4 ms·

If I wanted to save an important repo, I would run a command like this: ssh user@rsync.net "git clone --mirror https://github.com/widevindump/Netlix-4K-Scrip

by rsync 5y ago

If I wanted to save an important repo, I would run a command like this: ssh user@rsync.net "git clone --mirror https://github.com/widevindump/Netlix-4K-Script github/2021-12-27-widevindump_Netlix-4K-Script" ... which works because the 'git' binary is maintained on rsync.net and can be executed over ssh[1]. [1] https://www.rsync.net/resources/howto/git.html https://www.rsync.net/resources/howto/git.html

mindslight 5y ago
I'd delete this comment if I were you. The copyright cartels have ended lives for less. edit: I tried to keep it simple so that a null-edit would suffice to scrub the comment in question. But since I have to explain - the author runs the service for which they're providing instructions. This creates a straightforward argument that they intend their service to be used for storing forbidden files. Such "contributory infringement" is exactly how the copyright cartels have gone after youtube-dl, Popcorn Time, and many other general tools.
- loeg 5y ago
  ... what?
- deleted 5y ago
  [deleted]
- rsync 5y ago
  Oh, dear god please, please sue us. The exposure, the name recognition, the PR coup that this would be ... would dwarf every effort we have ever made in over 20 years of trying to publicize our company. Seriously: If you work for any of these "aggrieved" content providers and if you really want me to buy the Aspen house ten years early, dear god please sue us.
  - mindslight 5y ago
    And after years of litigation, when your well-paid counsel tells you that you're going to lose and the practical path forward is to sign a settlement agreeing to scan users' files for forbidden ones? IANAA but this does seem to be the basic path that every cloud service gets sucked into. I wish I were wrong, but I've seen no indication that courts respect digital privacy the way that physical boundaries have come to be respected (eg the US's 4th Amendment) - if you have the ability to do something about possibly forbidden communications, then you will be forced to. Digital privacy rights feel at least a few decades off, and that's assuming the centralizers don't continue to successfully embrace-extend-extinguish.
- vmception 5y ago
  I mirrored it and am not affiliated, so we can now flag their comment for their protection

by rsync 5y ago

mindslight 5y ago

I'd delete this comment if I were you. The copyright cartels have ended lives for less. edit: I tried to keep it simple so that a null-edit would suffice to scrub the comment in question. But since I have to explain - the author runs the service for which they're providing instructions. This creates a straightforward argument that they intend their service to be used for storing forbidden files. Such "contributory infringement" is exactly how the copyright cartels have gone after youtube-dl, Popcorn Time, and many other general tools.

loeg 5y ago
... what?
deleted 5y ago
[deleted]
rsync 5y ago
Oh, dear god please, please sue us. The exposure, the name recognition, the PR coup that this would be ... would dwarf every effort we have ever made in over 20 years of trying to publicize our company. Seriously: If you work for any of these "aggrieved" content providers and if you really want me to buy the Aspen house ten years early, dear god please sue us.
- mindslight 5y ago
  And after years of litigation, when your well-paid counsel tells you that you're going to lose and the practical path forward is to sign a settlement agreeing to scan users' files for forbidden ones? IANAA but this does seem to be the basic path that every cloud service gets sucked into. I wish I were wrong, but I've seen no indication that courts respect digital privacy the way that physical boundaries have come to be respected (eg the US's 4th Amendment) - if you have the ability to do something about possibly forbidden communications, then you will be forced to. Digital privacy rights feel at least a few decades off, and that's assuming the centralizers don't continue to successfully embrace-extend-extinguish.
vmception 5y ago
I mirrored it and am not affiliated, so we can now flag their comment for their protection