4 ms·
I generally despise hosting services, with their pages crammed full of ads, obnoxious waiting times, and constant attempts to get you to pay them that all just
by sjs 15y ago
I generally despise hosting services, with their pages crammed full of ads, obnoxious waiting times, and constant attempts to get you to pay them that all just scream "we hate every last damn one of you so much that we're going to make it as annoying as possible for you to get this file".
Despite all that it's nice to see someone stand up to the content czars.
- peterwwillis 15y agoThey make it that annoying so you'll pay for a premium account that removes all the annoying crap (and improves speed, removes download caps). And anyway, they provide a valuable service: illegal file sharing using only Google and HTTP. I've long since abandoned networks like gnutella, edonkey, bittorrent, etc in favor of a good blog search engine and file-downloading sites. Similarly there's hundreds of streaming video sites to watch TV series on without the need to download. I can ignore an ad here or there for the convenience of pirating media from any web browser in the world.
- JonnieCache 15y agoprotip: VLC can play incomplete files.
- Farow 15y agoAs does any decent media player.
- wmf 15y agoI can understand non-commercial piracy, but these download sites are evil parasites. It's a clever business model, though.
- peterwwillis 15y agoBandwidth costs money. Hosting costs money. They can't just let hundreds of thousands of people download gigabytes at a time at >5Mbps for free. Peer to peer networks don't have huge resource drains on anything but the bandwidth of ISPs.
- wmf 15y agoI'm not suggesting that they should operate for free; I'm suggesting that they should not operate at all. They're basically monetizing piracy.
- fleitz 15y agoAre you talking about watching a movie from a file sharing sites or watching a movie on blueray? It seems a little unclear from the post.