We take a look at Telltale's latest adventures in Gearbox's Borderlands to find out just what you can expect from this new adventure series.
Tales from the Borderlands - Episode 1: Zer0 Sum Reviewed
We take a look at Ubisoft's next iteration in the Far Cry universe to see just what is on offer
Badger Badger Badger - Far Cry 4 Reviewed
We chat with Blizzard RTS veteran Allen Dilling on the past, present and future of StarCraft!
StarCraft II: Legacy of the Void Developer Interview
The Pirate Bay Goes Magnetic
Damo
Brisbane, Queensland
5925 posts
http://www.heraldsun.com.au/technology/pirate-bay-to-replace-all-torrent-files-with-magnetic-links/story-fn7celvh-1226270577873

THE world's most popular file-sharing website is to delete all torrent files in a bid to become more resistant to being shut down.

The Pirate Bay announced it would begin by taking down all torrent files shared by more than 10 people (peers) on February 29, TorrentFreak reports.


If you don't know what a magentic link is go to the following link.

What is a magnetic link

02:47pm 14/02/12 Permalink
system
Internet
--
02:47pm 14/02/12 Permalink
Outlaw
Gold Coast, Queensland
1454 posts
02:50pm 14/02/12 Permalink
Eorl
Brisbane, Queensland
5290 posts
Read about a new torrenting program yesterday on /r/technology, seems pretty cool. Basically a untraceable file sharing program that uses overlay networking to host files. Have a read over here.
03:01pm 14/02/12 Permalink
thermite
Brisbane, Queensland
8951 posts
Yeah I read about tribler a week ago on news.com.au

although for some reason I remembered it and have been telling people it's called "gerbil" f***en woops
03:02pm 14/02/12 Permalink
arkter
Gold Coast, Queensland
577 posts
I still don't see how Tribler protects the users? I get that it can't be nuked off the internet but I suspect that they could still track IP's connected the same way they do with torrents.. if there is someone with more knowledge on it that could correct me I would be much obliged!
03:09pm 14/02/12 Permalink
Pinky
Melbourne, Victoria
12614 posts
It removes the public tracker altogether so that's one avenue that they cannot use to find out who is requesting what files.
03:57pm 14/02/12 Permalink
Sc00bs
Brisbane, Queensland
8641 posts
yeah was reading about tribler aswell, will have to have a go and see if its any good.

Sucks, i loved PB & btjunkie :( guess ill have to use my privates from now on :(
04:00pm 14/02/12 Permalink
FaceMan
Brisbane, Queensland
8312 posts
Someone will come up with a way to prevent IP addresses being seen and that will be the end of the road for these Media Empires. Its so stupid, instead of lowering prices and selling more they want to try to destroy the Internet which just makes potential consumers angry and drives more ppl to find better ways to pirate.

Was reading about why movies take so long to get here, Its to do with American Cinemas and 35mm film transfers. Apprantally America is the only Country that uses 35mm or something and it takes time/money to transfer originals to tape thats compatible overseas.

But releasing a film simultaneously poses its own challenges.

We may be in a digital age but the vast majority of US and international cinemas still use 35mm film reels - a technology more than a century old that is costing studios a small fortune.

On average, distribution takes up 3.5 per cent of movie budgets, costing studios between US$750-$1200 ($701- $1121) per film print.

Fewer than 1000 US and 100 international cinemas use digital screening technology.

To save on cost, distributors frequently reuse film reels from theatre to theatre - causing lags between releases.

A shortage of international theatres and the inability of actors to be everywhere at once to promote films also contribute to problems film studios experience staging a global film debut.



http://www.news.com.au/technology/study-states-obvious-people-pirate-films-because-they-have-no-other-legal-options/story-e6frfro0-1226269979142


04:04pm 14/02/12 Permalink
Sc00bs
Brisbane, Queensland
8643 posts
i read that and thought it was a crock of s***.

Like 1000$ a print that is seen atleast 1000+ times at a cinema is going to send them bank rupt... f*****g whingy c**** making up excuses instead of fixing the problem.

Actors on 30mill a movie, 15-20$ for ticket to see the movie and the customers are the scum bags for trying to get a 'reasonable' deal.

Internet companies full well know that the only reason they have 200gb/500gb + plans is for people to download things such as this.

04:08pm 14/02/12 Permalink
FaceMan
Brisbane, Queensland
8313 posts
stuff like this doesnt help...
http://www.news.com.au/entertainment/celebrity/whitney-houston-fans-express-anger-over-album-price-hike/story-e6frfmqi-1226270701223

The singer's Ultimate Collection went from £4.99 ($7.32) to £7.99 ($11.73) soon after the news of her death broke, however it has now returned to its original price, according to British newspaper The Telegraph.

Angry fans took to Twitter to express their outrage, describing the price hike as "greedy" and a "disgrace".

Sony and Apple declined to comment to the newspaper.



hard to say they are helping the artist there.
04:19pm 14/02/12 Permalink
thermite
Brisbane, Queensland
8955 posts
Apprantally America is the only Country that uses 35mm or something and it takes time/money to transfer originals to tape thats compatible overseas.


No that's not it at all. The point is that nobody (less than 1000 cinemas in the world) uses digital media / tapes in cinemas. So their system is to make expensive 35mm prints, and then once they're played out in America, they send them to the UK and Australia, by which time they're already covered in the dust and scratches everyone is familiar with, then once we're done with them they go to asia or africa, etc...
It's a really pov system, and obviously for some stuff, like Star Wars, the production company didn't accept using this distribution system and made enough prints to do a worldwide release.

If they switched to digital the distribution would be cheaper and easier.
04:20pm 14/02/12 Permalink
gamer
2270 posts
No that's not it at all. The point is that nobody (less than 1000 cinemas in the world) uses digital media / tapes in cinemas. So their system is to make expensive 35mm prints, and then once they're played out in America, they send them to the UK and Australia, by which time they're already covered in the dust and scratches everyone is familiar with, then once we're done with them they go to asia or africa, etc...


WOW That just does my f*****g head in....

But thinking about it and how there are different 'PAL' regions it makes complete sence now. F*** that pisses me off.

I remember seeing movies in the late 90s ... opening day (so it hadn't been shown before) and every now and then a frame would have a bit of dust or a line (human hair etc) on it... what you've said here explains that!

Grrr!!! Stupid moron film companies, what do they expect when they arn't digital yet...
04:46pm 14/02/12 Permalink
Sc00bs
Brisbane, Queensland
8647 posts
they expect us to wait months and pay top dollar for it.....
04:48pm 14/02/12 Permalink
ravn0s
Brisbane, Queensland
14517 posts
what's their excuse for delayed tv shows?
05:00pm 14/02/12 Permalink
thermite
Brisbane, Queensland
8956 posts
Usually TV shows go into production only once they have a broadcast deal, usually with a cable TV channel (who partially fund the production). The thinking is that it's not worth making a TV show if it is unknown whether it will be sold. But sometimes part of making that broadcast deal is that the TV channel gets exclusive rights to it for some time, before the show can be resold to free-to-air (syndication), or to DVD. Otherwise there would be no incentive for customers to purchase cable TV subscriptions.
Often they can sell them to channels in other countries immediately, but for whatever reason that isn't a priority, probably because they don't need those secondary deals to keep making the show. And even then, those secondary overseas channels aren't investing in the show in the same way the original cable TV channel was, so they don't give the show much respect and only find it a time slot when it suits them, and that could mean several months into the future.

05:21pm 14/02/12 Permalink
trog
AGN Admin
Brisbane, Queensland
35689 posts
Someone will come up with a way to prevent IP addresses being seen and that will be the end of the road for these Media Empires.
Well, no - you can't connect to a remote host and hide your IP address or anything. This means that all p2p networks are subsequently flawed, in the sense that you can just connect to a network, sit on it for a bit, and collect IP addresses of peers that are swapping copyrighted materials.

What people have done to work around this is to make it so that the peers you're downloading from are not, technically the person that is sending you the file. For example, you have three peers - A, B, and Z. Z wants to download a file from A, but wants to be hidden from A, so the requests go to B. B takes the information from A and forwards it on to Z.

A and Z are completely oblivious to each other, from a network point of view. For anyone to know who is involved in the transfer, they need to be in control of B. This model is extrapolated out over a number of different peers, so you end up having a bunch of things between A and Z - A, B, C, D, E, etc - and the traffic is just handed from one to another until it gets to its destination.

The obvious disadvantage is that you lose a lot of speed with each extra node. This is one of the tradeoffs though of privacy.

This has been implemented a few ways in software; the one I've looked at the most is called MUTE. Here's a great readable explanation of how it works: http://mute-net.sourceforge.net/howPrivacy.shtml (not too technical)

FreeNet is a similar network: https://freenetproject.org/ though it is more about publishing anonymously for people in precarious political positions (alliteration bonus).

I've used both of these very briefly and found them almost unusably slow for anything but if you have unlimited spare time then it might be worth a look. I haven't looked too closely at their network stuff so I am not making any personal guarantees that you'll be completely anonymous when using them, but to the best of my knowledge this is the only way you're going to get any sort of reliable anonymity when doing stuff online involving p2p connections.
06:14pm 14/02/12 Permalink
Eorl
Brisbane, Queensland
5291 posts
I find this more scary. Apparently Daemon Tools is projecting back all names of images that you mount. Pretty much a invasion of privacy, and apparently even turning the feature "off" doesn't actually stop it. Source.
07:13pm 14/02/12 Permalink
DM
Gold Coast, Queensland
4193 posts
I stopped using Daemon Tools yonks ago when it stopped reading isos for some reason. Magic Disk all the way!
07:15pm 14/02/12 Permalink
Nerfy
Brisbane, Queensland
5363 posts
That's interesting Eorl, I used to mount a lot of unix iso's which I torrented, but less so these days, mostly due to steam-ix. Still good for future reference.

Trog, you didn't type that all from your holiday phone did you? >_>
08:17pm 14/02/12 Permalink
infi
Brisbane, Queensland
18401 posts
cheggit shut down the other day. i was devastated.
08:53pm 14/02/12 Permalink
FaceMan
Brisbane, Queensland
8314 posts
you can't connect to a remote host and hide your IP address or anything.


Its impossible ?

Im sure there are some working on a way around it.
09:40pm 14/02/12 Permalink
trog
AGN Admin
Brisbane, Queensland
35693 posts
Its impossible ?
Yes (...to the best of my knowledge). When you connect to some network service to transfer data via most protocols, the other end knows who you are. There are some little exceptions to this (spoofing) but for the purposes of p2p file transfer - or any other service where you are trying to send or receive specific information that you want, then whoever you are connected to will know about it.
Im sure there are some working on a way around it.
There are, but it is all the sorts of things I mentioned above - misdirection via third parties. VPNs, proxies, and intermediary peers.
10:17pm 14/02/12 Permalink
no you hang up
Brisbane, Queensland
1930 posts
cheggit shut down the other day. i was devastated.

i fudged my ratio there ages ago. still sad to see it go but. end of a fap era.
10:30pm 14/02/12 Permalink
natslovR
Sydney, New South Wales
7631 posts
If you want to torrent anonymously torrent over TOR... Apparently.
10:38pm 14/02/12 Permalink
trog
AGN Admin
Brisbane, Queensland
35695 posts
If you want to torrent anonymously torrent over TOR... Apparently.
don't! because it will be slow and that's not what TOR is for - people are trying to use TOR for serious business (like staying alive in places run by a*******).

Also, TOR does not guarantee anonymity when doing p2p with BitTorrent - see this article on the official TOR blog for the technical infoz.

In short - trog says don't use TOR for BitTorrent, because it is no guarantee that you're safe and it wastes the bandwidth of the TOR network which is otherwise being put to good purpose by people who really need it to literally not get killed by their crappy government or their retarded religious countrymen.
10:51pm 14/02/12 Permalink
Eorl
Brisbane, Queensland
5295 posts
TOR is supposed to be used for other seedy stuff, and also for the less fortunate areas that are governed by d****.
11:01pm 14/02/12 Permalink
Jim
UK
12638 posts
Its impossible ?

Im sure there are some working on a way around it.


with tcp, yes it's impossible
in order to establish a connection and begin reading/writing to it, both ends must acknowledge/handshake, and continually acknowledge receipt of packets for reliability - it was designed for reliable transfer of data over latent networks like the internet

you can proxy the connection through other hosts, but the other host then knows about you because you had to establish a connection with it, and it then went on to establish the connection with the other end for you - so this doesn't remove the ability to track it - but it probably does typically make it harder and more involved and would often mean even more negotiation time is required by the entity chasing you because they now have to contact the host/s you proxy through and demand logs/evidence from each them

the bigger and more popular an organisation that offers these type of proxy services becomes though, the more vulnerable they will probably become to having legal requirements and disclosure imposed on them, so will eventually have to either stop providing the service out of sheer hassle, or comply with law and keep logs that they hand over when asked
11:23pm 14/02/12 Permalink
natslovR
Sydney, New South Wales
7632 posts
In short - trog says don't use TOR for BitTorrent, because it is no guarantee that you're safe and it wastes the bandwidth of the TOR network which is otherwise being put to good purpose by people who really need it to literally not get killed by their crappy government or their retarded religious countrymen.


That's a great point.

You know what?

Back in the early 90s some people made the great point that images on the internet were overloading shared bandwidth when text was sufficient. And they were right. Images took too long to download, and lynx was super fast and all you needed. The people that were wrong went on and formed Netscape.

A few years later some people made the great point that since IRC servers were a free public service sending text messages between people it shouldn't be abused by others to avoid paying for international phone calls by sending voice over those services and overloading them. And they were right. The people that were wrong went on and formed Skype.

And some people had the great point that a client sharing tool that lets gumbie users easily index and share their pc's music with other users is a mistake because it will be considered a violation of copyright law and would be targetted by the Music industry. And they were right. The people that were wrong went on and formed Napster.

And some people had the great point that our personal information should be kept private, and that exposing it to one company is a risk and no one in their right mind would upload their real identity to some website because that's too easily open to abuse. And they were right. The people that were wrong went on and formed Facebook.

And just last year some people made the great point that you couldn't host other people's purchased music and stream it back to them on any device because that's a copyright violation. And they were right. The people that were wrong are Google, Amazon and Apple.

There's been many more examples in just the 20 years I've been on the internet of what's clearly the right thing and so no one should do it, being smashed by someone coming along and doing the exact wrong thing, making millions of dollars and in many cases, in a short amount of time, it being considered the norm - and looking back on it and saying 'why didn't I do that?'

Oh I know, because I knew it was wrong. I get to be morally superior and not a millionaire.

Maybe in ten years time pumping huge amounts of torrent traffic through TOR will be seen to have made it safer to use as organisations setting up TOR nodes specifically to monitor and capture information that other people want to keep secret/anonymous wouldn't find it worth while.
03:29pm 15/02/12 Permalink
trog
AGN Admin
Brisbane, Queensland
35700 posts
I am not sure what your point is?
05:49pm 15/02/12 Permalink
kos
Germany
1946 posts
Retarded nonsensical rant of the week goes to nats.

But he'll have the last laugh when he's made millions of dollars from the enterprising business of routing torrent traffic through Tor... ?
07:38pm 15/02/12 Permalink
Captain Lateral
Brisbane, Queensland
4396 posts
natslovR right you know. its unrealistic to expect people with no accountability to not abuse the Tor system for personal gain.

If Tor can't handle torrents then its not built well enough, and should be updated to promote higher bandwidth sharing, (as in, if you give your tor node a larger bandwidth, then your connections to the tor peer pool have a higher priority, similar to how bit-torrent works) the trick is to do this while maintaining your anonymity.
10:56pm 15/02/12 Permalink
trog
AGN Admin
Brisbane, Queensland
35703 posts
its unrealistic to expect people with no accountability to not abuse the Tor system for personal gain.
There is no personal gain. As per my link above, it is not anonymous, and it is slower. Why would you bother?
If Tor can't handle torrents then its not built well enough
I can't fill an Olympic size swimming pool in ten minutes from a garden hose. It's not built well enough!

That is not what Tor is for. If you want to do anonymous file sharing, use one of the two services I linked above that are specifically designed for it!

edit; I am not trying to be a d*** by telling you what to do - I'm just trying to make sure people know the difference between really anonymous p2p file transfer, and stuff that isn't
11:05pm 15/02/12 Permalink
Jim
UK
12639 posts
lol, I love how recommending a course of action that considers other people, is seen to be driven by the goal of being 'morally superior'

what a d***
01:27am 16/02/12 Permalink
Dazhel
Gold Coast, Queensland
4433 posts
What's to stop someone from developing a client that integrates the process of sharing encrypted archives with obfuscated file names and via the regular bittorrent protocol and then distribute the encryption keys and file name search functionality via Tor?
01:47am 16/02/12 Permalink
kos
Germany
1949 posts
Couldn't the same companies that are tracking users of current torrents simply use the hypothetical Tor service to just decrypt which torrents are which and still easily track who is downloading what content?
02:01am 16/02/12 Permalink
trog
AGN Admin
Brisbane, Queensland
35711 posts
What's to stop someone from developing a client that integrates the process of sharing encrypted archives with obfuscated file names and via the regular bittorrent protocol and then distribute the encryption keys and file name search functionality via Tor?
At the end of the day, the "security" in that model still relies too much on obscurity - a malicious user (i.e., a media company representative) can get a hold of all that stuff and then just collect all the IP addresses that it downloads chunks from.

For true anonymity you really need that "untraceable" intermediary step offered by MUTE etc. Unfortunately that relies on the assumption that people running MUTE (and Tor exit nodes, for that matter) are not liable for content that passes through it. I suspect if MUTE became widespread, you would quickly see laws passed that made people liable for the content that passes through their nodes, which would shut it down quite effectively.

Hopefully free speech is a little more important though - I suspect it would be hard to get those laws passed in the US, for example, where free speech and anonymous speech are protected by the constitution. So that's some good news.
12:56pm 16/02/12 Permalink
paveway
Brisbane, Queensland
16304 posts
01:57pm 16/02/12 Permalink
system
Internet
--
01:57pm 16/02/12 Permalink
AusGamers Forums
Show: per page
1
This thread is archived and cannot be replied to.