Supreme Court to decide whether ISPs must disconnect users accused of piracy
Technology
179
Beiträge
130
Kommentatoren
2
Aufrufe
-
My routine is always use piratebay, never use a pirate streaming site, no new or big studio releases, no porn, not seeding for long and choosing less active torrents. I can't say much for how effective it is since I've never gotten hit so I can't really experiment (I've had five or six ISPs in two different countries).
they literally just pirate the stuff themselves, see which IPs connect to them, then connect those to an ISP and notify them.
And I don't even understand how this would hold up if it ever went to trial. How can an IP owner "pirate" their own IP? Even when they outsource it to services who do this they're still giving permission for the IP to be distributed.
It's like hiring someone to "steal" your own TV, putting it in a back alley and then accusing whoever takes it of being a thief.
It's generally seen as okay on a similar level to undercover work. They do it for Investigation reasons, the torrent was already uploaded before they joined, their monitoring serves a legitimate law enforcement purpose, and they're authorized by the copyright holder (themselves) to do it. They didn't put the movie or whatever out there themselves.
-
This post did not contain any content.
See you guys in I2P
-
Their uncivilized censorship regime vs. our civilized online child protection and anti-terror laws.
So you bought into the think of the children argument?
You know that's a red-herring, right? It's really about eroding privacy. -
So you bought into the think of the children argument?
You know that's a red-herring, right? It's really about eroding privacy.It was supposed to be a reference to a meme making fun of "us vs. them" mentalities. I know enough about the think of the children argument.
-
ha. all of my traffic is encrypted and routed through at least 3 pirate friendly countries and servers that don't keep logs. good fucking luck inspecting those packets.
-
Always make sure that QBT uses your VPN's network interface. I got some DMCA emails despite split-tunneling a VPN recently, and I realized it was bound to all interfaces by default - that's no good.
Better to just configure a firewall properly so that no packets can go outside of the vpn tunnel.
-
Better to just configure a firewall properly so that no packets can go outside of the vpn tunnel.
How is that better? If you configure your firewall rules incorrectly, this protects you against that. This ensures you have no connection if your VPN isn't on/isn't working.
-
What's crazy is that Trump claims to be against the current ruling in Sony's favor, and is siding with Cox.
Instruction unclear?
So trump like cocks?Good for him!
-
Gonna be a lot of issues that come from this. Legally speaking. It's already on the books that an IP address doesn't represent a single person... so I'm not terribly clear on how they plan to enforce this even if it were to pass.
You assume precedent, consistency, or ethics matter to the current people in power in the US.
-
How is that better? If you configure your firewall rules incorrectly, this protects you against that. This ensures you have no connection if your VPN isn't on/isn't working.
Thats what the firewall rules do too, don't allow internet connection if there's no vpn connection.
Firewall is a system-wide solution that always works, while qbt config relies heavily on the application implementing interface binding properly. Which it doesn't fully btw.
