111–120 of 223 posts
Dislike this kind of story appearing in HN. We're all well educated people with high earning potential who should be capable of buying movies, not using our talent to rip them off. I'd hate to see HN develop a bad reputation because of stuff like this.
I'd pay if they Try being in not-the-USA and paying for content. Add "Linux" in there and you can forget about it.
I'm deeply concerned about popularizing torrent streaming. A few leechers breaking "rarest-first" might not cause much harm. But if most leechers become streamers, torrents will lose their efficiency in distributing less-popular content. Transmission implemented a "streaming" feature once, that didn't actually stream. It just stopped fetching pieces "with the same rarity" randomly. They still got too much heat for ad…
I don't get this. It is definitely useful.
I'm not saying don't upload: the client still seeds. It just downloads the contents in order.
This looks like a way to break BitTorrent, as other posters have outlined. Streaming in general (apart from via a local server) frustrates me. The entire idea is simply a way of relinquishing control to an external body. Hard drives are not that expensive, and patience is a virtue. I'm very happy that youtube-dl exists, for example, because otherwise when Google disappears I'll lose a lot of useful material I have ac…
Streaming doesn't break bittorrent that easily. It's not optimal for the health of a torrent cloud, but practice has shown that it's not a major issue. Plenty of torrent streaming apps, most notably Popcorn Time ( http://popcorntime.sh and source code at https://github.com/popcorn-official/popcorn-desktop ) has existed for a long time now.
This doesn't work for me, because http://thepiratebay.se is hardcoded in the code and that mirror is blocked in my location. I filed an issue. https://github.com/weslleyaraujo/pirateflix/issues/3
Can't you fix that with an entry in your /etc/hosts file ?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Distribution of media is not as clearcut and issue as you make it seem. Just a couple complicating factors: there are lots of places where popular media is impossible to access legally due to licensing, and DRM often prevents media shifting, which many believe should be a right if you bought a piece of media. Also, we are not all "well educated people with high earning potential". Maybe a large majority of us are, bu…
If media is popular, everyone is entitled to it? Piracy will be rampant even if everyone is able to legally download all media. PS - I am one of those who are not "well educated with high earning potential". Even as a "poor" person, I am unable to morally justify my selfish actions (piracy)...
This is not a simple question. Access to media is access to culture. And we can't expect people without access to a common culture to participate in our society as equals. That's why we have libraries, museums, arts in public areas; we know that we need to share at least part of our common heritage, or it will stop being our common heritage.
Remember, intelectual property is meant to make creating art profitable enough that we don't stop doing it. It is supposed to protect the consumers, not the creators. Ideas that are not consumed are not a societal good, and we don't make laws to protect them. Of course there should be balance between protections for creators and consumers. If someone thinks the current legislation favours content creators more than it should on this alance, then for that person piracy is probably not morally wrong.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Even as a "poor" person, I am unable to morally justify my selfish actions (piracy)... That's fine, we have enough seeders.
Are you saying, if something is popular enough it no longer needs moral justification?
After all, is morality not a popular convention?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I'd pay if they Try being in not-the-USA and paying for content. Add "Linux" in there and you can forget about it.
So you're saying its up to content makers to support every niche OS, otherwise niche OS users are entitled to steal their work?
This looks like a way to break BitTorrent, as other posters have outlined. Streaming in general (apart from via a local server) frustrates me. The entire idea is simply a way of relinquishing control to an external body. Hard drives are not that expensive, and patience is a virtue. I'm very happy that youtube-dl exists, for example, because otherwise when Google disappears I'll lose a lot of useful material I have ac…
> because otherwise when Google disappears I'll lose a lot of useful material I have access to at the moment. Could you explain that ? Why would google disappear ?