

Pirate Bay Founder: “Future copy fights will need something better” - llambda
http://torrentfreak.com/shut-down-the-pirate-bay-founder-says-130708/?utm_source=dlvr.it&utm_medium=twitter

======
area51org
What he actually said seems to be more along the lines of "shut it down and
replace it with something better." I took the headline to imply that he's
turned over some new leaf and is "anti-piracy" now (clearly untrue from the
article's content).

~~~
javis
'"Shut it down and replace it with something better" says Pirate Bay founder'
doesn't get the clicks TorrentFreak are desperate for.

------
Goosey
Most insightful part is the forward thinking about the new wave of enforcement
that copyright infringement of physical goods via 3D printers will bring.
Something I hadn't considered before, but a massive shift indeed.

~~~
jkn
You probably meant patent infringement rather than copyright infringement? If
not, what would be good examples of copyright infringement made possible
through 3D printing?

~~~
betterunix
[http://www.npr.org/blogs/alltechconsidered/2013/02/19/171912...](http://www.npr.org/blogs/alltechconsidered/2013/02/19/171912826/as-3-d-printing-
become-more-accessible-copyright-questions-arise)

~~~
jkn
Thanks!

These cases seem comparatively insignificant to me. I think patent
infringement will be the real "intellectual property" issue with 3D printing.
I'm looking forward to a renewed debate on the ethics of having governments
intrude in people's private lives to enforce corporate monopolies.

------
yason
What's left to thwart the MAFIAA we need a protocol to serve anonymous/unknown
data, with plausible deniability.

Like this: "I'll store this blob of data on my computer and upload it to
anyone who asks for it as long as I can prove that I don't know what it
contains, and that I can't know what it contains."

Basically some scheme based on asymmetric encryption with the ability to
verify that the blob is encrypted. (The server owner hands one part of the key
to the user, the user encrypts the blob, sends it to the server which verifies
that it's encrypted with the key sent to the user.)

I don't know from the top of my head what's needed to implement that.

~~~
dadrian
You mean onion routing?
[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Onion_routing](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Onion_routing)

~~~
jamesjporter
Nah, onion routing just bounces HTTP requests/responses around before sending
them on to their final destination (which is still a just a server somewhere).

What the GP is talking about sounds something more like freenet or
cryptosphere. When you query for some data in these systems you have no idea
where it is stored and the people who are storing it / sending it back to you
have no idea what they are storing.

------
qdpb
This is not a very accurate quote, very link baity.

------
lettergram
Why don't the admin's use The Pirate Bay for donations (on their homepage say)
to help kickstart a new more secure, encrypted, decentralized file sharing
software? I am sure if they offered a $50,000 prize they are far more likely
to get results.

~~~
pokpokpok
because who says the current admins are the best people qualified to build
that software?

~~~
lettergram
It doesn't have to be an admin, I said offer up a prize for someone who CAN
produce a product.

------
cygx
According to Wikipedia, Bittorrent as well as other filesharing solutions like
Gnutella and Kad (the eMule network) can be made to work on top of I2P [1].

The wikipedia page also lists alternative solutions like GNUnet and Freenet
with anonymity built-in from the start instead of bolted-on after it became a
concern.

[1]
[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anonymous_P2P#I2P_clients](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anonymous_P2P#I2P_clients)

------
mtgx
Maybe he's referring to something like Tribler or Retroshare.

[http://www.tribler.org/](http://www.tribler.org/)

[http://retroshare.sourceforge.net/](http://retroshare.sourceforge.net/)

~~~
GhotiFish
I don't like retroshare, it's a massive resource hog for something that is
supposed to be run in the background. It consumes far to many resources.

The concept I find to be too wasteful. Bouncing through multiple channels is
fine for secure communication, but for large amounts of data...

You don't watch youtube through the TOR network.

~~~
betterunix
"You don't watch youtube through the TOR network."

You might if watching Youtube could destroy your finances, your credit rating,
your ability to connect to the Internet, etc.

------
digitalengineer
It is not said in the article but I think he's referring to the dangers of
real-time tracking of torrent downloaders.

------
contingencies
OK, let's take this apart and use this thread to analyze the alleged failings
of torrent model. He raises:

(1) A security problem ("something safer"), presumably regarding
identification prior to raids and repression.

(2) A speed (asks for "something faster").

(3) Centralization (best not to "depend on a few persons").

My random thoughts:

(1) Tor offers a reasonable approach for torrent metadata accrual and
distribution, but will limit availability. As for actual content, spoofed
origins may be possible on some networks, otherwise intermediaries are
necessary and then you have Tor or a multi-VPN money-draining complexity
fetish. Moving away from the open internet exclusively to Tor/I2P would be a
great way to _educate_ the user base and bring support to those projects. Good
luck moving _all_ torrent tracking sites though... it may just force people
elsewhere. Still, the education benefit would be significant... but there's
strength in numbers and fleeing to darknets does not play one of the greatest
hands: solidarity, or social strength.

(2) Transfer speed challenges perhaps largely derive from the random
distribution; itself an asset. Sourcing content more locally (using AS based
logical topology mapping, community-reported speeds between ASs, etc.) may
provide some benefit, but ultimately may cause greater harm than good due to
increased risk of local distribution and thus prominent node identification
and the aforementioned raids and repression. With regards to _initial_
distribution specifically (versus general redistribution after initial
seeding), it may be possible to add some sort of priority, anonymous queue for
newly posted / incoming data that is based on an anonymous but
cryptographically preserved uploader reputation metric (somehow adjudicated by
trackers?).

(3) Infrastructure costs money, which is perhaps a major part of the
centralization problem with TPB - someone needs the keys to the proverbial
kingdom to keep it running. The web in general needs decentralization of
hosting, which at the moment generally both exposes identities and is too
difficult and expensive for the average user (largely therefore: Blogger,
Twitter, Facebook, Flickr, Picasa, etc.) Read earlier today someplace Firefox
has a project going in this area at the moment based upon altering consumer
browsers to participate in third party data hosting, perhaps this could be co-
opted carefully and legally armoured by to preserve an inability for
individuals to identify which content they are in fact hosting. Unfortunately
its motivator for hosting is the wont to publish one's own data .. elsewhere
.. and most people right now are net consumers rather than publishers, so this
may be brittle.

Others' takes?

------
mhurron
No wait, not yet, I'm not done download ... um ... [insert something about
freedom]

Seriously, my internet connection isn't the fastest, give me some time will
you?

