Hacker News Reader

Comment by mattmanser | Hacker News Reader

Tis only a matter of time before laws start getting passed, ISPs are forced to monitor and people start getting cut-off/fined.

I'm not arguing for that position, but that's the way it's going. So any time soon could be sooner than you think.

As for the article, what a load of nonsense, 'hey use these instead' article is quite obviously advocating piracy, whichever way they try and spin it, disclaimer or not. The disclaimer:

All of these services should be used for legal downloads, of course

There is no sane person in the world that believes that a torrent site's primary purpose is for legal downloads.

View on HN

> There is no sane person in the world that believes that a torrent site's primary purpose is for legal downloads.

You cannot say that. That's absurd. There are tons of torrent sites with legal content, and whose primary purpose is the sharing of legal content. For example http://www.clearbits.net.

> Tis only a matter of time before laws start getting passed, ISPs are forced to monitor and people start getting cut-off/fined.

Bypassing whatever ISPs put in place will likely still be easier than purchasing, especially given that pirated content typically has a higher quality than paid content. It's a double-whammy: paying for DVDs or CDs forces you to see ads (occasionally telling you not to pirate!), in some cases download DRMed, locked content, and usually at a lower bitrate than the pirated options.

Not only is it easier to pirate, but you usually end up with a higher-quality and less annoying product.

Edit: The solution to all of this is for the content distributors to realize and understand the situation. If they put all the high-quality content online and provide direct, fast downloads (without treating me like a criminal!) then the world will change and most people will buy content...I think.

I can say that, the majority of torrents used in the world are films and songs. Any other claim is truly preposterous.

I have no idea why you think otherwise, who do you think torrents?

It's a totally strange position to take. I do not understand it.

On the other hand I totally agree with you and the poster above me about the ease, quality (in terms of advert and stupid menu-less content) and speed on getting new content, it's absurd we're in a situation where getting illegal content is quicker and easier than getting legal content. But that's another matter.

I'd imagine that World of Warcraft (and StarCraft II) updates account for just as much bandwidth via BitTorrent as do 'illegal downloads'...

There was a time when people thought the primary purpose of an mp3 player was to play pirated music, would you claim that an article about a new mp3 player was "advocating piracy"?

Stating that a piece of software exists is hardly "advocating" using it for illegal purposes. Most of the usage of torrents probably is copyright-infringing downloads, but that's not its only purpose and that doesn't mean a journalist can't talk about it.

> Tis only a matter of time before laws start getting passed, ISPs are forced to monitor and people start getting cut-off/fined.

Will that actually accomplish anything? I think it will just push things deeper underground, and force downloaders to encrypt everything, which is at best a minor inconvenience.

There is no sane person in the world that believes that a torrent site's primary purpose is for legal downloads.

As someone whose colleagues work on BitTorrent for distributed systems research, that's patently false. At the moment I'm in the planning stages of a service which will use BitTorrent for distributed computing a la MapReduce.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com