Silk Road 2 takedown / Irish arrests

hatrickpatrick

Iwasfrozen wrote: »

Self regulation of the internet doesn't work, if it did then Silk Road wouldn't have had to be taken down.

That's exactly why self regulation of the internet does work, it allows society to bypass archaic BS like drug prohibition which our politicians are too cowardly to do anything about.

Iwasfrozen

JRant wrote: »

Yet numerous studies indicate that those 2 factors do nothing to deter crime one jot.

Another good example would by Iron Maiden. They seen that a lot of their material was being illegally downloaded in South America. Now instead of wasting their time in the courts, they packed up their guitars, headed down there and made a fortune touring the very same countries where the downloads occured.

Studies by whom?

So Iron Maiden lost millions in illegal downloads and we're supposed to commend them for "adapting"? No company, Iron Madien included, should have to adapt to criminal activities. The governments of South America have a duty to protect their intellectual property and are obviously failing.

PopePalpatine

Iwasfrozen wrote: »

Illegal downloading costs the US economy 250 billion every year.

Where's that figure coming from?

If anyone has five minutes, watch the $8 Billion iPod:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GZadCj8O1-0

Even the MPAA put the "damage" done to the media industry at ~$57bn in 2012.

KomradeBishop

Iwasfrozen wrote: »

I don't think I ever said I would, I mentioned a three pronged attack to stopping copyright crime in general, I don't think I ever specifically mentioned Tor, which is obviously a subset of the larger problem.

Yes you did, you proposed reporting and blocking websites, which includes Tor-hosted websites - so it's pretty simple, either:
1: You think it is practically possible to block Tor websites, or
2: You think it is not practically possible to block Tor websites.

Which is it?

Here's an example of a (legal) Tor website, which you need no special software to access:
https://3g2upl4pq6kufc4m.tor2web.org/

So it's just like any other link on the Internet, no special software needed or anything.

66ad

Iwasfrozen wrote: »

Studies by whom?

So Iron Maiden lost millions in illegal downloads and we're supposed to commend them for "adapting"? No company, Iron Madien included, should have to adapt to criminal activities. The governments of South America have a duty to protect their intellectual property and are obviously failing.

Off course they have to adapt... Your arguement is rediculous and for one who promotes "Free Market" and less government control so much. I think you know it's rediculous and just arguing the same points over and over and over, to try not too lose face.

KomradeBishop

Iwasfrozen claims self-regulation of the Internet won't work, yet his last remaining policy option, relies on self-regulation of Internet users, to report one another for pirating.

Peist2007

66ad wrote: »

I think you know it's rediculous and just arguing the same points over and over and over, to try not too lose face.

Nail on head and something common to Boards. Lose an argument and then twist it and turn it and, hey presto, we are now arguing over something completely different.

PopePalpatine

KomradeBishop wrote: »

Iwasfrozen claims self-regulation of the Internet won't work, yet his last remaining policy option, relies on self-regulation of Internet users, to report one another for pirating.

Nah, all he needs is for this task force to start recruiting random Internet users. They could be like Soviet secret police informants!

Iwasfrozen

PopePalpatine wrote: »

Where's that figure coming from?

Even the MPAA put the "damage" done to the media industry at ~$57bn in 2012.

The 250 billion figure comes form here

"Although legal content distribution services like Netflix, Crackle, iTunes, Hulu, Amazon, Epix, and Vudu have again made accessing entertainment content legally more convenient, it is estimated that online piracy costs the U.S. economy somewhere around $250 billion per year. When content is illegally taken and distributed, income stops, jobs cannot be supported, and people are left unemployed. There is no question that content piracy has had a negative impact on everyone involved in the entertainment industry and on the overall global economy."

KomradeBishop wrote: »

Yes you did, you proposed reporting and blocking websites, which includes Tor-hosted websites - so it's pretty simple, either:
1: You think it is practically possible to block Tor websites, or
2: You think it is not practically possible to block Tor websites.

Which is it?

Here's an example of a (legal) Tor website, which you need no special software to access:
https://3g2upl4pq6kufc4m.tor2web.org/

So it's just like any other link on the Internet, no special software needed or anything.

Accessing Tor is not by itself a crime.

66ad wrote: »

Off course they have to adapt... Your arguement is rediculous and for one who promotes "Free Market" and less government control so much. I think you know it's rediculous and just arguing the same points over and over and over, to try not too lose face.

Why exactly? Why should a company adapt to criminal activity? Should Tesco adapt to people stealing goods from their stores? The government has a duty to protect ip belonging to companies as stated under Irish law and right now they are failing miserably.

mikom

Iwasfrozen wrote: »

Should Tesco adapt to people stealing goods from their stores?

Yes, ideally by hiring a security guard, not closing down the whole street.

KomradeBishop

Iwasfrozen wrote: »

Accessing Tor is not by itself a crime.

You're dodging again, that's an irrelevant reply to my post - you proposed reporting and blocking websites, which includes Tor-hosted websites - so it's pretty simple, either:
1: You think it is practically possible to block Tor websites, or
2: You think it is not practically possible to block Tor websites.

Which is it? It's a question with a simple binary yes (that it's practically possible) / no (it isn't practically possible) answer - and answering it will save pages of wasted time debating.

shruikan2553

The costs we have are:
Elite force tracking websites and blocking them.
Elite force to track the users and gather info on them.
Court cases to prosecute.
Prison (tip: when they come to your door to take you away kill them, youll probably get less than 10 years)

What we get from it:
A mysterious amount of money into the economy.

And all of this because theres a chance that the person may have bought it otherwise.

If all of this effort was to stop child porn then at least I could say iwasfrozen's heart was in the right place even if his plan was as likely as an Irish empire where the sun never sets but instead it is to help businesses who are unable to cope with new technology. This is also from the same government who cant control what internships go up on their website.

Up next: How do we shut down email so we can save the post and courier industry and a documentary about going back in time to kill Edison and save candle makers everywhere.

Peetrik wrote: »

There are easier solutions to having to learn the ins and outs of setting up TOR connections.

Products like the invisbox where you just plug it into your modem and go online through it make it much easier. Can't wait to get mine

Thats interesting. Must do some research into that.

Iwasfrozen

KomradeBishop wrote: »

You're dodging again, that's an irrelevant reply to my post - you proposed reporting and blocking websites, which includes Tor-hosted websites - so it's pretty simple, either:
1: You think it is practically possible to block Tor websites, or
2: You think it is not practically possible to block Tor websites.

Which is it? It's a question with a simple binary yes (that it's practically possible) / no (it isn't practically possible) answer - and answering it will save pages of wasted time debating.

I wrote that as part of a three pronged attack websites should be blocked by gardai whenever they are detected or reviewed after being reported by a member of the public. I never mentioned Tor websites, I never mentioned the deep web and frankly as long as a person isn't doing anything morally wrong, and yes downloading music without paying for it is morally wrong :rolleyes:, I don't care what they're doing.

PopePalpatine

Iwasfrozen wrote: »

The 250 billion figure comes form here

"Although legal content distribution services like Netflix, Crackle, iTunes, Hulu, Amazon, Epix, and Vudu have again made accessing entertainment content legally more convenient, it is estimated that online piracy costs the U.S. economy somewhere around $250 billion per year. When content is illegally taken and distributed, income stops, jobs cannot be supported, and people are left unemployed. There is no question that content piracy has had a negative impact on everyone involved in the entertainment industry and on the overall global economy."

You left out the bit about the author advertising his own company. It is also not stated where this estimate has come from.

JRant

Iwasfrozen wrote: »

Studies by whom?

So Iron Maiden lost millions in illegal downloads and we're supposed to commend them for "adapting"? No company, Iron Madien included, should have to adapt to criminal activities. The governments of South America have a duty to protect their intellectual property and are obviously failing.

How do you know they lost millions?

Companies adapt every day to combat criminal activities. Here are some examples;
Army escort for cash in transit.
Security tags on clothing in stores.
Security guards in banks.
I could go on but I hope I've gotten thhe point across.

Ah yes intellectual property indeed. Would the companies you want to protect be the same ones that are ripping off these artists in the first place?
Would the intellectual property cases be held in the same small Texan district were the vast majority of these cases take place? The one with the super friendly local judiciary that always finds in favour of the large corporation.

J Mysterio

catallus wrote: »

So let the criminals do as they please, just in case there's an iota of a possibility of mismanagement by the overseers?

Wow. Moral equivocation, how are you! :rolleyes:

Very naive. Power corrupts; absolute power corrupts absolutely. Think Animal Farm, 1984, V is for Vendetta. Think the Gestapo, KGB, NSA.

Do you think Wikileaks is a good or a bad thing?

shruikan2553

PopePalpatine wrote: »

You left out the bit about the author advertising his own company. It is also not stated where this estimate has come from.

http://www.redtouchmedia.com/

It doesnt help that like the music industry you are going to hear about how bad piracy is and how they are all crumbling. Would be interesting to see if these types of companies have been growing or not since the internet.

Iwasfrozen

PopePalpatine wrote: »

You left out the bit about the author advertising his own company. It is also not stated where this estimate has come from.

http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:vaobcpeXKV0J:www.iccwbo.org/Data/Documents/Bascap/Global-Impacts-Study---Full-Report/+&cd=1&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=ie&client=firefox-a

"The OECD published an extensive report on counterfeiting and piracy in 20084.
The report, based on 2005 data, found that the value of international trade in
counterfeit and pirated goods was at least $200 billion. In 2009, the OECD
updated this figure to $250 billion5.
In releasing their findings, the OECD stated,
“This total [$250 billion] does not include the value of domestically produced and
consumed counterfeit and pirated products and the significant volume of pirated
digital products being distributed via the Internet. If these items were added, the
total magnitude of counterfeiting and piracy worldwide could well be several
hundred billion dollars more.” In addition the OECD explained that
counterfeiting and piracy “can have broader economy-wide effects on trade,
foreign investment, employment, innovation, criminality, environment […] and
with respect to governments, counterfeiting and piracy have direct effects on tax
revenues and government expenditures.” (p.13)"

JRant

Iwasfrozen wrote: »

I wrote that as part of a three pronged attack websites should be blocked by gardai whenever they are detected or reviewed after being reported by a member of the public. I never mentioned Tor websites, I never mentioned the deep web and frankly as long as a person isn't doing anything morally wrong, and yes downloading music without paying for it is morally wrong :rolleyes:, I don't care what they're doing.

So you want the internet to self regulate. Great, we're in full agreement then.

KomradeBishop

Iwasfrozen wrote: »

I wrote that as part of a three pronged attack websites should be blocked by gardai whenever they are detected or reviewed after being reported by a member of the public. I never mentioned Tor websites, I never mentioned the deep web and frankly as long as a person isn't doing anything morally wrong, and yes downloading music without paying for it is morally wrong :rolleyes:, I don't care what they're doing.

Tor websites are 'websites' - I even gave you a link to a Tor website that you can click and open up like any other website - so your policy of blocking websites like that, is practically impossible.

There is a link to the Pirate Bay that you can access in your browser (no special software) with a URL that looks like https://x.tor2web.org; it is practically impossible to block.

Your policy of blocking websites is unworkable. Your policy of relying on Internet users to report one another is unworkable. Nothing you suggest, makes event a dent in the problem.

JRant

Iwasfrozen wrote: »

http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:vaobcpeXKV0J:www.iccwbo.org/Data/Documents/Bascap/Global-Impacts-Study---Full-Report/+&cd=1&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=ie&client=firefox-a

"The OECD published an extensive report on counterfeiting and piracy in 20084.
The report, based on 2005 data, found that the value of international trade in
counterfeit and pirated goods was at least $200 billion. In 2009, the OECD
updated this figure to $250 billion5.
In releasing their findings, the OECD stated,
“This total [$250 billion] does not include the value of domestically produced and
consumed counterfeit and pirated products and the significant volume of pirated
digital products being distributed via the Internet. If these items were added, the
total magnitude of counterfeiting and piracy worldwide could well be several
hundred billion dollars more.” In addition the OECD explained that
counterfeiting and piracy “can have broader economy-wide effects on trade,
foreign investment, employment, innovation, criminality, environment […] and
with respect to governments, counterfeiting and piracy have direct effects on tax
revenues and government expenditures.” (p.13)"

I suspect that the OECD pulled those figures from the same place that the Anglo boyo's did.

The Diabolical Monocle

That little mention of piracy made me think back on a documentary (cant remember the name)on the scale and depth of piracy and to be fair its fvcking amazing how far it goes.
There are guys in China counterfeiting fvcking RICE, they just blast a load of plastic chippings in with the real stuff, they counterfeit fvcking EGGS, there was this guy sitting in his run down flat somewhere in the Chinese equivalent of Leitrim going though this process of rolling fake eggs which would then be sold on ... dont remember if anyone was eating them though.

Medications however were being counterfeited like a good thing, and these were very sophisticated counterfeits, often sold on to Africa where the results were tragic. Boatloads going on the international markets, some even ended up in reputable pharmacies.

One woman in Europe had her health seriously damaged cause of some chemical they were using for counterfeit footwear, the chemical supposedly kept the shoes intact and dry during transport but with the small disadvantage that it was oh 50% likely to bring about terminal illness.
They didn't give the smallest of fvcks, they'd poison someone for a couple of euro.

Princess Consuela Bananahammock

Iwasfrozen wrote: »

Ilegal downloading destroys businesses and creates unemployment, legalising weed harms only criminal gangs. Weed is not addictive and has no noticeable health problems attributed to it.

This fails to answer either question I put to you - here's my post again:

Princess Consuela Bananahammock wrote: »

Why should certain drugs be legal, but downloading of copyright meterial be illegal? From a purely moral standpoint?

One could argue that certain drugs are dangerous and should be banned, but then piracy never killed anyone so therefore would be ok?

1 - I said from a purely moral standpoint, not a finanacial one. Laws are created, in theory, based on morals, not economics.

2 - I also said "dangerous" drugs. Drugs that you admit are "not addictive and have no notcieable health problems attributed to it" are not dangerous.


In shout, using the argument for free market and self-regualtion, we could still argue that Silk Road activities should not have been legal in the first place, and that piracy is an economic crime not a moral one.