Theres nothing bad about torrents.

Not really but abuse of *******s are widespread.

use t0rrent

If words are coming up censored then there is a viable reason. Use common sense and do not attempt to bypass/circumvent the bad word filters.

Then may I inquire the reason behind censoring the specific word I asked about?

Apologies I only bypassed it so people would know which word I was talking about. 7 asterisks could be many words.

It's no problem and it's a valid question, and I believe it to be acceptable to bypass the filter for the sole purpose of asking the staff a question about the word in question.

xper or Martin L would have to answer why it is censored however.

Let me guess, most t*rrents are pointing at illegal activity?

Perhaps. But there are legitimate uses for *******s, too. Some of the update tools recommended on these forums (ryanVM, etc) use *******s to distribute their packages. Many OSS projects distribute through *******s, i.e. Open Office.

It would make sense to at least show it as t******, so that we have a clue about wtf they're talking about. Also, censoring ******* isn't going to stop people from linking to them. Although illegal use of *******s should be discouraged, I do not think this is an effective way to do so.

Thats a great question
Thats an excellent point

I don't live in the US so I use *******s mainly for TV shows

Terminator the Sarah Connors Chronicles
COPS
Lost
etc... we don't get these channels

So *******s aren't all bad

Well, still it´s not legal what you are doing...

Considering the shifting sands of what is okay and what is not okay, the word "legal" only applies in some places and not others. For instance, it is perfectly legal to sell something you have bought here in Austria. In fact, it is a basic priciple and right. This clashes with MS's idea of non-transferability and they have lost when it has been tested. It is still "illegal" in America to sell some versions of its OS software due to the non-transferability clause in the EULA, but even though they still include that clause here, it has been deemed invalid.

I know this is a minor issue, but the point is that the whole issue of legality is very much politcally based and not static. Downloading for many whether by t*****s or straight single server acceses is more like picking up broadcast ransmissions with a radio. They feel if it is out there, they have a right to sample it and no one has the right to tell them it is "illegal" to do so. In this country as in England, the government taxes radios and televisons, so you pay for the broadcasting whether you like it or not. Also, here as in the US and Canada buyers of cassette tapes and blank CD and DVD media have been paying a tax for years which goes to the the likes of the RIAA and MPAA supposedly to compensate them for folks who copy their stuff. They are still collecting money and at the same time going after people who downl;oad and copy their stuff to CDs. Isn't that a tad hypocritical? Like having cake and eating it too? You betcha. And your politicians have been going along with it. but is it all really "illegal"??? I'd venture to say that it is not under the circumstances - but that's a whole 'nother can of worms.

The issue of software is a different issue because there isn't the two-faced hypocritical stance taken, but a straight forward one. but there are choices there. A friend of mine has almost completely weaned himself of MS and with the latest configuration of PostFix he'll be able to get rid of Exchange server at last. So it can be done.

T******s aren't the problem. They are just a distribution method and Bram's Bit******* has worked hard to legitimize the whole scene. Why are discussions about them not allowed? Don't know, but I'll guess it's because it cuts down on the work for the admins and mods here. Nobody wants to police the vast number of posts here for questionable links. They probably reason that anyone interested in that scene will soon find all the sites they need to with a little research and we don't need to get into it here. I don't believe it is an attempt to silence genuine discussion at all.

Filter removed. Thanks for bringing this to our attention.

torrent

Thanks

By using AdBlock you are helping MSFN. Thanks.

What?

Its sarcasm.

He was referring to anonymous_user's sig.



Please don't block MSFN's ads. We need your support.

The same could be said about guns!

The guns aren't the problem, even though there may be 'legal' uses, the majority use them 'illegally'. Its usually the bullet that kills, the gun is just the distribution method!

<-- Premium Sponsor and adblock user

heres my take on it:
using adblock = good
bragging about using adblock on a community supported by ads/donations = bad taste

I think you'd have a difficult time time justifying that statement.

For instance, in the USA there are millions of gun owners and it's a gross miscalculation to say that the "majority" are using them illegally.

Besides, the bullet is just as innocent as the gun or it's manufacturer. The person pulling the trigger is solely responsible for it's target and any damage done.

Same with computers and torrents: Both are innocent objects of hardware and software, but can both be used together or independently to break the law in a number of different ways.

@Yzöwl I didn't intend to get into a debate on guns, and though we probably agree fundamentally on the issue, I don't think the analogy holds very well. As a network communication system the internet is more like an expanded and enhanced telephone system. Indeed, it relied and still does to some degree on the existing telephone network. While we know it is technologically easy to eavesdrop on a given phone conversation, it is still illegal to tap into it without a warrant, the Patriot Act aside for the moment. The same for the mail system. there is an inherent approach taken by the lawmakers that the individual is due a certain level of privacy.

So, if you and I conspire to commit a crime using a telephone, it is certainly not the obligation of the phone company to either listen to us, report us, or interfere with us in any way. Nor are they liable for any damage that may result. They are merely a distribution system for our conversations and that has long ago been established and even tested in the courts.

It is this historical precedent to which I'm referring when I say that torrents are only a way of distributing bits in a more equitable fashion as oppposed to the single server many user model. I don't believe this is in any way equivalent to the "distribution" of bullets. Secondly, "guns" are not a singular and easily definable item because they range from the smallest derringers to fully automatic sub-machine guns to Big Bertha, not to mention the variety of ammunition types. It would be necessary to confine the range to say just handguns and maybe single shot bolt action rifles, and even then, the history development and multi-use of firearms doesn't really compare to torrents as a distribution method.

Broadcasting radio waves is a distribution method and I suggest that you'd be uncomfortable with the idea of someone coming up to you while listening to the radio and informing you that you were not allowed to listen to that particular station. You would likely protest that whoever said that is an id*** - and rightly so. After all should listening to broadcast music or speech be against the law? Should the broadcasters themselves be held responsible, or even those who allowed them to broadcast? Where exactly should the "blame" lie?

I don't claim to have legal knowledge on any of this, but it is still clear to me as a layman that there are raging inconsistencies floating about. Even in the issue of guns. I believe Canada has a high gun ownership, but has no where near the same problems of their children getting shot up in schools aas we see in the US. Both Switzerland and Austria have a high gun ownership level comparable to that in the US, and also without the corresponding level of shot up kids. Are guns themselves the problem? No. But access, training, and education, along with national temperment and cultural background play a big part in the results. In both Germany and here in Austria the public transport systems rely a great deal on a level of compliance (tickets are only checked occasionally so it is possible to ride without paying - sometimes). It doesn't work in France or England and would never work in New York because it would be abused to death, so they have to use a check every ticket for every ride system in those places.

Blaming torrents for "illegal" sharing is something our sadly clueless legislators are very good at. It is up to us to educate them.