Select SigText from Signatures where Len(SigText) > 120 Order By Len(SigText) desc
You seem to have an open and fair mind. I hope you continue on this path.
I am a Christian fundamentalist, though the fundamental of the Christian faith is love: "For the whole law is fulfilled in one word, in this: "You shall love your neighbor as yourself." (http://bible.cc/galatians/5-14.htm). Some Christians lack love, and others lack faith in God's words in the Bible. And both are wrong in these things.
Jesus accused religious authorities of his day of "making void the word of God by your tradition, which you have handed down." (http://bible.cc/mark/7-7.htm). Corrupt institutions like the Catholic church have the habit of doing the same in this age. To prevent being misled by "identity theft", one must examine what the scriptures themselves state.
those scary guys who whack themselves on the head until they bleed
It came to me finally: Hezbollah.
TV and Radio are not exactly free. You do pay for it, but indirectly. But ignoring that...
The copyright holder gets to dictate the terms. If you haven't signed your music over with the right organization you cannot get airtime on the Radio either. It's actually illegal for radio stations to broadcast music without permission from the copyright holder. There are groups/companies that allow general permission to be obtained for millions of songs, and that is what a radio station uses.
This is done using something called a contract. You *can* contract your music to be played on the internet. That's been done and has been done for a decade. But if you want to play music on your internet radio station where the permission can only be obtained if you're an AM/FM radio station. Then you're legally out of luck.
Basically you're proposing that you don't like the terms given to you, so you will violate them. It's *not* your music, software, movies. You don't *own* it. If you create some music/software/movies and want to distribute them on suprnova or whatever for free, then be my guest. In fact everyone would appreciate the positive example that would set.
But if you decide to take what you want, rather than pushing for real change, then you are not on an ethical high ground. If you really cared about your "cause" of having free internet content, then you should cease watching movies/tv, listening to music, etc. Unless it meets your requirement of truly free internet media.
Sounds to me that you're just a spoiled kid that wants what he wants and doesn't care how he gets it.
Try to have a Purpose instead of a motive.
“Common sense is not so common.” — Voltaire
It won't work that well for many websites (eg. blogs) where the content changes regularly (BitTorrent isn't expected to handle multiple-dated versions of files as such a big part of it), and html source doesn't usually get that big so the improvements won't be so dramatic. A larger proportion of the time will be spent finding a node to download from..
Actually, you are 100 % mistaken.
Theft is when you take someone else's physical property without permission.
Sneaking into a movie (or ballgame) is, well, sneaking into a movie (or ballgame). It is NOT theft.
This is not a moral argument or a justification of sneaking into movies (or ballgames). It is an argument concerning the meaning of the words "steal" and "theft." Probably the best term for people who enjoy artistic or sports performances without paying for them (when such payment is normally required) is "freeloader."
As for me personally, I do not practice or condone copyright infringement, and I don't sneak into movies or ballgames, nor do I condone such sneaking. I am certainly not a thief. I am actually a law-abiding citizen, and not a freeloader.
I am also, I guess, a language purist, and I resent that the MPAA and RIAA are waging a propaganda war to make copyright infringement legaly, morally, and linuistically equivalent to
theft.
MM
By including this sig, the copyright holders of this work or collection unreservedly place it in the public domain.