|
Termyn8or -> The network news (P2P downloading) (3/12/2011 2:13:33 AM)
|
Except for those who feel the need to call downloaders thieves, there is not much need to repond, except if there are questions. Legality is not the issue until it gets to court.
The RIAA I presume has not given up. I think they have finally realized just how gargantuan a task it would be to shut down filesharing on P2P, and now have regrouped. For those who know, the ones with older P2P softwaare (not crippleware) are still at it.
Well they have taken a new approach. They may not have given up on shutting the whole thing down, but that seems to be on the back burner now and they have a new strategy - if you can't beatem, joinem. Or so we are supposed to think.
What i s happening is that they now have the software and they participate, and are doing it in numbers. Now all these sources could concievaqbly be in one building, we have no way of knowing. They are simply sharing files. Nothing wrong with that right ?
Actually there isn't, and there wasn't before. They have been polluting the network for some time now, but a while back you could tell. I mean when the hottest movie out, which will be in theaters next week is available and it says "Full DVD rip dolby director's cut with outtakes in high def" and the file is 11KB, you knew damn well it wasn't the file. Most likely a virus. Easy.
But now they have changed strategy and have a superior method. They are peppering the network with a new type of file, and they are getting good at it. They are all different filesizes and everything, and they jibe with the content somewhat. On some you can tell if your software reports the bitrate of an MP3, but not always. When you see an MP3 file that does not report the bitrate, that's not what you want. But it's more than that even.
One going around is a series of different files of different sizes which are a recording of a female voice saying "This is an illegal MP3 download, please go to www. whatever dot com and....... Yeah right. You think Secret Crush is a bitch ? Who knows what this is.
What's more if you use Windows Media Player, unless you have the privacy set right, they know right where you are even if you didn't download the file. Do not run these on Media Player 10. Make sure they play in something like VLC first.
You see, I'm down to the point where I have to think for a week to remember one line out of a song, then google it and sift the results just to find out who did it. It gets even worse, how the hell do I put a guitar riff into a search string ? Can I hum a few bars into Google ? Fat chnce.
But now I am lookming for the extremely rare things, the obscure. Bitch all you want but no record store will ever have them. For example Montrose doing O Lucky Man. Gogle it and you can listen to it, but I don''t see how to buy it on the first page of results. Come on if it's a money game, I got money. Here's another one, John Entwistle 905. Same shit. If it were for sale you think they would tell you right ?
Well these files show up on P2P but they are all no good. I don't know what each of them can do, in light of the newer software, but they certainly don't play, at least what you want.
If your program has the option to sort by number of sources, they got sources. It's easy to get these files, that are not what you want. However they fucked up.
The naming convention is wrong. A valid file will have Artist Name - Title.MP3 and the bitrate should be shown. I believe the problem is that they generated all the filenames automatically, or possibly even that they are picking up the stream (which makes the P2P network work) and generating the file titles on the fly. It's always the same. Certain words in the search string are reversed.
I think that may be because in my particular case maybe, or everyone's, that they are not interpreting the data correctly, which is what causes the error. They can't really induce an error in the whole system, but they do apparently inadvertently in the filename.
What's more I'm sure they think they got the world by the balls right now, and I am pretty sure I can prove that they generate the filenames and provide results on the fly.
This is the result screen from a totally random search string :
You see the words complete, new album, live, original track and all that. There was no original track for xdefrrnygmju. There is no live xdefrrnygmju.
So this is how you tell. For now.
No doubt they will correct the problem eventually, but for now, why crash and burn ?
Mind you, don't get pissed off about this. What did you expect them to do ? I think it's going to be an interesting game myself, and one thing also comes to mind. If they are resorting to this, it's all the fuck they can do, because that's their money. If they would do more they would. Wouldn't you ?
T^T
|
|
|
|
