2 ms·

This is also known as "Hosting" which, I found amusing.

jandrese 7mo ago
Allowing anonymous people to host files on your server is a great way to collect (and distribute!) illegal porn, stolen data, stolen software, police warrants, etc...
- Brian_K_White 7mo ago
  Every useful tool is useful for bad things. Everything with the power to protect the innocent, also has exactly the same power to protect the guilty. The two facets are inseperable. Observing only the negative side, or only the positive side, is a null argument. The fact that a tool can be used for bad is exactly cancelled out by the fact that it can be used for good. Neither is a valid basis for any kind of policy. Except that on balance, it's better for everyone that we have tools and capabilities and knowledge than not. It's better that we have knowledge of say, poisons, than not, even though some people apply the knowledge to do harm. This manifests in at least a couple different dimensions. The simplest one: there are more good or neutral people using knowledge and tools for good things than not. A less direct way: It's better for you to have options to help yourself and others deal with problems and meet needs than not. Even if someone can use a tool against you, you are still better off having a lot of useful tools at your disposal in general than not, including to counter the one going against you, which zeros that out, and then also to deal with everything else, which becomes a net positive. The alternative is to be an animal. Either a wild animal totally at the whims of nature, or worse a voluntarily domesticated animal that knows that tools exist, but has abdicated all responsibility for their own welfare to some farmer claiming to take care of them. And you still have the exact same bad guy problem, only now without any ability to deal with it. Acting like the bad side of a useful thing is the only side, or even the most important side, is simple bad math. Aside from any other unflattering quality that results in fear of any obvious easily identified harm being one's highest priority that outweighs all other considerations.
  - jandrese 7mo ago
    Pro: You arguably make the world a better place by letting people share knowledge more easily. Con: Possible 25+ year jail sentence, multi-trillion dollar fines, might be distributing actually harmful material. This is one area where I'm letting the limited liability corporations take the risk.
- gzread 7mo ago
  And yet, Dropbox exists
overfeed 7mo ago
Hosting without section 230 protections is "Distributing" whatever content you've (un)wittingly downloaded that's deemed illegal.
- bandie91 7mo ago
  we are talking about books. books. illegal. Saint Leibowitz ora pro nobis.
  - overfeed 7mo ago
    > we are talking about books I would love for the authors of in-print books to be paid - even when it's usually not a lot. Buy books - they are cheap, or borrow them from libraries - they buy books. If you need books for not-reading, and at scale, you should still be paying - especially if you can afford to pad Nvidia's fat margins. Even if you're self-interested, I would urge you to pick your crimes carefully, and to remember to commit one crime at a time. If distributing copyright material is your chosen hill - more power to you! Just don't sleep walk into it thinking it's harmless.

Allowing anonymous people to host files on your server is a great way to collect (and distribute!) illegal porn, stolen data, stolen software, police warrants, etc...

Brian_K_White 7mo ago
Every useful tool is useful for bad things. Everything with the power to protect the innocent, also has exactly the same power to protect the guilty. The two facets are inseperable. Observing only the negative side, or only the positive side, is a null argument. The fact that a tool can be used for bad is exactly cancelled out by the fact that it can be used for good. Neither is a valid basis for any kind of policy. Except that on balance, it's better for everyone that we have tools and capabilities and knowledge than not. It's better that we have knowledge of say, poisons, than not, even though some people apply the knowledge to do harm. This manifests in at least a couple different dimensions. The simplest one: there are more good or neutral people using knowledge and tools for good things than not. A less direct way: It's better for you to have options to help yourself and others deal with problems and meet needs than not. Even if someone can use a tool against you, you are still better off having a lot of useful tools at your disposal in general than not, including to counter the one going against you, which zeros that out, and then also to deal with everything else, which becomes a net positive. The alternative is to be an animal. Either a wild animal totally at the whims of nature, or worse a voluntarily domesticated animal that knows that tools exist, but has abdicated all responsibility for their own welfare to some farmer claiming to take care of them. And you still have the exact same bad guy problem, only now without any ability to deal with it. Acting like the bad side of a useful thing is the only side, or even the most important side, is simple bad math. Aside from any other unflattering quality that results in fear of any obvious easily identified harm being one's highest priority that outweighs all other considerations.
- jandrese 7mo ago
  Pro: You arguably make the world a better place by letting people share knowledge more easily. Con: Possible 25+ year jail sentence, multi-trillion dollar fines, might be distributing actually harmful material. This is one area where I'm letting the limited liability corporations take the risk.
gzread 7mo ago
And yet, Dropbox exists

overfeed 7mo ago

Hosting without section 230 protections is "Distributing" whatever content you've (un)wittingly downloaded that's deemed illegal.

bandie91 7mo ago
we are talking about books. books. illegal. Saint Leibowitz ora pro nobis.
- overfeed 7mo ago
  > we are talking about books I would love for the authors of in-print books to be paid - even when it's usually not a lot. Buy books - they are cheap, or borrow them from libraries - they buy books. If you need books for not-reading, and at scale, you should still be paying - especially if you can afford to pad Nvidia's fat margins. Even if you're self-interested, I would urge you to pick your crimes carefully, and to remember to commit one crime at a time. If distributing copyright material is your chosen hill - more power to you! Just don't sleep walk into it thinking it's harmless.