8 ms·

It was one thing when it was the RIAA that was coming for our repositories. Now that it is Google, I'm extremely sad and disappointed. I think the time has com

• Scoundreller 6y ago
  I think space is becoming a reasonable frontier. Until then, something IPFS based.
  • dannyw 6y ago
    This is maybe one of the few use cases where a cryptocurrency can help; in a similar vein to the effectiveness of BitTorrent. Specifically, Filecoin (built by the IPFS folks) could be used as a datastore for git. You can send DMCAs to pseudonymous Filecoin operators all you want; but the content will still be up if one operator keeps hosting it. Hopefully it will also encourage all commits and repositories to be PGP signed (and not through a centralized FVEY platform), strengthening security, authenticity, and trust.
    • Scoundreller 6y ago
      Space-based crypto-funded storage for guaranteeing that one operator. The best part about non-GEO satellites is that, although you can't see them 24/7 from one location, that also makes it incredibly difficult to jam their uplinks continuously.
    • StavrosK 6y ago
      Filecoin isn't a datastore, it's a coin. IPFS is the datastore. However, I'd probably use something that works better, maybe Dat or Zeronet.
• Shared404 6y ago
  Sourcehut may be a good option as well. Drew seems like the type to fight illegitimate DMCA's. Edit: I'm curious, why the downvotes? I am legitimately trying to be helpful. I recognize if you have personal differences with ddevault, but he puts his code where his mouth is. If I'm misunderstanding said downvotes, please enlighten me. Edit 2: Many thanks to those who have responded. It appears I misunderstood about this specific instance, where the DMCA does have some legitimacy.
  • deleted 6y ago
    [deleted]
    • young_unixer 6y ago
      Lawful evil.
  • judge2020 6y ago
    Didn't downvote, but I think you overestimate anyone if you think they'll go to court for you against an org as big as the RIAA or Google (unless perhaps if it's the EFF).
    • Shared404 6y ago
      My (flawed?) understanding of DMCA is that the project whom a DMCA is filed against can counter-file if they believe the DMCA is illegitimate, after which the burden of going to court is between the group that filed the DMCA and the group they targeted. Someone else in this thread linked this, which seems like a useful resource as well: https://sourcehut.org/blog/2020-10-29-how-mailing-lists-prevent-censorship/ https://sourcehut.org/blog/2020-10-29-how-mailing-lists-prev... Edit: It was biryani_chicken who linked the resource above. Also, I misunderstood about the legitimacy of this specific claim, my brain had yet to shift gear from the youtube-dl shenanigans. Thanks for the response!
      • zinekeller 6y ago
        The problem with both RIAA and Google takedown demands is never about the DMCA takedown in relation to copyright infringement, its the circumvention (it seems that EFF understand this very well, but most online commentors didn't get this, which was exarcabated by GitHub using the DMCA takedown repo). Now, no one knows if GitHub were also directly targeted by legal threats as an acessory to "enable" the distribution of circumvention tools, which RIAA and Google is arguing. Also, what RIAA is trying to remove is the code that allows to get the music video files from YouTube, which is served differently to normal videos (not just the test units in question). This was conspicuously absent from all discussions I've read.
• phs318u 6y ago
  You just gave me some serious deja-vu. Who remembers when TPB were going to buy Sealand in order to host trackers out of the reach of authorities?
  • diggan 6y ago
    Turns out buying Sealand in order to continue to run ThePirateBay was over-engineering, as ThePirateBay is still alive and running today, albeit in a slightly different form than before.
    • pbhjpbhj 6y ago
      For now? It seems like a lot of torrent info sites have been closed down (just from reading https://torrentfreak.com/ https://torrentfreak.com/, maybe more pop up than get taken down?).
      • diggan 6y ago
        Don't know. Swedish police (et al) have been trying forever to shut it down, and while they have momentarily succeeded, it always seems to come back up. I'm no longer familiar with the architecture of TPB, but they seem to be running things in a much more decentralized fashion nowadays, where bunch of independent sites (at least independent domains) are running a frontend with the same database content. Unsure how that works behind the scenes. But rest assure, you can always find a domain which is not blocked and that is mirroring the content of the proper TPB. In my case, thepiratebay.org is blocked by my ISP, but thepiratebay.party is just a few hours behind (confirmed via VPN) Compare the following pages for example (if thepiratebay.org works for you) - https://thepiratebay.org/search.php?q=user:dauphong https://thepiratebay.org/search.php?q=user:dauphong - https://thepiratebay.party/user/dauphong/ https://thepiratebay.party/user/dauphong/
  • dylan604 6y ago
    Isn't Sealand just a couple of underwater charges planted by some clandestine operatives away from not existing?
• fabianhjr 6y ago
  Just use some decentralized forge like git-ssb.
• Cthulhu_ 6y ago
  Switzerland won't stay neutral and definitely isn't some untouchable fantasy land; it has to be stored outside the boundaries of individual countries, ergo, decentralized solutions like some other commenters mentioned. Git is great for that. I wonder if, in addition to IFPS and the like that were mentioned, if there is a tracker or index of git remotes out there - just a big list of servers hosting git, ranging from the big ones like github to someone's raspberry pi hooked up to the internet to idk, usb sticks in a geocache.
  • justinclift 6y ago
    Sounds like someone (not me) needs to register "thegitbay.org" or similar. And maybe a .onion variant too. ;)
    • LockAndLol 6y ago
      I2P Gitlab how to: https://geti2p.net/en/docs/applications/gitlab https://geti2p.net/en/docs/applications/gitlab Existing server: http://git.idk.i2p/zlatinb/muwire http://git.idk.i2p/zlatinb/muwire Can't find the clearnet address
    • NetOpWibby 6y ago
      Throw in a Handshake domain and bases should be converted from the URL angle.
• grishka 6y ago
  Underwater in the middle of the ocean, using starlink for connectivity.
  • intricatedetail 6y ago
    RIAA would have tried to extract even more money from artists to buy state of the art weaponised submarines and an army of seamen.
    • grishka 6y ago
      It's gonna be a full-fledged pirate ship with big-ass cannons then.
      • NetOpWibby 6y ago
        Make it so
      • edoceo 6y ago
        On a ship they are called guns. Big-ass Guns
        • dylan604 6y ago
          Big-ass Guns are not effective against missiles launched at you from great heights and/or distances.
          • parliament32 6y ago
            I'd love to see the day we're launching missiles at foreign ships over copyright violations.
  • ocdtrekkie 6y ago
    Since Starlink is operated by a US company, they'd be able to shut you down.
• saddlerustle 6y ago
  Switzerland, along most western countries due to ratifying the relevant WIPO treaties, has copyright laws broadly similar to the DMCA: https://www.admin.ch/opc/en/classified-compilation/19920251/index.html#id-ni10 https://www.admin.ch/opc/en/classified-compilation/19920251/...
  • daniellarusso 6y ago
    What about Trinidad and Tobago? I remember there was an international ruling where the US was in a trade violation, and I thought the country was permitted to waive IP enforcement until they were compensated. I am having trouble finding the reference.
    • csdreamer7 6y ago
      Not sure about Trinidad and Tobago. Antigua was the one given the right to violate US copyrights to pressure the US to abandon it's illegal gambling restrictions. It was given that right by the WTO. https://www.nytimes.com/2007/12/21/business/worldbusiness/21iht-wto.html https://www.nytimes.com/2007/12/21/business/worldbusiness/21... Keep in mind, there is a big difference between being allowed to violate US copyrights and waiving IP enforcement.
• sbarre 6y ago
  I hate to break it to you but Google hasn't been the company you seem to think they still are for a very long time.
  • squarefoot 6y ago
    To me it was the day they removed the discussion filter functionality from their search engine. It was a purely advertising driven move: from now on people searching for a keyword couldn't anymore filter for other people talking about that thing but rather they would be inundated by shops selling that thing or shills promoting it. That plot however was probably much older, since the obvious wonderful alternative, Dejanews, wasn't available anymore for having been already bought by Google many years before.
    • bosswipe 6y ago
      I've found that a lot of people are adding "reddit" to their searches as a poor-man's discussion filter. It sort of works but it's also sad in how it's another reflection of how centralized and concentrated the web has become.
      • thebean11 6y ago
        That's certainly what I'm doing, and I'm hoping that there will be some alternative by the time reddit becomes useless (it seems to be moving in that direction, although not too quickly for the smaller niche subreddits).
      • argiopetech 6y ago
        I've also had good success with "forum".
    • efreak 6y ago
      `-cart -checkout -"check out" -clearance -discount -sales -PayPal -shipping` is what I use on occasion to remove e-commerce sites from the results.
• draw_down 6y ago
  Anybody that wants to sell streaming services that use copyright holders’ content will ultimately do this.
• xhkkffbf 6y ago
  It was going to happen. When Google was making money off of piracy by just running a search engine, it was happy to encourage it and celebrate the philosophy. Now that they're cashing big checks from advertisers and content companies, well, they're just following the money.
• B-Con 6y ago
  Considering that it's a DRM module, it's not a surprise. I believe anyone with a DRM module that does not protect it is at risk of losing their license with the content owners. That basically why DRM exists to begin with. Blaming the content service is easy since they're user-facing, but it's shallow. Content-related restrictions are, in my experience, almost always dictated by the content owner. Region locks, availability windows, use of DRM, DMCAs for anti-DRM, etc, are all at the requirement of the content owners. I don't think these modern Internet-based service providers care about that stuff much, they have little incentive to. It's driven by contracts. Incidentally, this is always the reason behind region locks. Service X or content Y isn't available in your country? Don't blame the streaming service, blame the content owner.