Microsoft Censors Pirate Bay Links in Windows Live Messenger • Hacker News Board

Re: Microsoft Censors Pirate Bay Links in Windows Live Messenger

#141

Post by pavel_lishin » Sat, Mar 24, 2012, 9:44 PM UTC

m_for_monkey wrote: post #120

pavel_lishin wrote: post #96

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't disagree, but how would you implement this? Results trump ideals every time.

If this is really a serious problem, then they should send an informative email to every user, say once every week about spamming, phising, passwords, etc. Of course, it should be easy opt out. Moreover, when I last used Windows (XP, 2008), executables could still masquerading as .doc files. This would be easy enough to solve for MS, I think.

> then they should send an informative email to every user, say once every week about spamming, phising, passwords, etc.

Which would be annoying. Users would either block it or ignore it.

> Of course, it should be easy opt out.

If it was easy enough, everyone would, rendering it useless.

Re: Microsoft Censors Pirate Bay Links in Windows Live Messenger

#142

Post by pavel_lishin » Sat, Mar 24, 2012, 9:44 PM UTC

m_for_monkey wrote: post #120

pavel_lishin wrote: post #96

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't disagree, but how would you implement this? Results trump ideals every time.

If this is really a serious problem, then they should send an informative email to every user, say once every week about spamming, phising, passwords, etc. Of course, it should be easy opt out. Moreover, when I last used Windows (XP, 2008), executables could still masquerading as .doc files. This would be easy enough to solve for MS, I think.

> then they should send an informative email to every user, say once every week about spamming, phising, passwords, etc.

Which would be annoying. Users would either block it or ignore it.

> Of course, it should be easy opt out.

If it was easy enough, everyone would, rendering it useless.

Re: Microsoft Censors Pirate Bay Links in Windows Live Messenger

#143

Post by jsilence » Sat, Mar 24, 2012, 9:50 PM UTC

Thank you, Microsoft for promoting endpoint to endpoint encryption.

Re: Microsoft Censors Pirate Bay Links in Windows Live Messenger

#144

Post by temphn » Sat, Mar 24, 2012, 9:54 PM UTC

javert wrote: post #39

jacquesm wrote: post #15

We'll be seeing a lot more of this in the next couple of years. The RIAA and the MPAA will get more and more desperate and will call in more favors with industry buddies as they get closer to the recognition that they are losing the war in spite of winning a couple of battles. In the Netherlands 'Brein', one of the rights organizations has done more to promote the pirate bay than the pirate bay ever could have hoped…

I'm disappointed to see the destruction of property rights (intellectual or otherwise) being lauded on HN. The RIAA and MPAA make deals with artists to distribute their music, and you want to interfere and just steal it instead. It's dishonest, it's juvenile, and it's eroding at the basis of society (equality under the law, property rights, basic respect and goodwill towards others, etc.).

The products of the RIAA and MPAA generally undermine property rights (viz. "F the Police"). Now that they are the ones being f'd, they turn to the people who respect property rights to protect them. No sale, they deserve to pass into the ash heap of history.

Re: Microsoft Censors Pirate Bay Links in Windows Live Messenger

#145

Post by [deleted] » Sat, Mar 24, 2012, 10:03 PM UTC

hamidpalo wrote: post #124

hamidpalo wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

OTR has nothing to do with encryption. All it says is "pretty please don't save my conversation." The only way for fully encrypted conversations is to use a plugin that encrypts messages themselves, or use an ecrypted P2P IM network.

There seems to be some confusion about the XMPP definition of OTR as defined in XEP-0136 which does not mention encryption ( http://xmpp.org/extensions/xep-0136.html#otr ) and the colloquial use of OTR which apparently means "encrypted IM." AFAIK there is no defined standard or agreed-upon XMPP extension for the latter. I should have clarified this in the original comment.

[deleted]

Re: Microsoft Censors Pirate Bay Links in Windows Live Messenger

#146

Post by eurleif » Sat, Mar 24, 2012, 10:03 PM UTC

hamidpalo wrote: post #124

hamidpalo wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

OTR has nothing to do with encryption. All it says is "pretty please don't save my conversation." The only way for fully encrypted conversations is to use a plugin that encrypts messages themselves, or use an ecrypted P2P IM network.

There seems to be some confusion about the XMPP definition of OTR as defined in XEP-0136 which does not mention encryption ( http://xmpp.org/extensions/xep-0136.html#otr ) and the colloquial use of OTR which apparently means "encrypted IM." AFAIK there is no defined standard or agreed-upon XMPP extension for the latter. I should have clarified this in the original comment.

>AFAIK there is no defined standard or agreed-upon XMPP extension for the latter.

The standard is here: http://www.cypherpunks.ca/otr/Protocol-v2-3.1.0.html It doesn't need an XMPP extension because it's defined in terms messages, so it works with any IM protocol.

Re: Microsoft Censors Pirate Bay Links in Windows Live Messenger

#147

Post by pohl » Sat, Mar 24, 2012, 10:03 PM UTC

VMG wrote: post #64

javert wrote: post #39

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm disappointed to see the destruction of property rights (intellectual or otherwise) being lauded on HN. The RIAA and MPAA make deals with artists to distribute their music, and you want to interfere and just steal it instead. It's dishonest, it's juvenile, and it's eroding at the basis of society (equality under the law, property rights, basic respect and goodwill towards others, etc.).

What is fascinating to me is the hypocrisy. Most HNers probably believe some sort of property rights for software (or even blog designs). May here would argue that the GPL is a great license and violators should be punished. You can also often read that Hollywood and the Music Industry are producing worthless crap, but yet The Pirate Bay is dominated by commercial entertainment, not by Creative Commons content. Much…

It's interesting, because there are sources on the internet that catalogue a taxonomy for all manner of fallacious arguments (Wikipedia is one obvious example), but there doesn't seem to be a name for claiming that internet posts written by the people in set A are hypocritical because they presumably-contradict either 1) posts by people in set B happened to appear on the same website, or 2) some hand-waving characterization of the zeitgeist of the site's denizens.

This is clearly fallacious, I don't know why people keep using this technique, and we really should give it a name so that it can be referred to by shorthand. (Any suggestions?)

If you happen to find a person in the set A intersect B, then you've got a case against that individual. But nobody seems to go to that much effort.

Re: Microsoft Censors Pirate Bay Links in Windows Live Messenger

#148

Post by _gd3l » Sat, Mar 24, 2012, 10:12 PM UTC

This doesn't bother me. Or, I should say, I'm not inherently opposed to it.

Microsoft is a private company acting on their own will. This censorship is one I might not agree with, but it could just make the case for another uncensored client to become popular.

As long as this type of behavior isn't forced by a government, I actually like it in the long run. I think companies should take a stance on things, and seeing Microsoft act this way just makes me more happy with companies who take the opposite stance. If that favorability change happens with enough people, theoretically Microsoft could hurt financially. This would then make it more profitable to be open and uncensored.

So, in a nutshell, I've seen comments elsewhere about this that were SUPER negative and hateful. I understand them, but at the same time, I think this is just another signal to instead focus on and promote those platforms that focus on and promote freedom. And a big signal, to boot.

Re: Microsoft Censors Pirate Bay Links in Windows Live Messenger

#149

Post by zotz » Sat, Mar 24, 2012, 10:14 PM UTC

javert wrote: post #39

jacquesm wrote: post #15

We'll be seeing a lot more of this in the next couple of years. The RIAA and the MPAA will get more and more desperate and will call in more favors with industry buddies as they get closer to the recognition that they are losing the war in spite of winning a couple of battles. In the Netherlands 'Brein', one of the rights organizations has done more to promote the pirate bay than the pirate bay ever could have hoped…

I'm disappointed to see the destruction of property rights (intellectual or otherwise) being lauded on HN. The RIAA and MPAA make deals with artists to distribute their music, and you want to interfere and just steal it instead. It's dishonest, it's juvenile, and it's eroding at the basis of society (equality under the law, property rights, basic respect and goodwill towards others, etc.).

P2P is here to stay. RIAA and MPAA aren't.

It's not a destruction of property rights. It's the beginning of something new for people that make a living creating things people like to hear and watch.

Speaking as a musician who has had dealings with the RIAA, I won't miss them even one little bit.

Re: Microsoft Censors Pirate Bay Links in Windows Live Messenger

#150

Post by ericd » Sat, Mar 24, 2012, 10:29 PM UTC

waterlesscloud wrote: post #97

natesm wrote: post #70

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Yeah, because I just can't stand to pay an enormous amount like $10 or $20 for that book or album I really have to have. This isn't about listening to something or reading something. It's about the ability to remix and build upon it. > I think it's unreasonable to expect people who make things to be able to profit from them for more than 5 years. It doesn't matter, because most people don't profit from their works…

"This isn't about listening to something or reading something. It's about the ability to remix and build upon it." This kind of statement does not help your case at all. Pirate Bay is not about remix culture. You know it, I know it, everyone knows it. Saying that it is just makes every single thing you say on the topic suspect. I'm not in favor of the kind of restriction we see dicussed in this article. I'm against s…

Copying is at least about 60% simplicity and convenience, and about 30% better quality and lack of commercial BS. Free is a nice bonus, but I have cheap tastes and more money than I need, so it's really not a driving force as long as the commercial stuff is reasonably priced. I really don't want to hunt through 4 websites/apps to find something. The fact that I know one will have something and no idea if one of the legal alternatives will is the crux of it - I don't have time for the results of their licensing games. It's the same reason I only shop Amazon with Prime.