On Mon, May 12, 2014 at 8:26 PM, grarpamp <[email protected]> wrote:
> On Mon, May 12, 2014 at 10:57 PM, David Barrett <[email protected]> > wrote: > > How does anonymizing help if the exit nodes are sent takedown notices for > > content downloaded via Tor? > > All but one of the nets do not have 'exits', should be obvious > I meant using the completely internal modes of operation for > all such nets. The rest of your note is moot therein. > I apologize for not inferring what you felt was obvious. Can you educate me as to how Tor can be used for torrenting? The top links on the subject all seem to advise against it: https://blog.torproject.org/blog/bittorrent-over-tor-isnt-good-idea > And you don't get busted for downloading copywritten junk, only for > serving it up... ftp, rapidshare, mega, youtube etc users have all > proven that long ago, DL is largely unregulated at all, anywhere. > BT'ers are dumb and have confused terms in their head due to > the protocol often requiring bidirection xfer them acting as a server, > and/or BT users not being aware of that action. Not my problem. > I agree, you are tautologically correct that one solution to avoiding a Bittorrent takedown notice is to simply not use Bittorrent -- very astute. However, to clarify, Bittorrent's core design is to share while downloading, which is what allows it to scale so well in such a distributed way. The question is how to *use* Bittorrent (or some incremental iteration atop Bittorrent) while protecting the network from automated copyright takedown. Recognizing that this isn't your problem, can you help share your ideas on how this problem could be solved? -david
_______________________________________________ p2p-hackers mailing list [email protected] http://lists.zooko.com/mailman/listinfo/p2p-hackers
