Live data from Hacker News

TV piracy groups formally adopt h264

scenerules.irc.gs

71–80 of 125 posts

Re: TV piracy groups formally adopt h264

#72
post #48

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> last I checked, RAR doesn't offer a compelling advantage in performance, compression, or error correction May be time to check again: http://www.quickpar.org.uk/AboutPAR2.htm

RAR != PAR. You could apply PAR2s to any format, even (gasp) a single file.

We do. Our tools use it to help customers in India upload multi gigabyte movies to our storage in the US.

But nobody uses RAR without PAR2, and I was responding to the bewilderment at those using RAR.

Re: TV piracy groups formally adopt h264

#73
post #19

Personally, I find it fascinating that this band of merry pirates is so organized, so rules-based. Out of a purely anarchic environment, they've managed to accept this kind of self-discipline. If only web-standards committees had that sort of power...

The (movie/audio/warez/demo) "scene" is not anarchic at all but rather a very well organised distributed processing machine. You probably know these guys organise into "groups" but there is lots of other stuff you likely do not know. I will describe below aspects of the warez scene, as it was some 10 years ago. I believe most observations continue to hold today and are probably mirrored in the movie-release scene. So:

"The scene" is made up of groups and each group is made up of specialists: suppliers provide material for release, crackers (or rippers, depending on context) remove copy protection and sometimes optional "filler" material, coders write useful helper software for the group and couriers distribute releases around the internet. Not all groups fill every role and some may have other roles I did not describe here (hackers, carders, hardware suppliers to name a few). There are sometimes partnerships between groups with different specialities; usually this occurs when there is an overlap in membership. For example: a release group may have close links with a particular courier group and those guys handle all their releases.

The distribution process is actually quite interesting. Each successful release group aims to have a small list of affiliations with well known and prestigious underground boards/ftp-sites. The quality and prestige of a board depends on the speed of its connection, its capacity, its group affiliations, the standing of its admins in the community and the speed with which new releases are uploaded to it. Each well regarded site is allowed only one particular kind of affiliation: a games group affil, an apps group affil, a courier affil, an ISO affil -- you get the idea. The important thing is that there is only one of each. Affiliations carry prestige for a site and being affiliated with the best sites raises a group's prestige, so there is often heated competition between sites and groups for affils. This is the case at least in the so called "zero second" scene where releases are "traded" (i.e. re-uploaded) by couriers within seconds of being first uploaded. Once a release has been traded among all zero-second sites, they slowly filter down to lesser and lesser sites until eventually making their way to the Internet at large.

So why would you go this all this trouble? The reasons are myriad but usually it comes down to prestige: for example, among couriers there is a longstanding weekly and monthly competition between groups that prove their chops by trying to dominate each other. Similar competitions exist among release groups. There is huge pressure to be the first to release a highly anticipated game or well known application. Additionally, there are strict rules about how to release something -- what to keep, what can (and should) be omitted, how to package everything up, the inclusion of .nfo and .diz files and so on. Failure to comply with these strict standards renders a release invalid and causes it to be "nuked" (deleted) among the top sites. This process amounts to a public shaming of the group responsible and makes it possible for competing groups to snatch the credit by doing a "proper" release.

I could go on and on but I think that's enough for now. Hopefully I've convinced you that pirates aren't an anarchic bunch ;)

Re: TV piracy groups formally adopt h264

#74
post #39
post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Internal scene transfer was (and still is, afaik) done using FTP servers, often very primitive ones because they had to evade detection on hacked servers. When you're racing a large game or movie from one server to another, the last thing you want is for a random disconnect to ruin it 90% of the way through, or even worse, to finish it and find that the CRCs don't match because of random corruption. It also means tha…

FXP http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File_eXchange_Protocol

Pfft. Pro couriers don't even bother with FXP. A shell account on a fast European box and mget/mput are the weapons of choice.

Re: TV piracy groups formally adopt h264

#75
post #62

The main question is, with all this technical skill, are they going to release any films of their own?

Very little about film making has to do with x264 encoders and torrents. Anyone can do those things... Louis CK figured it out, anyway.

My point was that there is a large community that has gathered around the idea of sharing films. Large enough to make them want to issue standards. All I'm saying is with that size of community dedicated to sharing film, they should be producing more films. Especially if they dislike the current paradigm enough to remove themselves from its market.

Re: TV piracy groups formally adopt h264

#76
post #31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That may have been true at one point, but it is a totally obsolete practice due to Bittorrent.

It's still true to this day. Real scene is still done with FXP and then leeched down the food chain to BT/NGz/p2p/etc... Releases are out for hours before they even make it to open user levels. Get it where it's hot, yo.

>hours

This is rarely true of most scene releases these days. They will hit private bittorrent trackers often within seconds of preing, and public ones not long after that.

Re: TV piracy groups formally adopt h264

#78
post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Respectfully I think I am right: "I don't know how hard the tv groups are pushing for early release" Why do you think they are called racers? "Early release" as you call it is the reason for the season... "He would have to do everything on his own -- the capping, the encoding, the packaging." This does not make any sense to me. Who would have to X?

> Why do you think they are called racers? They're not. Cappers and racers are different people. It used to be that racers weren't even affiliated with the release group, just people moving stuff between sites for upload credit. > Who would have to X? The same person would have to do all the work involved in making a release. Usually, there's a division of labour: different person provides the source, someone else en…

[deleted]

Re: TV piracy groups formally adopt h264

#79
post #40
post #31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That may have been true at one point, but it is a totally obsolete practice due to Bittorrent.

What are you talking about? Do you think the cappers are seeding the torrents themselves? A lot things happen before you start leeching from tpb...

Bittorrent isn't used just on public sites; you can use the same technology to share between a very select group.

Re: TV piracy groups formally adopt h264

#80
post #39

Earlier quoted context omitted.

FXP http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File_eXchange_Protocol

Pfft. Pro couriers don't even bother with FXP. A shell account on a fast European box and mget/mput are the weapons of choice.

First of all no "pro courier" is going to be on HN bragging about his "weapons of choice." Second of all FXP was the protocol of choice back in the day(the time period the parent post was referring to). Thirdly, I remember when telix and minicom where "the weapons of choice."
Post reply on HN