3 ms·
There could be a loose collective here that decides to defend against these sorts of things collectively, whilst still allowing independent operation. Heck, th
by rocqua 9y ago
There could be a loose collective here that decides to defend against these sorts of things collectively, whilst still allowing independent operation.
Heck, that isn't very different from the concept of insurance.
- ben_w 9y agoI was thinking about insurance as I wrote my previous comment. All it takes is one that doesn’t have it when the risk is a new precedent. Government would just go after them. (And that’s assuming the government doesn’t just pass a new law, which is non-zero risk, but which I will overlook for now because sometimes one bit of a government will do things against the interests of another bit, such as a recent case in the UK where a specialist was recruited for the NHS and kicked out by the Home Office).
- thriftwy 9y agoWhy doesn't "government" go against bittorrent? Oh, I forgot, they can't! Nevermind.
- ben_w 9y agoIf any government cared enough (except perhaps the American one), it could ban the the protocol. They don’t care, and the people who do care are satisfied with the existing options for suing copyright infringers. TOR is much more likely to be regulated than bittorrent, given the whole point of the latter is to remove control from governments.
- thriftwy 9y agoThey used to care pretty strongly. That's a fact. They also didn't do much about it. Also a fact.