He supposedly got a million subscribers on the first day, including myself. 150 takedown notices is significant in light of this? Google probably process that many in a half day and no one says a thing. That this new service has so few should probably be the news rather than the other way around. This seems pretty trivial to me, especially in light of the fact that his previous service handled so many takedowns that they granted the content folks special access like YouTube does. Bet he doesn't do that again...

Seems simple to me - did the computer (aka exit node in TOR speak) request the file? Yes? Sue them into the ground. "Proxy" you say? Well, we'll sue you until broke anyway. This isn't the same as a router or switch, proxies are not infrastructure in the mechanical sense but are programs which in this case could be argued were being used to skirt the law. That is how a lawyer would likely attack this and truthfully they wouldn't be far off the mark. You want to risk your home, savings, and future income on a bunch of "peers" understanding your very thin point on this? That they wouldn't also pile on a metric crapton of other charges based on additional files on your computer "discovered" while looking for this content? That the warrant would be wide enough to snare that and more? Goforit dude! I'll watch from the sidelines on this one.

From the standpoint of the node they lay out there to snare others it will look like your computer, despite acting as a "proxy" requested the files and for that reason they will attack you just as they attack users now. From their standpoint you're guilty and in reality you will have asked for the file even if it was for someone else. Kind of like holding drugs for someone else, how well does that work out these days? When the smoke clears, even if found "innocent" somehow, I'm betting you won't be willing to cheer the victory too much. Been there, done that, got the T-shirt I'm sad to say...

oh bullshit. Citation? Anywhere? FUD...

TPB never served up content, not ever, when it was serving up torrent links and has been pointed out they DO still serve LINKS. The "S" in his summary is typified incorrectly. In his example "S" is characterized as TPB, it's not. Instead "S" is the first USER who has submitted a torrent link to the TRACKER. The tracker never, not ever, not even once, passes any of the actual content information thru it. The Tracker simply tells the first person that asks for it how to contact the USER who has offered up the content - that's "S". This is a critical misunderstanding on the part of the person who wrote this IMO. What's weird is that the writer almost seems to understand it later in his writing but stating the TPB served up content pretty much screwed the pooch concerning his understanding torrents I think.

In addition, if I were a movie studio and a connection were proxied through a user's machine in the manner that he appears to be advocating rather than directly to a consuming user I'd still sue the proxy. My argument would be that the proxy did indeed download the content - and I'd be right. Never mind that the data was "just" passed along, I think an argument could be made that the proxy requested and received content and that no matter what was done afterwards I'd prosecute the proxy for having downloaded content. I might also attempt to find out who the originating user was who requested the content but I'd be happy prosecuting proxies because sure as hell after a few of them were coughing up tons of cash no one would be allowing their machines to knowingly proxy. It's for this reason that I won't become a TOR exit node or allow my WiFi to run wide open. Perhaps in those cases I could claim innocence, just as I might running this proxy idea, but the end result would be the same - financial ruin which is the example that the MAFIAA wishes to make in order to chill uses of this kind of technology. I happen to not be willing to take that risk with my current place in life. A very large part of his scheme rests upon the idea that a proxy isn't responsible for the data that passes through it, is that really solid legal ground? I'd argue not and proving yourself a proxy without declaring it openly, which would likely violate ISP TOS for most home connections, could be financially painful in any case. Does anyone REALLY want the Govt. kicking in a door and rooting through everything they own searching for this? Perhaps you're completely legal but I'd hazard to guess not everything they look at could be declared so once placed under a microscope, I'd prefer they stay out of home just in case.

That said, let's imagine a place where this was actually created. ISP already scream that Torrents take up a hugely disproportionate amount of bandwidth. What is proposed is a doubling or trebling (++) of that usage as the SAME bits get shuffled place to place in a bit of a shell game. Does this benefit the 'net?

IMO, there has to be a better way and I don't think that this is it. I wish I had a solution but from where I sit this sure doesn't look like a good one...

No actually I do not see answers to my questions so clearly as you and apparently others do.

No health impacts from this? So then you'd be willing to swallow it? Get it in your hair? Eyes? Lungs? Food? How about a gel capsule down the hatch? Did you see anything in either linked article that mentions this? I didn't. I see what is supposed to be a harmless acid and hydrogen mentioned as byproducts, nothing more. Hey is Graphene okay to swallow? Buckyballs? You might be surprised. You might not want to swallow any of this and you may also find that if it's produced in quantity that it will find it's way into our food chain or used as a weapon. I'm not against it, just not quite so quick to become excited. That you so quickly dismiss this line of thinking, along with others, is amusing.

Product of the reaction is an acid and hydrogen. With tap water? Sewer water? Distilled water? Are we going to be taking the equivalent of drinking water to use this? If it's potable water then it's a bit more valuable than something I'd drain a ditch to get. If on the other hand I can use ditch water and the result is this acid, hydrogen, and the waste from the water then we might kill two birds with one stone - hence my question concerning it and my concerns ref potable water. I didn't mention exhaust, I know what the byproduct of burned hydrogen was and thought that was obvious.

No water used to produce this? Another post mentions that it's much the same as a chip manufacturing process (is it?) - lots of water and other chemicals used in that. Some of those chemicals are nasty BTW. I see nothing in the article regarding usage of water for production either for or against so I'm interested in why you dismissed this so quickly. Can you cite anything regarding producing this? Do note that it says "significant energy and resources" in the article...

The article states that hydrogen and acid are created, it mentions nothing about the medium being completely consumed or chances of recovery recovery. Citation please.

Waste byproducts of creating these - also not answered and yet you find the question redundant? The process for creating these is simply stated as " significant energy and resources to produce" and nothing more is said. Where exactly did you find the answer concerning this? I'm betting they aren't simply grinding down beach sand and since the spherical shape appears to be important to the process that would seem to imply some sort of process such as vaporization. That you leap to the conclusion that this process produces NO waste is amazing. Again, cite your sources for the conclusion since you so readily dismiss the question. Hint: it ain't in the linked articles or in the minuscule announcement made in the further linked article.

What's the health impact of these getting into the ecosystem? Pass right thru a human? Cause serious disease? What happens when it hits the water IN a human? If this becomes in any way widespread these are going to be issues.

What's left after the reaction? Must the water be pure or can we produce power from dirty water and do what with what's left? Could this be used to clean dirty water by simply using the water for power? Is oxygen also produced from this - I'd think so right since water is H2O. Are the particles completely consumed in the reaction? No reuse? How much water is used in the manufacturing process to create these particles? What are the waste byproducts for the process of creating these particles?

Hey, doesn't sound like a bad idea to me. It would probably be 90% men signed up tho!

Yeah, I use the autocomplete suggestions often. When I'm typing in a query it's often about something I want information about and if the autocomplete pops up with something close to what I'm looking for I select it knowing it's been asked and answered by Google using those terms previously. This is a pretty obvious way to use the search system and I suspect quite a few others use it this way too since Google has kept the autocomplete around despite controversy. Certainly when terms pop up I'm not searching for I ignore them (I'm an adult), frankly I seldom search a person's name anyway so this popping up wouldn't concern me a bit.

BTW everyone is making a great deal of noise over his bankruptcy having been annulled. When was it annulled? Was it years ago? Recently? How much debt did he walk away from? These are pertinent questions to be asked and while having this somehow "annulled" is well good and fine when you want to bitch at Google how about getting the whole story on it? It may be a past misdeed but the circumstances may matter a great deal to those considering his sefvices...

Take a look at unRAID. I'm currently running it and have been for years but am now also looking at NAS4Free and wow is it waaay more complicated to setup! It's going to be faster mind you and I can use it's NFS shares for VM storage but no way would I ask someone who wasn't willing to spend a few hours to set it up to try it out. I am considering trying FreeNAS too, especially since you seem to like it's interface better, but it's going to be VERY hard to beat unRAID for simplicity IMO...

use Plex as an IOS client. Run it on say unRAID as a plug-in or on a separate computer (I run it on a VM). Plex handles the DHCP issue and the piercing of your firewall, it can also sample down the media to allow it to stream on low bandwidth connections. For storage I do unRAID for many of the reasons posted elsewhere here and it's been working great or quite a few years for me.

I too have been running this for years and years now for pretty much all of the reasons mentioned. Recently I've begun having some REAL fun and have virtualized unRAID on an ESX host and am now able to run a bunch of other VMs too. I'm fiddling around with NAS4Free as a second NAS package to store the VMs and to create a cache drive for unRAID. Let me tell you, the software setup for unRAID is child's play compared to some of the fun I'm having trying to setup this other package. It's certainly doable and it can do ZFS, ISCSI, and other things but no way in hell would I recommend it for someone who just wanted to load up some software and quickly go. unRAID really does make things very easy and while I'm having a blast with my more complex setup it's overkill for most folks even geeks like myself.

I wouldn't just do a share on a Windows or Linux machine for sure, I wouldn't do a complex ZFS thing with even more complex expansion, but unRAID? Oh heck yes - I have even given away a couple of these boxes as Christmas gifts they're so easy to maintain!

Well... I have about 20TB worth of data, mostly static media, but many many hours worth of work building it. This isn't something I can stick on a portable and lock away I'm afraid. I could certainly backup my music to such a drive, and a I do, but the rest? Yeah not so much. I do need to backup the drive holding my ESX VMs but that's not looking like cake either. I'm protected from a single drive failure and I've had them more than once. If I lose two drives I lose the data on those two drives, nothing more (unRAID). A lightning strike or fire would suck to say the least...

Not exactly useless... There's a preclear script that many unRAID users use to beat up their drives while monitoring SMART. It doesn't just look at SMART for a thumbs up or down but monitors the various parameters that SMART throws out. Users run this multiple times in a row and find bad drives fairly regularly. I will admit that I've not been running it but judging from the numbers of folks who have been finding it useful and from the fact that warranties seem to be getting ever shorter I may begin doing so. I use a decent number of the 3TB drives that are always going on sale and I'm starting to think I'm tempting fate by not testing them. I've gotten spoiled in that my unRAID box covers my ass in the even of a failure but I see too damn many reports of new drives going toes up to not be concerned. I have 3 drives sitting on the shelf waiting to be loaded and I may beat them up beforehand just to be sure they won't screw me when I least expect it...

Tineye says no go, it can't be found. Not with an URL search and not with an upload search. I too am VERY skeptical but this photo isn't being found by the tools I know to use and I also note it has no EXIF.

If your machine has FireWire ports they can be used to directly access memory and obtain the keys - it would not be safe in this case. This is a well known forensic technique for doing memory dumps. Do not allow the machine to sleep or hibernate as this will also write memory to disk where it can be examined offline.