Beta

×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

cancel ×

423 comments

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

Note the spin... (5, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#27110929)

...major crackdown...

...one of the biggest pirate server confiscations ever ...

...international pirate network...

The same spin doctors that run the drug war are now being employed in the Imaginary Property war.

BTW. Despite the word association games the article plays, there is no comparison between a server containing 65TB of files and Pirate Bay, as Pirate Bay doesn't contain any copyrighted information that isn't supposed to be there.

Re:Note the spin... (5, Insightful)

Renderer of Evil (604742) | more than 5 years ago | (#27110953)

The same spin doctors that run the drug war are now being employed in the Imaginary Property war.

Pretty much. Law enforcement always does this by putting the drugs in dollar figures. "1 million dollars worth of cocaine" sounds much more impressive than 2 kilos of powder.

Re:Note the spin... (5, Informative)

Reality Master 301 (1462839) | more than 5 years ago | (#27111023)

That's because "1 million dollars worth of cocaine" would be around 30 kilos at the current price.

Re:Note the spin... (5, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#27111239)

Not in police fantasy accounting, where the value of that 2 kilos is determined by how much could be got by splitting it in to 1/10 gram rocks and selling them at the highest street price of ~$25, which would mean 4 kilos would be worth 1 million dollars. I'm not kidding.

Re:Note the spin... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#27111453)

The values that get punted in the news are based on the importer individually cutting and chopping the drugs down into individual grams and selling it that way themselves - i.e. patently ridiculous.

Re:Note the spin... (5, Interesting)

Jafafa Hots (580169) | more than 5 years ago | (#27111037)

Not to mention the fact that they insinuate that 65tb of files are illegal files, when they could be just about anything. I seem to remember hearing about a case of some guy busted for child porn or something like that and they announced on the news that they had confiscated "hundreds of video cassettes," and showed them on a table in the press conference. It later turned out that they were all like rental videos and crap, and the cops knew it, but were using that as a cudgel to poison public opinion and get the guy to cop a plea.

Re:Note the spin... (5, Funny)

Soulshift (1044432) | more than 5 years ago | (#27111099)

Bah, 65TB? Wait till they discover what's in /dev/rand! I wish the cryptanalysts good luck!

There goes the weekend (1, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#27111219)

No what am I going to do? I've got every mp3 in existance! I've got all color movies ever released, and then some. But now what? And don't say I'm stealing because I'd never buy any of this shit anyway.

Re:Note the spin... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#27111125)

I think the probability of the file server containing free ebooks, linux distributions and other ostensibly legal large files is slim to nil.

Probability that its mainly appz, movies, tv series and pr0n: 99.9%.

There's no kicks to be had distributing stuff that's already freely available.

Re:Note the spin... (4, Funny)

troll8901 (1397145) | more than 5 years ago | (#27111151)

The same spin doctors that run the drug war are now being employed in the Imaginary Property war.

"Mister Threepwood, it is MY experience that there are only two kinds of pirates: Those who are committing acts of wanton savagery, and those PLANNING to commit acts of wanton savagery!"

- Admiral Ricardo Luigi Pierre M'Benga Chang Nehru O'Hara Casaba the Third, Monkey Island 4.

Re:Note the spin... (2, Funny)

LilGuy (150110) | more than 5 years ago | (#27111429)

Soon you'll be wearing my sword like a shish kebab!

Not like The Pirate Bay (5, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#27110937)

The filesharing server is giving out the content. The Pirate Bay does not.

Re:Not like The Pirate Bay (1, Insightful)

JRGhaddar (448765) | more than 5 years ago | (#27111259)

The argument that "We don't host the files so we are not at fault" is extremely weak.

Now I know it's unpopular on here to go against TPB guys here on slashdot, but they could be considered accessories.

Just as if someone was robbing a bank and you hold the door open so they can escape easier.

Now there is no crime for "opening a door" in fact that would be typically a nice gesture.

But the act of aiding and enabling those who commit a crime to do so does make them liable.

Then what about "we didn't know they were robbing the bank so we are not in fault" this doesn't work because TPB were indeed the individuals who made a door in the first place, and with that creation bares a responsibility of who goes in and who goes out. Of which they were clearly notified that some individuals were committing crimes.

I understand blah blah you can't control me blah blah big media lots of money blah blah I don't want to pay for something I enjoy... but whatever get over it.

All media should be free. Okay done.. now if all media is free than all software should be free. okay done. Now all services and products should be free okay done.

It won't work. Complete freedom is not good because we need constraints for society, civilization, and technology to progress.

A fish in a fish bowl lives a fish out of a fishbowl dies.

If we were to make all media free it would in effect kill the fish, in this case big media, and if we were to do that then there would be:

No Star Wars, No Star Trek, No Family Guy, No Indiana Jones, No DailyShow, No SNL (pick the year you like), No Office, No Office Space... you get the point...

While some champion the new use of technology I for one am disappointed that more aren't championing protecting creative works.

Re:Not like The Pirate Bay (3, Insightful)

Laglorden (87845) | more than 5 years ago | (#27111301)

So, you think people should be convicted for opening a door? or maybe just installing a door?

If there wasn't a door the bank robber couldn't get away! or in for that matter.

We can't convict people for setting up a web-site or hosting torrentfiles (linking to illegal AND legal content). The persons hosting TPB are not the one committing the crime.

It would be more like convicting someone who owns the paper where an advert for the door above (which was used in the bank-robbery). Insane.

Re:Not like The Pirate Bay (1)

JRGhaddar (448765) | more than 5 years ago | (#27111439)

See the point wasn't just opening the door.. the point was opening the door and being aware that robbery is happening... Which they are.

Personal responsibility has to begin somewhere, and it begins the moment you open the door in the first place.

Re:Not like The Pirate Bay (1)

irae (1152885) | more than 5 years ago | (#27111341)

Yeah mods, mod him down as flamebait because you don't agree with him, well done:/

Re:Not like The Pirate Bay (1, Interesting)

muuh-gnu (894733) | more than 5 years ago | (#27111411)

Well, you probably would mod down a nazi elaborating the need to exterminate jews, no matter what his arguments were.

We too systematically mod down copyright nazis whenever they elaborate the need to exterminate information exchange or on the internet and wet dream about large scale for-profit censorship and mass punishments of filesharers.

Re:Not like The Pirate Bay (1)

aurasdoom (1279164) | more than 5 years ago | (#27111377)

Let's ban all american gun shops, because those are the places where people buy guns to kill other people or rob banks & such.

Re:Not like The Pirate Bay (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#27111431)

You conveniently forget the amount of free advertisement as well as free market investigation it produces. Do you know how much advertisement costs? or how much market investigators charge? Hmm, some imaginary figures would be nice. ;) To be truly nonpartial, you should deduct those profits from the imaginary lost sales. They really should try to go with the flow once instead of trying to swim against it. They really should try to go with the flow once instead of trying to swim against it.

Re:Not like The Pirate Bay (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#27111447)

There needs to be a clear line here. If you want to go so far as to say they're accessories, then why not sue ISPs? Why not sue Microsoft? Why not sue motherboard and hard drive manufacturers?

Everything and everyone is an accessory.

You are an accessory to your neighbors stealing movies because that data passes over your wire too.

Without having RTFA... (4, Insightful)

Kokuyo (549451) | more than 5 years ago | (#27110939)

...and just assuming the summary isn't stupid, I'd say this was a good thing. 65 TB of files is... fucking huge.

THIS is what I understand when someone talks about piracy; a few individuals who move about large quantities of media content.

Now the big question would be whether they made money that way, which I assume they did. After all, how do you pay for a 65TB server with corresponding bandwidth?

Re:Without having RTFA... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#27110949)

...and just assuming the summary isn't stupid, I'd say this was a good thing. 65 TB of files is... fucking huge.

65 terabytes spread across at least a dozen computers isn't that much. It just looks good in media.

Your average Swedish teenager gamer's computer has 2 Terabyte harddrives these days. These guys just had another drive for their pr0n.

That said, the TPB user loder hasn't uploaded anything in a week...

Re:Without having RTFA... (1)

Plunky (929104) | more than 5 years ago | (#27110955)

and presumably they should also be prosecuting the people who told them about the servers, since pointing to a server that you can infringe copyright at is also prosecutable.. or is it?

Re:Without having RTFA... (3, Informative)

91degrees (207121) | more than 5 years ago | (#27111025)

No.

There's a concept of intent. If you do something to assist a crime, you're potentially an accessory. If you do something to prevent a crime you're helping the police.

I really don't see any inconsistency here.

Re:Without having RTFA... (3, Interesting)

morie (227571) | more than 5 years ago | (#27111433)

New defence for the Pirate Bay: We are only helping the police. We hyperlink in an effort to prevent a crime by pointing out those servers

Re:Without having RTFA... (1)

dissy (172727) | more than 5 years ago | (#27111161)

and presumably they should also be prosecuting the people who told them about the servers, since pointing to a server that you can infringe copyright at is also prosecutable.. or is it?

It is if you start to refer to doing so as 'verbal hyperlinking', then it becomes accessory to copyright infringement! yaay

Re:Without having RTFA... (5, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#27110959)

After all, how do you pay for a 65TB server with corresponding bandwidth?

How much is the "corresponding" bandwidth? Not sure what you mean by that phrase. I could afford a 65TB server without any difficulty. I don't need one, but we're not talking about something astonishing here. Less than I'm about to spend on roof repairs *grumble*

Re:Without having RTFA... (0)

johannesg (664142) | more than 5 years ago | (#27110983)

Now the big question would be whether they made money that way, which I assume they did. After all, how do you pay for a 65TB server with corresponding bandwidth?

Paid subscriptions, most likely. And a terabyte worth of HD space is only about 80 euro's these days, so the total expense does not have to be that high.

But... 65TB... Assuming you watch 8 hours of movies per day, that would still add up to about 8 years of watching. Why could anyone possibly want that?

Re:Without having RTFA... (4, Insightful)

Teun (17872) | more than 5 years ago | (#27111089)

But... 65TB... Assuming you watch 8 hours of movies per day, that would still add up to about 8 years of watching. Why could anyone possibly want that?

I've never heard a stamp collector writes more letters or postcards than average.
Surely many of us have seen how people do things because they can.

Re:Without having RTFA... (1)

Arancaytar (966377) | more than 5 years ago | (#27111017)

corresponding

Could you please take a moment to estimate how much bandwidth "corresponds" to 65TB of disk space?

Or is that the same "corresponding" as the one that resulted in "16,000 movies"? :P

Re:Without having RTFA... (5, Insightful)

Splab (574204) | more than 5 years ago | (#27111051)

Why do you assume that just because you pay extortion like prices for internet where ever you are in the world that everyone else does the same? This is in Sweden, so he most likely has access to 100mbit connection for around $50 a month (if that pricey) with a truly unlimited plan.

Also 65TB while expensive, isn't that hard to build these days, usually you would do so by picking up server hardware from business going under and just fill them with cheap(er) hardware.

Re:Without having RTFA... (5, Informative)

Mirar (264502) | more than 5 years ago | (#27111351)

My 100Mbps (in reality 60Mbps down/20Mbps up) is baked into the rent whether I'd use it or not, so it's "free".

A quick google reveals that several housings in Brandbergen (Haninge, Stockholm) - where the hit was made - have a similar deal. It's fairly common here. So it might not even cost anything to have bandwidth enough to fileshare on a large scale.

Not that I know if "Scene" people actually fileshare on a large scale.

Re:Without having RTFA... (1)

mirshafie (1029876) | more than 5 years ago | (#27111143)

No, they were scene enthusiasts. They're not even "pirates", they are probably the most avid content consumers around. Do your homework.

This is slashdot! (1)

argent (18001) | more than 5 years ago | (#27111321)

...and just assuming the summary isn't stupid

That's crazy talk!

Re:Without having RTFA... (2, Interesting)

Idiomatick (976696) | more than 5 years ago | (#27111345)

Yeah, that's like the price of a used car... 10k US for the drives. Probably another few hundred for the computers. The rest is internet fees. $500/mnth in donations is pretty normal for these things. So it is doable.

My suspicion comes here. What could the server have? 65TB isn't just a lot, it is a suspicious amount. Lets break it down.

Say he has 800,000songs he serves (around 7years solid of music) that is 4TB of space. And lets say the rest is videos. That is about 88,000 DVDs. That since movies began there would be 880 movies a year worth watching. Movies werent that big until recently but I bet this year hollywood isn't going to release 880movies to theaters. This figure also blows away what netflix has to offer. Ignoring the fact that you would have to watch like 6 movies a day to get through the list. It doesn't make any sense.

Re:Without having RTFA... (5, Informative)

jedrek (79264) | more than 5 years ago | (#27111401)

65TB isn't 'fucking huge' in the world of the 'scene'. Take any movie that comes out, it goes through a couple release cycles. First you get the CAM, which is some dude in a theater with a video camera in his lap. So that's 700mb for the divx and 4gb for the DVD-R of that. Then the TC, another 4.7gb, R5 or DVDSCR: 4.7gb, retail rip: 4.7gb + 4gb for the PAL DVD-R. Then somebody releases a divx internal: 1.4gb and a dvd9: 9gb. Then it comes out on blu-ray and there's a 720p rip at 4gb and a 1080p rip at 9gb. That's almost 50gb for the full lifespan of a single movie release, not counting kids movies that often come out in language-specific versions.

TV shows are huge too. Approx 10gb of new TV shows were released yesterday in xvid and x264. That's the major shows - you could easily double it counting Discovery Channel shows, British TV, etc. It's like that, day in, day out.

Games and applications come in at 1-14gb/pop, including almost-monthly releases of windows xp, windows xp64, vista x86 and 64bit.

And remember, this is all spread out over multiple servers, multiple copies, etc.

The fact is that there is just an incredible amount of data out there being produced every single day.

"Corresponding"? (5, Informative)

Reality Master 301 (1462839) | more than 5 years ago | (#27110943)

There wasn't 16k movies, nor 65tb of files. The media exaggerates everything, the only thing they know is that the serverS (note the s) had a combined storage space of 65tb.

Re:"Corresponding"? (3, Insightful)

gowen (141411) | more than 5 years ago | (#27111005)

The media exaggerates everything,

Even if the statement is not true (and you offer no actual evidence it isn't), this exaggeration comes from Antpiratbyrån, not from the media.

Re:"Corresponding"? (3, Insightful)

Jafafa Hots (580169) | more than 5 years ago | (#27111053)

"and you offer no actual evidence it isn't"

I didn't think that's how these things were supposed to work.

Re:"Corresponding"? (4, Funny)

gowen (141411) | more than 5 years ago | (#27111169)

You're right. Internet discussion boards are rarely improved by the injection of factual evidence.

Re:"Corresponding"? (5, Funny)

91degrees (207121) | more than 5 years ago | (#27111207)

[citation needed]

I'm going to internet meme hell for this comment aren't I?

Re:"Corresponding"? (1)

BlueStrat (756137) | more than 5 years ago | (#27111265)

[citation needed]

I'm going to internet meme hell for this comment aren't I?

*DING*

You have arrived at your station.

Please use caution when exiting the conveyance.

Thanks for traveling Slashdot.

HAND HTH KTHXBY

Re:"Corresponding"? (5, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#27111065)

this exaggeration comes from Antpiratbyrån, not from the media.

Maybe, but when the article contains such gems as 'the server is part of an international pirate network called "The Scene,"', you have to conclude that the reporter isn't exactly familiar with the field he's writing about and probably barely understood a word of what was being said to him.

Re:"Corresponding"? (5, Insightful)

gowen (141411) | more than 5 years ago | (#27111179)

Right. His level of technical knowledge is another reason why he's not exaggerating the figures himself -- he's just mindlessly regurgitating what the Swedish Anti-Piracy guy told him.

Re:"Corresponding"? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#27111209)

Yeah and then they go on to say that "the scene" is responsible for spreading files to P2P sites "including the pirate bay." I bet there are a lot of people in the scene that dont like reading that. The scene has always been against their releases getting out, but there is always some kid at the bottom of the chain that wants to look cool to non-sceners and spreads it. Basically the author seems to have done no research and is just trying to make the bust seem hardcore.

Re:"Corresponding"? (1)

Reality Master 301 (1462839) | more than 5 years ago | (#27111113)

I'm sorry, I didn't realize the media was always perfect and not required to check the facts of a story. I also failed to understand that they're not required to actually be more than a one-sided press release vehicle. Forgive me also for not realizing that perpetuating an exaggeration is ok, it stops being an exaggeration after the source. end-of-sarcasm

65 terabytes hey? (5, Funny)

alienunknown (1279178) | more than 5 years ago | (#27110947)

Some members of this site may be concerned with how many libraries of congress this 65 terabytes can hold. I'm more concerned with how much of the 65 terabytes is porn.

If 65 terabytes of porn has just been removed from the net it could very well be the largest tragedy that the internets have ever encountered. Just thinking of such a tragedy brings a tear to my eye.

Backup server, anyone?

Re:65 terabytes hey? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#27111015)

Here is one [youporn.com]

Re:65 terabytes hey? (4, Funny)

mwvdlee (775178) | more than 5 years ago | (#27111285)

65TB of porn, that would amount to a massive 0,2 promille of all the internet porn. Morn this godforsaken day!

Re:65 terabytes hey? (1)

poena.dare (306891) | more than 5 years ago | (#27111359)

It's not that bad. In the absence of porn the internet constantly creates and destroys virtual porn. This is called the Cashmere Sweater effect and... oh damn I meant to post this to another story. nm

Re:65 terabytes hey? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#27111299)

Don't worry, if it was 65 TB of porn, I have backups! ;)

Just like the Intrepid! (4, Funny)

pallmall1 (882819) | more than 5 years ago | (#27110951)

Today they seized a fileserver containing about 65 terabytes of files...

Gee, I guess that's why the one seeder of the torrent file I was downloading went offline. Strange, I shuddered with pain [startrek.com] when it happened, like 65 terabytes crying out in astonishement as the server died.

Re:Just like the Intrepid! (0, Redundant)

eiapoce (1049910) | more than 5 years ago | (#27111129)

I felt a great disturbance in the Force, as if millions of voices suddenly cried out in terror and were suddenly silenced. I fear something terrible has happened.

Torrent Freak (4, Informative)

Norsefire (1494323) | more than 5 years ago | (#27110969)

According to the related article on TorrentFreak [torrentfreak.com] the server was a topsite used by numerous scene groups and Peter Sunde (aka Brokep of the The Pirate Bay) has said that "it is possible that it's a major source" for The Pirate Bay.

Re:Torrent Freak (1)

Computershack (1143409) | more than 5 years ago | (#27111111)

I thought Peter Sunde claimed not to have anything to do with the daily running of the site?

Re:Torrent Freak (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#27111149)

Actually, what Peter Sunde said was that it was _not_ a major source for Pirate Bay that has over 800k people uploading to it.

Re:Torrent Freak (1)

clarkkent09 (1104833) | more than 5 years ago | (#27111203)

Read it again

"Peter Sunde of The Pirate Bay disagrees however. He says that more than 800,000 people have uploaded stuff to The Pirate Bay, and that it is unlikely to be the only source, but that it could possibly be a major source."

Re:Torrent Freak (2, Informative)

eulernet (1132389) | more than 5 years ago | (#27111419)

You are wrong.
Top warez sites are never connected to P2P networks.
And you have to pay to access to such sites.

Also, it seems that the site was a huge archive, since most of the warez sites only handle a couple of months of releases.

BTW, shutting down a server won't change anything, since there are a lot of servers around the world, and they are not connected to each others.

Re:Torrent Freak (1)

ravenlock (693538) | more than 5 years ago | (#27111397)

Right...

Ponten also claimed that the Sunnydale topsite was the source of all pirated material available on The Pirate Bay, but this was denied by Peter Sunde. "More than 800,000 people have uploaded to The Pirate Bay, so I don't believe it's the source of everything. But it is possible that it's a major source," he said.

65TB of what (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#27110971)

65TB of torrents or actuall content?

meh (1)

dltopdx (1109497) | more than 5 years ago | (#27110981)

removing 65TB from the internet has the same effect as shutting down 500 average filesharers. yeah, it sucks, but it's not going to have a huge impact.

Re:meh (2, Interesting)

Splab (574204) | more than 5 years ago | (#27111067)

This was most likely a dump site, so this probably means quite a lot of old stuff has gone off the grid now (they make the comparison in movies, but it is more than likely mostly TV shows).

New releases will find a new hub to distribute through, but it will take some time - also often with these raids the "scene" will go a bit underground, disconnect etc. until they are back to a comfortable level where everyone knows each other.

65 TB?!?! *gasp* (4, Insightful)

vigmeister (1112659) | more than 5 years ago | (#27110995)

Today they seized a fileserver containing about 65 terabytes of files, corresponding to around 16,000 full-length movies

65 terabytes of files? Storage space of that magnitude is unfathomable! How many full length movies would that be? 16000 you say? That is still too large for me to process. If I wrote down all the files in 1s and 0s, how many football fields would that occupy?

Every slashdot user can divide 65 TB by the size of a DVD. Unfortunately, full-length movies are NOT a standard measure of storage space. Least of all on slashdot in the context of file-sharing.

Cheers!

Re:65 TB?!?! *gasp* (1)

Skapare (16644) | more than 5 years ago | (#27111087)

65 terabytes of files? Storage space of that magnitude is unfathomable! How many full length movies would that be? 16000 you say? That is still too large for me to process. If I wrote down all the files in 1s and 0s, how many football fields would that occupy?

At the standard Moore's Law rate, if applied to storage, you'll be able to carry all that around in your pocket in 15 years.

Re:65 TB?!?! *gasp* (1)

dangitman (862676) | more than 5 years ago | (#27111175)

At the standard Moore's Law rate, if applied to storage, you'll be able to carry all that around in your pocket in 15 years.

And I thought my joke alluding to goatse was gross. This is just sick.

Re:65 TB?!?! *gasp* (4, Funny)

tpgp (48001) | more than 5 years ago | (#27111095)

If I wrote down all the files in 1s and 0s, how many football fields would that occupy?

Depends on the font size.

Re:65 TB?!?! *gasp* (5, Funny)

julian67 (1022593) | more than 5 years ago | (#27111147)

For UK readers 65TB of files is the equivalent to an area half the size of Wales, 10 Wembleys, 3 Home Office Detention Centres or 12 double decker buses!!!

Re:65 TB?!?! *gasp* (0, Flamebait)

dangitman (862676) | more than 5 years ago | (#27111163)

Unfortunately, full-length movies are NOT a standard measure of storage space. Least of all on slashdot...

No, but distended rectums are.

Re:65 TB?!?! *gasp* (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#27111327)

If I wrote down all the files in 1s and 0s, how many football fields would that occupy?

Your analogy is very unfathomable. It's like "If I vaporize 65 tonnes of H2O in space, how many swimming pool would that occupy?" It's just plain stupid.

While I agree it's wrong to use '16.000 full-length movies' to relate them, it's not that hard to fathom 65TB of digital space. Think about a stack of 33 bricks of 2TB disks. It's about that size, with 1TB to spare.

Again, it isn't clear whether the unique contents are 65 terabytes (and it's not tebibytes) combined and whether they use a raid configuration or not. Media just loves to exaggerate.

And this from http://torrentfreak.com/large-pirate-topsite-raided-in-sweden-090306/

Update: Only one of Sunnydaleâ(TM)s servers was seized, the location of the other servers remains unknown.

Re:65 TB?!?! *gasp* (1)

Idiomatick (976696) | more than 5 years ago | (#27111417)

It corresponds to 70,000 Olympic football pitches.

16,000 movies? (4, Funny)

Arancaytar (966377) | more than 5 years ago | (#27111001)

That's very amazing. Movie technology has existed how long now? If we're very generous and round it up to 100 years, then the world must have produced 160 movies per year, or nearly one every two days, for there to be that many.

Gosh, the box office has been busy, hasn't it.

Re:16,000 movies? (1)

ABasketOfPups (1004562) | more than 5 years ago | (#27111045)

You can find numbers on the net, from 45,000 films (US) to millions (may include foreign). Depends on how and what you count.

Re:16,000 movies? (1)

sodul (833177) | more than 5 years ago | (#27111293)

Grandparent might have assumed that a Film has to be from one of the big Hollywood productions or it does not qualify.

If you look at netflix online movies they have 'only' 12,000 titles available, yet quite a few people (including my wife) think the selection is limited which is true since they have about 100,000 titles on DVD, most of it are American titles, and while their foreign selection is ok they miss a *lot* of things. I pretty sure that many countries produce more than 160 movies each every year, heck Tokyo alone might produce that many 'features' every month (not stuff to show to your grandma though).

I think the grandparent tried to show he was smart by proving his ignorance and this is just your typical american that see the world like this [msxnet.org] . A few miles from where I live we have The Language Capital of the World [montereyla...apital.org] , The Garlic Capital of the World [state.ms.us] and the Artichoke Center of the World [beachcalifornia.com] .

My point ? For many people in the US the 'World' ends at the county line.

p.s.: before the grammar nazis show up let me say that English is my third language, ... and it's 4AM.

Re:16,000 movies? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#27111047)

http://geography.about.com/cs/countries/a/numbercountries.htm
Being this many countries in the world. Around 1 movie per country per year doesn't sound that unreasonable.....

Re:16,000 movies? (1)

auLucifer (1371577) | more than 5 years ago | (#27111061)

or nearly one every two days

How long does it take to make pr0n?

Re:16,000 movies? (5, Funny)

Teun (17872) | more than 5 years ago | (#27111119)

6-10 inches.

Re:16,000 movies? (2, Insightful)

clarkkent09 (1104833) | more than 5 years ago | (#27111141)

Note that movies are being used here as unit of measurement. The article doesn't mention what portion of that data are movies or whether or not it contains any movies at all.

A unit of scaremongering? (1)

D4C5CE (578304) | more than 5 years ago | (#27111375)

movies are being used here as unit of measurement

Actually they are being used as a unit of scaremongering [wikipedia.org] , and a strange kind of filesharing that would be where one server holds every file in full, amounting to a total of 65 TB.

If they are talking about some FTPWelt.com [cebit.de] kind of pay-for-download archive, there seems to be something fishy (in particular at this point in time) about the purported link between TPB and an alleged über-Camorra known as -OMG, shiver me timbers- "The Scene".

Re:16,000 movies? (1)

91degrees (207121) | more than 5 years ago | (#27111231)

Well, Googling for "this week's movie releases" gave me a site listing 14 releases this week. Another gave 140 DVD releases including a lot of TV shows on DVD.

And none of them included porn - an industry that truly goes for quantity over quality.

Re:16,000 movies? (4, Informative)

odie_q (130040) | more than 5 years ago | (#27111367)

IMDb lists 438,664 theatrically released movies.
Source: IMDb statistics page [imdb.com]

An international pirate network called 'The Scene' (5, Funny)

D4C5CE (578304) | more than 5 years ago | (#27111011)

the server is part of an international pirate network called "The Scene,"

What a well-organized network that must be to have such unmistakably identifiable persons (some even being computers!) among its membership under this absolutely new and unique trademark name. ;-)
Now where are the ships and home port of their evil "pirate" fleet?

Whoopy do. (2, Insightful)

jack2000 (1178961) | more than 5 years ago | (#27111055)

How do I mod the entire article -1: Stupid?

What a complete coincidence (1)

mrsam (12205) | more than 5 years ago | (#27111059)

What a complete coincidence that this happened right after The Pirate Bay trial concluded, and not before. Because, after all, that was exactly what the defense position's was: go after the actual infringers.

Were this raid to happen a week ago, it would've been the highlight reel of TPB's testimony -- evidence that aptly demonstrates who exactly is committing copyright infringement.

Your aRrr Online. (1)

Ostracus (1354233) | more than 5 years ago | (#27111123)

"SmugJerk writes "Authorities are continuing to apply pressure on Sweden's filesharing community amid the trial of several principals of The Pirate Bay filesharing site. Today they seized a fileserver containing about 65 terabytes of files, corresponding to around 16,000 full-length movies."

OK so let me know when we get to the particular right that's being violated and I'll get excited. Otherwise it's business as usual around here.

Re:Your aRrr Online. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#27111193)

OK so let me know when we get to the particular right that's being violated and I'll get excited.

It seems to be alleged that the exclusive distribution rights of copyright holders were being violated. We won't know for sure until the trial, I guess, but if this is the sort of thing that turns you on then feel free to get excited now.

65 TB in one server just for filesharing? (0)

Britz (170620) | more than 5 years ago | (#27111159)

If we assume an average of 1TB per drive, which is a high average, since 1.5 TB just came out last month and I don't suppose he bought all his drives last month, that is 65 drives on one server.
Using IDE or SATA it is not possible in a "normal" setting, because there are 4 to 6 drives to the standard el cheapo IDE or SATA controller. With up to 7 or 8 slots on an E-ATX mainboard this is nowhere near 65 drives.

So he must have been using some kind of NAS or iSCSI solution. For filesharing? Why? All the crazy filesharers/movie collectors I know burn tons of CDs or DVDs for storage.

And what kind of a pipe must this guy have had to utilize sharing 65 TB?

This sounds like someone may have converted 650 GB to 65 TB or something like that.

Re:65 TB in one server just for filesharing? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#27111371)

Apparently, there wasn't ONE server, there might be a farm of servers. Given the police has a habit of taking anything that looks remotely like a computer it might be someones computers not used for the site in questions or just some poor neighbours home computer or anything.

In the Pirate Bay raid the police took the 11 computers that was "the pirate bay" but they also nabbed 180 someting other computers that was just in the same vincinty as TPB.

In the home for the persons behind TPB they took stuff like old PDP computers (likely not many TB of storage of those though) and Sega/Xbox videogames, mp3-players, technical calculators(?)

I guess they just multiply everything.

I think DVDs qualify as "storage" in Antipiratbyrån's world. So there could be DVSs, backup-tapes or whatever shit included in that figure.

Probably not just one server though.

65 terabytes? (5, Funny)

philipmather (864521) | more than 5 years ago | (#27111171)

65 terabytes? Shirley you don't need a full install of Vista just for a file server?

Come on... the "Libraries of Congress" gag has been done so it only left me with the "in Soviet Russia" line, "...profit" or generic Microsoft bashing. ;^P

this isn't filesharing... (1)

Turiko (1259966) | more than 5 years ago | (#27111187)

...since filesharing is semi-decentralised. None of the files are actually on anyone's servers; the users have them.

Re:this isn't filesharing... (1)

Logic Worshiper (1480539) | more than 5 years ago | (#27111309)

Some users make servers for other users, so a server can exist although the users "have the files".

Re:this isn't filesharing... (1)

Turiko (1259966) | more than 5 years ago | (#27111331)

You're right, altough i doubt a user would make 65 terrabite available ;)

Stop spreading that false FUD (5, Insightful)

meist3r (1061628) | more than 5 years ago | (#27111213)

Jeez, does anyone ever check their sources? MSNBC of all things? You know what the MS stands for do you?

Other than that:

There was not ONE server with 65TB but a "ring" of servers with "suspected" 65TB overall data. Police took down exactly one single server. All the other servers were shut down by the people running them so they could not be traced further.

[ENG] http://torrentfreak.com/large-pirate-topsite-raided-in-sweden-090306/ [torrentfreak.com]
[SWE] http://www.aftonbladet.se/nyheter/article4582094.ab [aftonbladet.se]
[ENG] http://www.thelocal.se/18050/20090306/ [thelocal.se]
Just the fact that they dub that "the biggest raid ever" is such a hilarious demonstration of how much they don't know.

"Ponten said the server ring had collapsed as a direct result of the raid." hahahaha
Did you mean, was redirected and pulled out of your sight? And even if it "collapsed" these are Gigabit sites, backup is easy and there is, well let me understate, definitely more than one of these.

Re:Stop spreading that false FUD (2, Informative)

DELNI-AA (1132369) | more than 5 years ago | (#27111329)

... and further to that; Swedish police are unable to confirm that this took place at all...
http://www.idg.se/2.1085/1.216376/antipiratbyran-rekordtillslag-mot-svensk-piratserver [www.idg.se] ... and from the same source; servers in the ring where accessible by non-anonymous ftp.

I agree; likely to be an imaginary event.

Sad days (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#27111267)

I am listening to my sad music now... oh wait, that isn't the same Scene, is it..?

I'll just go sit in the corner now.

Dark side (1)

Swoopy (101558) | more than 5 years ago | (#27111297)

The ability to host 65 terabytes of movies is insignificant compared to the power of the dark side ....

65TB gone... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#27111325)

And nothing of value was lost.

A new network called "The Scene" (3, Funny)

heretoo (1230368) | more than 5 years ago | (#27111365)

Mmm hmm... and they all belonged to a network called "The Scene".. probably made with a "series of tubes"..

Not really "on" the server (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#27111385)

I hope they don't have a daisy chain of firewire drives connected together to get to 65TB. I guess this is the way a Mac user/admin would do it?

This amount of storage needs to be on a SAN/Frame.

Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?
or Connect with...

Don't worry, we never post anything without your permission.

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>