What is Digg?Sponsored by Travelzoo
Take Advantage of Ridiculously Low Holiday Airfares view!
travelzoo.com - Flights $52 and up for Thanksgiving, Christmas & New Year. But move on it now.
250 Comments
- twiztidsinz, on 06/22/2009, -4/+147Why don't you let the government set up cameras in your house?
You're not doing anything illegal, right?
There's more to privacy than just hiding 'illegal activities'. - twiztidsinz, on 06/22/2009, -2/+115For?
Providing a VPN service is not illegal, nor are torrents.. - kierucom, on 06/22/2009, -1/+111A desire for privacy is not the same as an admission of guilt. The whole "if you have nothing to hide you have nothing to fear" argument makes no sense in countries where citizens have rights to privacy and protection from unwarranted search.
- daxxer, on 06/22/2009, -5/+102And then the entertainment industry will sue the companies offering anonymous torrenting.
- dehn, on 06/22/2009, -2/+83You cant control the internet. Just ask China.
- thatonekid393, on 06/22/2009, -2/+73I got a warning from my ISP.
I waited 3 months then just started downloading more privately. - G00SEISL00SE, on 06/22/2009, -1/+65***** you did more than i did. I think i have gotten about 5 of those warnings now.
- neelsama, on 06/22/2009, -4/+60"Instead of stopping the pirates in their tracks the entertainment industry has simply inspired a new ‘industry’ worth millions of dollars." - Good bussiness
- inactive, on 06/22/2009, -0/+45Did you send a thank you letter back? Thanking them for warning you that you're being snooped? Lol. Awesome.
- brandnewx, on 06/22/2009, -15/+51***** RIAA! ***** SEXY GIRLS!
- DiggyWiggy, on 06/22/2009, -0/+34Yeah but unfortunately our rights to privacy and protection from unwarranted search are flying out the window. Try talking about the Patriot Act with those who support it, the "if you have nothing to hide you have nothing to fear" argument is very much in full effect these days, that's why I'm worried about it being an issue...
- dorthensensens, on 06/22/2009, -6/+40Over 3 centuries ago, musicians were not well payed. In fact they were considered just one step above beggers in class structure. However, this didn't stop people from being musicians. They did it because they loved it. Not for the money because there was none to be had. If money is what is motivating you to produce content, then perhaps you should consider a different line of work. Just like workers at the railroad 100 years ago became obsolete, high paid content providers will too be obsolete. These are the signs of the time. If you think that movies and music will not get made anymore because people expect them to be free, then i think you are in for a surprise. Time and again history shows us that people will do things because they enjoy to do it. Content, and I mean good content, will be made by people on their macbooks and redcameras because they want to. Not because of the money. In fact it may even be better as big money competition will not be a factor and the really proficient will excel.
- Nifab, on 06/22/2009, -8/+39There is no such thing as usenet (suggestive wave of the hand) and if there were it would never be talked about openly.
- twiztidsinz, on 06/22/2009, -2/+33Yeah... they "won" with a huge asterisk next to it...
- DiggyWiggy, on 06/22/2009, -12/+41If I'm not downloading Hollywood movies or RIAA artists anyway, is one of these really necessary? I mean, if one of these VPNs gets sued and has to hand over their IP addresses, won't I have wasted my money, and also make myself a bigger target by putting myself on a smaller, consolidated list of pirates who wish to be more anonymous (basically admitting some sort of guilt)? I suppose it's a matter of trusting thepiratebay over my ISP, which I do x1,000,000,000, but I'm still unsure if it's worth it.
- MrMeikel, on 06/22/2009, -0/+24TPB and a VPN service aren't the same thing by any means.
- inactive, on 06/22/2009, -0/+24Those letters are *****
- inactive, on 06/22/2009, -0/+23Suing them for providing a legal service? I don't doubt it, but it would be interesting.
- TsuruchiBrian, on 06/22/2009, -0/+21@DaDrake
It's a matter of economics (supply and demand). When it comes to intellectual property, no matter how high the demand is, the supply is effectively infinite.
I am not opposed to the RIAA because it unfairly traps "innocent" people. The RIAA is a bunch of lawyers representing a group of companies trying to maximize it's profit. The problem of "innocent" people being unfairly victimized is a problem with our legal system (Hate the game not the player).
I am opposed to the "RIAA" (copyrights and patents) because I don't think the net effect of these laws is positive. I think copyrights and patents in particular stifle innovation in general. I would point to the amazing success of open source software as evidence that innovation can and will still be made in a system where information is free.
Intellectual piracy is not morally wrong. It is illegal. There is a difference. Just because something is illegal does not make it morally wrong. We as a society try to make our laws reflect our morality, but our morality should not be affected by our laws. Murder would and should still be immoral even if it wasn't illegal.
There was a time in history when ideas WERE free, and copyrights and patents did not exist. Technology was what gave artists the ability to record a song once and sell nearly unlimited copies of it. Artists used to have to give live performances to make money. Now technology has made it possible to copy art for free.
This idea that artists or inventors are entitled to all copies of their work is relatively new, and I think it should be challenged. What if Newton had owned the math called calculus that he invented, and had the power to charge anyone who used it money? Would our society be a better one? Would it inspire more kids to become mathematicians in order to discover some very important formula and be able to charge anyone who wants to use it? - MikeFromAmerica, on 06/22/2009, -0/+21FYI, a MediaSentry employee can download and install Transmission just as easily as you can.
- Agamemnon582bc, on 06/22/2009, -2/+22When is the entertainment industry going to learn that the days are gone when they could rip people off and earn a ridiculous amount of money off of it? Lower your ***** prices and people will stop pirating $30 Blu-Ray movies. Digital media is cheaper than a pack of gum.
- shredswithpiks, on 06/22/2009, -2/+22"other then not downloading at all or using my neighbors WiFi?"
That's exactly what jewdiknight (lol) doesn't want to do. - Redline500, on 06/22/2009, -1/+21It's bad karma to use Tor for movies and mp3's dude. Use BitBlinder or i2p instead.
Tor is for people in China working towards democracy. - baboonraf, on 06/22/2009, -4/+23SHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH
- danielrh9, on 06/22/2009, -7/+25Using proxies or Peer Guardian are likely enough. But using your neighbors WiFi?
Come on. Stealing from the evil RIAA or MPAA is one thing. But your neighbors? You're really kind of a jerk at that point. - deathtap, on 06/22/2009, -4/+21Why can't they see this is a losing battle? How much more obvious can it be? I just don't understand it.
- poppyfire, on 06/22/2009, -0/+16I have to give you a hard time about this. If you'd have read anything about thepiratebay's new VPN service, you'd know it's UBERbenefit is that it doesn't keep track of IP's. So even if records were demanded by a court, there would be NO records. Hence the WIN factor. . . .
- xedd, on 06/22/2009, -1/+16MrUploads,
How about you getting paid directly, without the middle-men in suits and them getting their cut from the action so they can buy several houses and vacation twice a year in the Bahamas and golf at the expensive country clubs, all because of YOUR hard work?
Why do you and us the 'consumers' of entertainment need to be burdened with all those parasitic monkeys?
I am more than willing to pay for entertainment. And I do.
But the present state of things doesn't sit well with me, and the arguments used to support the continuance of a system that was developed for a pre-internet world are not convincing, to say the least. - twiztidsinz, on 06/22/2009, -0/+14Tor is also free... and based on end-users.
A paid VPN is quite different than Tor. - DaDrake, on 06/22/2009, -9/+23Movies aren't food. You don't need it. If you don't want to pay the price for a movie, simply don't buy the product.
I am trying to understand people's sense of entitlement to products they deemed too expensive. I am a recent college grad with not much money, everything is too expensive for me. Should I dictate that paying $0.01 for a movie is too much, and thus I should feel free to download it?
Now, I am a hypocrite for saying piracy is morally wrong when I done it myself. I know this. But at least I don't try to make excuses that fail any test of reasoning. There simply isn't a moral highground in piracy. Intelligent people, who are against the RIAA, are against it because it unfairly traps innocent people, gives too much legal authority to corporations, and is ineffective. Unintelligent people who are against the RIAA simply are because they are entitled a-holes who never understood that as a customer, you can speak with your wallet. - ArrakisDune, on 06/23/2009, -0/+14You forgot the #1 rule of Usenet....
- tdwtomcat, on 06/22/2009, -1/+14I would love to digg you, but I am obligated to bury everything regarding Usenet.
- HEAVYisSPY, on 06/22/2009, -3/+15NOT INTO THE PIT...IT BURNS!
- insanebrain, on 06/22/2009, -1/+12You mean the fact that a artist has to give 70 cents of a dollar to the dinosaur company and THEN has to pay his own costs ?
.. or you are 1 of the dinosaurs who is pissed that he can't steal enough money,. . or you really don't know what's going on. The music business/raping model is over 50 years old and still unchanged. Wake up and see that those raping days are over.
This time the people don't have to change, because they have the power... it's time that the big business are kneeling for us, instead of the other way around. - Ouze, on 06/22/2009, -6/+17http://lmgtfy.com/?q=getting+started+with+usenet
- joemofo214, on 06/22/2009, -0/+11LONG LIVE ALLCAPS!
- TnTBass, on 06/22/2009, -0/+10I got a couple of those and it made me see the error of my ways! I obviously had to stop downloading immediately... so I could fix my IP filtering since it stopped working for some reason.
- triassic911, on 06/22/2009, -0/+10Money, my friend.
- inactive, on 06/22/2009, -5/+15Galt, even though I do find it pleasurable to bury all of your inane comments, ...you're a *****. Etc, etc. Blocked.
- netneutrality, on 06/22/2009, -0/+10Who are you referring to -- the pirates or the content owners?
- Kronos6948, on 06/22/2009, -0/+9Mr Uploads, I too have produced my own content.
I'm a musician who knows it's damn tough to make a living off of it. Especially, since I like writing/performing music that isn't very popular. Sure, it has its mainstream artists here and there, but it's not a big enough market to make a huge living off of.
I think what most people are trying to say about piracy of content is that people shouldn't try to make a living off of their art. While I wouldn't want to agree with it, I do see where they're coming from.
Before the advent of the recording companies, musicians performed locally, got paid minuscule amounts just for services rendered. If they were lucky, they'd get 3-4 minutes that they could perform on radio. But then the companies came in, and made stars out of people.
In the process, they took over all the rights that the musician had over what they created. In effect, they controlled the source of money. IIRC, Michael Jackson still owns the rights to all the Beatles stuff, and therefore collects big time royalty checks off of the Beatles material; which is what most record companies do with the IP's that they own.
The model used to be that they'd bring out an album on a format (like Vinyl), sell as much of it as they could, and release a new format (like 8-Tracks), so that everyone would go out and RE PURCHASE everything they owned on vinyl. This process repeated several times, so that they could continue raking in the cash.
But then, digital downloads came along. Something intangible. Something that the record companies poo pooed, thinking that no one would want an album without the album art, sleeve, case, or something tangible. So, they ended up losing tons of money because no one wanted to pay for the same damn albums that they just bought 4 times over. Also, they found that they didn't have to borrow their friend's cassette or CD of a band to check them out, they could just download it.
If the recording companies were smart, they would've hopped right on that bandwagon, figured out a price point where they could've made money still, and sold digital lossless downloads.
But, instead, they decided to fight everyone about it.
So, what ends up happening is that the recording industry loses money, starts to shrink, but instead of the bigwigs taking paycuts, it's the bands who get dropped who no longer own the rights to their hits who get screwed.
Are there people who feel wrongly entitled to download whatever they feel like? Yes. Are there folks who genuinely get hurt monetarily for illegal downloads? Yes. But, I feel that this change is inevitable, and that being a career entertainer is starting to go the way of the dodo. People are going to have to go into other lines of work to make a living.
I hope this wasn't too convoluted or all over the board. - WiseWeasel, on 06/23/2009, -0/+9@SpeedyG: If you're behind a router, your ISP can't see your computer's MAC address. They would need physical access to your router to determine that.
- TypeEE, on 06/22/2009, -0/+9They sue a lot of torrent search engines. They are not serving the bits, they are just ip addresses.
- Vankeldon, on 06/22/2009, -1/+10I'm gonna have to agree with dorthensenens on the finding a better way to make a living comment. I would love to be able to make a living blacksmithing. I find it enjoyable, but when is the last time you passed a blacksmiths shop? Sometimes jobs go away and the people who do them adapt.
- theonlyronster, on 06/22/2009, -0/+9He was clearly joking about doing that.
- netneutrality, on 06/22/2009, -6/+14+14/-36.
I admire your bravery to shout that here. +1. - Redline500, on 06/22/2009, -0/+8Can't sue an i2p network!
- danielrh9, on 06/22/2009, -11/+18Can you (or anyone else) provide any introductory articles on this? Or perhaps just a few URL's of the best places to get started with Usenet? I've been wanting to try this out and move from Torrents to Usenet but haven't had the time or patience to really investigate it.
- ProjectGSX, on 06/22/2009, -3/+10If you have a product people want and refuse to provide it to them in an acceptable manner, they are going to find other ways of getting it. Its just that simple.
-
Show 51 - 100 of 254 discussions
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is