All right, so the point is, if something like 95% of a torrent site typically is pirated stuff, it does not change the profile of the site much if you toss some Linux ISOs in the mix. Also, Linux distros typically have their own torrent trackers, which is the preferable download source anyway.
Googlebots index web pages automatically and users can post any kind of content to YouTube. Google simply does not have the time to manually check if any item is copyright-infringing or not. That's why they have to rely on deleting data on copyright violation complaints sent by the authors.
Look, I know that a lot of pirated material slips into Google's indexes, but that does not justify a service like Torrentz.eu or The Pirate Bay, which deliberately have their main focus on pirated stuff.
That's more of a characteristic of the torrent technology. The data is always distributed among clients, so there's no central party to host the data anyway. But in practice the party offering the.torrent files or magnet links is providing the access to the data, and making the piracy possible.
Even the new laptops containing Intel HD Graphics hardware would not provide anything higher than what he currently gets (GLSL 1.40 and OpenGL 3.1). His only option would be to get a machine with AMD or NVIDIA hardware, but that would break the $300 budget.
Actually that's pretty good counter-argument to my comment. On the other hand, they do remove content based on complaints, but still you are mostly right.
Slashdot Mirror
Oh, thanks for the correction. How is the Sandy Bridge hardware broken?
I'm so sorry. I'm getting off your lawn right now.
Why not? At least it would be a fair argument for their defense.
Good point, and I don't know what the accurate number is, but I still suggest that primarily the content indexed by Google is legal.
All right, so the point is, if something like 95% of a torrent site typically is pirated stuff, it does not change the profile of the site much if you toss some Linux ISOs in the mix. Also, Linux distros typically have their own torrent trackers, which is the preferable download source anyway.
Most of the torrent sites in Torrentz's index contain mostly pirated stuff.
What math? I just made up a number that felt good to me.
What about selling counterfeit products?
It's you. Looks fine from here.
What? I said that it is pleasing to read.
Over 90% of the material would have to be legit.
Googlebots index web pages automatically and users can post any kind of content to YouTube. Google simply does not have the time to manually check if any item is copyright-infringing or not. That's why they have to rely on deleting data on copyright violation complaints sent by the authors.
Look, I know that a lot of pirated material slips into Google's indexes, but that does not justify a service like Torrentz.eu or The Pirate Bay, which deliberately have their main focus on pirated stuff.
So to refine my comment, I still think that Torrentz.eu cannot directly be blamed for anything, because they are just a meta-search engine anyway.
That's more of a characteristic of the torrent technology. The data is always distributed among clients, so there's no central party to host the data anyway. But in practice the party offering the .torrent files or magnet links is providing the access to the data, and making the piracy possible.
The article font in the IBTimes website is really pleasing to read, because it has enough weight. Thin characters on many websites make my eyes bleed.
On the other hand, they [Google] do remove content based on complaints
Which of torrentz.eu cannot do even if they wanted to, as they don't host any content.
Google does not host the content either.
Yes, you can. I do not disagree with that in any way.
Why aren't google blocking these dodgy torrent sites?
That would be shooting the messenger. Google indexes everything.
That's like saying that a sex shop is a general-purpose convenience store if they happen to sell some candy too.
Even the new laptops containing Intel HD Graphics hardware would not provide anything higher than what he currently gets (GLSL 1.40 and OpenGL 3.1). His only option would be to get a machine with AMD or NVIDIA hardware, but that would break the $300 budget.
Actually that's pretty good counter-argument to my comment. On the other hand, they do remove content based on complaints, but still you are mostly right.
Google is a general-purpose search engine.
So what? It's still mainly geared towards warez.
Heh, apparently the Slashdot piracy mob already quickly modded down my both messages.
Try googling "harry potter torrent" and see what links you get. It indexes content, legitimate or otherwise.
No, there is a big difference because Google's main intent is not to promote piracy.
The City of London Police are abusing their power to enforce civil matters and shut down legitimate search engines.
Legitimate? The site clearly promotes piracy.