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!

The Pirate Bay Launches Browser To Evade ISP Blockades

timothy posted about a year ago | from the speak-friend-and-enter dept.

The Internet 118

hypnosec writes "The Pirate Bay, on its 10th anniversary, has released 'Pirate Browser,' which it claims would allow people to access The Pirate Bay and other such blocked sites. The 'Pirate Browser' is a fully functional browser that currently works with Windows. ... According to the Pirate Browser website, the browser is basically a bundled package consisting of the Tor client and Firefox Portable browser. The package also includes some tools meant for evading censorship in countries like UK, Finland, Denmark, and Iran among others."

cancel ×

118 comments

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

As always... (5, Informative)

djupedal (584558) | about a year ago | (#44530689)

The internet sees any blockage as an outage and works to avoid it.

Re:As always... (2, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44530737)

Needs a Linux version.

There is one. (2, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44530825)

Re:There is one. (0)

rudy_wayne (414635) | about a year ago | (#44530999)

So all they have done is take the "Tor Bundle" which is nothing more than a specially configured version of Firefox, and call it "The Pirate Browser".

Re:There is one. (1)

pipatron (966506) | about a year ago | (#44531361)

From their FAQ:

Does it make me surf the net anonymously?

No, this browser is just to circumvent censorship, to remove limits on accessing sites governments don't want you to know about.

Re:There is one. (2)

budgenator (254554) | about a year ago | (#44531419)

Well they changed the name didn't they, so its not exactly the Tor Bundle.

Re:There is one. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44533821)

And "Ice Weasel" is the same as "Fire Fox" with a non copyrighted name. Yes, welcome to internet, thats how we roll.

Re:As always... (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44530863)

Needs a Linux version.

Bitch, bitch, bitch. Damn, is that all you *NIX nerds know how to do all day, WINE about this? No wonder they chose that acronym.

Re:As always... (1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44530827)

It is a game of chess. ISPs will move to block this (no surprise to anyone, including PB) and another move will be made. Wash, rinse, repeat.

What the censors don't understand is that their actions are actually resulting in new tech and new approaches to evade and avoid their censorship. They are creating a self fulfilling prophecy and fueling the actions of their targeted "victims".

Re:As always... (3, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44531103)

It is a game of chess. ISPs will move to block this (no surprise to anyone, including PB) and another move will be made. Wash, rinse, repeat.

What the censors don't understand is that their actions are actually resulting in new tech and new approaches to evade and avoid their censorship. They are creating a self fulfilling prophecy and fueling the actions of their targeted "victims".

Yes, and the only ignorance in that mentality is thinking that the citizens will be the ones who will ultimately "win" here.

Chess game? No, not quite. More like cat and mouse. When governments find they've had enough of that shit, and you suddenly find you need to pass a background check and obtain a personal license in order to simply obtain internet service, along with new federal law making all public (read unregulated) internet access points illegal, then you may find yourself thinking differently about this.

Sound completely outlandish and impossible? Yeah, I though the same thing once about Orwellian prophecies too.

The problem with cat and mouse games is the cat eventually gets the mouse. Every time.

Re:As always... (2)

darthdavid (835069) | about a year ago | (#44532901)

Actually cats, like most predators, fail to catch their prey way more than they succeed. That is to say, the mouse usually escapes.

Re:As always... (1)

bestalexguy (959961) | about a year ago | (#44533033)

the only ignorance in that mentality is thinking that the citizens will be the ones who will ultimately "win" here.

I'm afraid you fail to see a much bigger ignorance in your mentality. You talk about citizens while you should rather say the tiny % of citizens who actually give a damn about internet freedom (or lack of control and regulation).

People make revolutions for things they care about; unsurprisingly, they let politicians do what the lobbies command on all the other issues.
In my country I can't see thousands of protesters in the streets on this issue. Not even dozens. Not even one.

Politicians are evil, but on this matter they don't even need to be, to get what they want.

Re:As always... (1)

mrchaotica (681592) | about a year ago | (#44534275)

I'll just leave this right here...

The Right to Read [gnu.org]

Re:As always... (1)

mcneely.mike (927221) | about a year ago | (#44533341)

"The only way to win is not to play."

"How about a nice game of...... oh, never mind."

Re:As always... (3, Interesting)

buchner.johannes (1139593) | about a year ago | (#44530867)

I am still waiting for a SSL-only browser. And no old buggy versions enabled please.

Re:As always... (1)

mcgrew (92797) | about a year ago | (#44531007)

From their page it looked like it used open-source components, but I didn't see any links to source code. I think I'd want it available for inspection and recompiling and letting people make modifications like you suggested. If I were in one of the countries listed on their site I'd sure want it -- but I'd still be paranoid and want the source code.

If the source is available I apologize for my ignorance.

Re:As always... (4, Informative)

pipatron (966506) | about a year ago | (#44531495)

It's "just" the tor browser bundle and firefox portable, they link to both, where sources can be had. The custom configs are (naturally) included in this release for inspection. It seems that they configure Tor to be as fast as possible while removing some possible anonymity, and they block certain countries as exits to remove censorship. Then they have a dynamic proxy to automatically route torrent sites through Tor.

Re:As always... (1)

Trax3001BBS (2368736) | about a year ago | (#44533803)

It's "just" the tor browser bundle and firefox portable, they link to both, where sources can be had.

I use TOR; it claims it wasn't ment for the downloading large files, some of the sites take forever just to load the graphics.

Re:As always... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44534009)

There is nothing wrong with using Tor to download torrents. Torrents are small. When Torrents are opened the data downloaded based on them may be huge although presumably the pirate browser has made it such that users are not warned about dangers and the like. They have simply taken a browser (Tor Browser Bundle) that was meant for anonymity and made it into a browser solely designed for bypassing censorship where the anonymity part doesn't really matter, but the bypassing part does.

Re:As always... (1)

metrix007 (200091) | about a year ago | (#44533393)

Why? Are you going to review it yourself? If not, what makes you think others will?

Re:As always... (1)

Culture20 (968837) | about a year ago | (#44532679)

Just block everything outgoing except port 443. It would be a rare site that would serve http on 443. If you're less paranoid, you could block just outgoing port 80.

Re:As always... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44530869)

If plumbing has a blockage a plumber is called to unblock, if a road is blocked we use another to go around it. If ISP is blocked it's a problem dealing with ass-holes so we go around them. Pirate browser is a fix to a problem, all is good !

Re:As always... (1)

brit74 (831798) | about a year ago | (#44530949)

If this were true, then why did it take 10 years for the PirateBay to create it?

Re:As always... (2)

fredprado (2569351) | about a year ago | (#44530985)

You mean this specific solution? Because they had the idea just now. They have been evading and routing around censorship for all these 10 years, though.

Re:As always... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44530989)

Because it isn't a necessity; it might be convenient, but there have always been other ways to get around the blocks.

Re:As always... (1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44530995)

Sweden has long ping times, on account of the cold, and being frozen 6 months of the year.

Also they were busy building Volvos.

Re:As always... (1)

PaddyM (45763) | about a year ago | (#44531265)

If only it wasn't conceived as a communications network designed to survive a nuclear attack!

Magical Thinking. (2)

westlake (615356) | about a year ago | (#44531421)

The internet sees any blockage as an outage and works to avoid it.

The Internet sees and understands nothing. It is a machine like any other. It can be managed and it can be changed.

The notion that a communications network with a global reach and universal access is inherently anarchic and ungovernable is as old as the telegraph and probably older than the semaphore. The geek should know better.

Re:Magical Thinking. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44532457)

communications network with a global reach and universal access is inherently anarchic and ungovernable

Not really. The Internet is built by commercial ISPs which in turn have to obey the governments and regulations. You'd be surprised how fast the majority of piracy traffic can be destroyed when the big guys start to play the hard ball. It just hasn't happened yet, and is not likely to happen in the immediate years. We can talk about Tor and similar undernets, but not as many people would bother to use them when the major torrent sites are crushed. It's that simple.

Re:Magical Thinking. (1)

spire3661 (1038968) | about a year ago | (#44532475)

The conditions of the machine are such that the ground state is to route around damage. You can can put in a raised floor that captures the run off and prevent it from going to ground, but thats not the same thing. As originally designed, the internet routes around damage.

Re:Magical Thinking. (1)

AmiMoJo (196126) | about a year ago | (#44533053)

The internet is different. Older networks were mostly point-to-point, with blockages being very difficult to route around. The internet is awash with alternative routes to places. We have darknets too, so you can be on the internet and create a web site or send a message completely anonymously and in a way that is almost impossible to block.

It is of course an arms race, but unlike previous networks the internet makes it easy for people to create new protocols and routes themselves. Look at how ineffective the authorities have been at preventing the use of file sharing for copyright infringement. All attempts to take down TPB or block it in any country in the world have failed utterly. No amount of money or campaign contributions can control it. It is both anarchic and ungovernable.

The machine itself may not route around censorship, but I consider the users to be part of "the internet" and they certainly do.

is it good (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44530703)

for porn in uk?

sounds like (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44530709)

naboo needs to use this to escape that blockade

Evading from... (4, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44530723)

evading censorship in countries like UK, Finland, Denmark, and Iran among others.

So it has come to this.

Re:Evading from... (3, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44530799)

That moment when you realize your nation is mentioned in the same sentence as one of the most backwards places on Earth.

*facepalm*

The Netherlands is missing from this list. So is China...

different reasons though (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44530933)

With Iran, it's about political and religious censorship and online activists.

The Finns have censored child porn sites [wikipedia.org]

Also in 2006, the government started Internet censorship by delivering Finnish ISPs a secret blocking list maintained by Finnish police. Implementation of the block was voluntary, but some ISPs implemented it. The list was supposed to contain only sites with child pornography, but ended up also blocking, among others, the site lapsiporno.info that criticized the move towards censorship and listed sites that were noticed to have been blocked.

I think all censorship is wrong, but frankly putting Iran with Finland, Denmark and the UK in the same sentence with Iran is a bit misleading. And having stumbled on porn sites in past quite easily (Whitehouse.com instead of .gov anyone?), I'm not outraged over the blocking of child porn. If there is a legitimate site being voluntarily blocked by an ISP that I must access for whatever reason, then I'll get around it. But considering the draconian laws against child porn, I'll take the censorship for fear of accidentally being condemned for life over an accident.

What we should really being in an outrage over are the overly zealous laws against sex thought crimes and the fact that these children are being used by sick bastards who produce that shit.

Re:different reasons though (3, Insightful)

fredprado (2569351) | about a year ago | (#44531029)

But it is the same thing. This IS political censorship. In both places censorship tries to block what is against the law. In both places people use programs to get around it because they don't agree with those laws.

Re:different reasons though (1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44532473)

We are still not talking about any serious violation on human rights or free speech as long as we are only talking about blocking copyright-infringing warez sites.

Re:different reasons though (1)

The Archon V2.0 (782634) | about a year ago | (#44532841)

So a malum prohibitum or civil offense is enough justification to make something blockable? That's not even a slippery slope, that's halfway down the hill. Build the infrastructure and it WILL be abused, particularly if it's all behind closed doors.

Re:different reasons though (2)

fredprado (2569351) | about a year ago | (#44532917)

Oh yes we are. We are talking about the control of information. We are talking about giving to a few the control over what we could repeat, express or comment about. The same laws that allow for blockades against warez sites allow for blockades against any site that breaks copyright in any way, no matter how marginal or subjective that may be, and it is not a novelty or a rarity to see people using copyright to attempt to block ideas they do not wish to spread.

Re:Evading from... (1)

pipatron (966506) | about a year ago | (#44531507)

The Netherlands and China is covered in this browser bundle. They specifically block dutch and chinese exit nodes, among others.

Re:Evading from... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44532501)

I think you're unfair. The UK has a lot of faults, but I wouldn't call it one of the most backwards places on Earth!

What could have been pretty cool.... (5, Interesting)

mark-t (151149) | about a year ago | (#44530783)

... is if the browser distributed any (unsecured) content which is currently loaded into a tab or window, in addition to any the inline media content such as images or embeded video all via bittorrent... potentially reducing the impact that "flash mobs" might have on websites to the extent that people adopt use of the browser.

It'd be ideal, in my opinion, if someone developed an new protocol based on http that did something like that, but I don't think that's terribly likely to happen

Re:What could have been pretty cool.... (2, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44530873)

The problem with that would be the time it takes to begin download, rather than the download itself. With HTTP, you already know where to download from so the setup time is relatively miniscule; with bittorrent, you have to turn the metadata into a location and then turn around and connect to there. People already complain about how slow HTTP is, so I'd hate to see the reactions to this new hybrid.

P2P HTTP would be great (4, Insightful)

amaurea (2900163) | about a year ago | (#44530943)

I agree. A peer-to-peer http replacement would also mean many more websites could get by without advertisements. With the current centralized model, your traffic load and bandwidth expenses grow as your site gets more popular, meaning that most of them end up having to add advertisements as they get big enough (which isn't necessarily that big), not out of any wish to exploit the users to get rich, but to avoid ruining themselves.

The bittorrent protocol solved this problem for large files by making downloaders participate in uploading too, meaning that a single, low-capacity server can serve a practically unlimited number of concurrent downloads. But bittorrent has too high a start-up cost and too high latency to replace http. I am not sure how easy it would be to build a peer-to-peer http replacement that has low enough latency to be useable for html pages etc., and it would not work for cases sites like slashdot etc., where each user sees the site slightly differently.. And of course, there would be the problem of getting enough users for it to be viable. But I think it could be done, and would be valuable once in place.

Of course, one could try to go a bit further too, and make the site data itself distributed and encrypted, to make it censorship-resistant and anonymous. But that would add a huge amount of overhead, as demonstrated by freenet [wikipedia.org] , which has even larger latency issues than bittorrent (if I recall correctly) due to the need to obsufcate the routing. So while something like freenet is good to have, it would also be nice to have something simpler and faster like what you suggested.

Re:P2P HTTP would be great (1)

☛ (3015109) | about a year ago | (#44531013)

You're thinking of Freenet and its' "freesites".

Re:P2P HTTP would be great (3, Interesting)

SuricouRaven (1897204) | about a year ago | (#44531299)

He did mention Freenet. Specifically saying that it did exactly what he wants to see done, but the level of anti-tracking anti-censoring built in comes with severe performance penalties.

Re:P2P HTTP would be great (1)

amaurea (2900163) | about a year ago | (#44531321)

I mentioned freenet in the post you just replied to. I like the concept of freenet, but I think anonymity and distributed storage has too great an overhead to be a viable http replacement. But perhaps I'm being pessimistic here.

Re:P2P HTTP would be great (1)

AmiMoJo (196126) | about a year ago | (#44533067)

The entire Pirate Bay database is about 100MB. It seems like it could easily be built in to a torrent client and updated in a distributed fashion.

I'm not sure if that includes comments though, which are worth having. Even so, a few hundred megabytes is nothing these days. Finally BitTorrent could be completely decentralized, independent of both trackers and websites.

TOR Browser Bundle (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44530795)

Is just a custom variant of the TOR browser bundle set up to be less anonymous...

Why? (1)

lennier1 (264730) | about a year ago | (#44530821)

There are enough sites which have opted for the more sensible way to publish an extension for major browsers that automates the "proxy/alternate DNS" process to circumvent this kind of censorship (e.g., the ton of measures to circumvent websites' self-censorship in Germany due to the damn GEMA).

Having a separate browser for every censored website sounds even more of a waste of space than needing a different add-on for different kinds of censorship measures.

Re:Why? (1)

Nrrqshrr (1879148) | about a year ago | (#44530907)

Isn't this simply a tor/firfox bundle though? You could simply download it and check whatever blocked websites you want, if I understood correctly

i see things shifting (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44530893)

UK, Finland, Denmark, and Iran - the axis of evil!

Re:i see things shifting (1)

jones_supa (887896) | about a year ago | (#44532485)

In Finland the access to the site has been restored for most places when they moved to the thepiratebay.sx domain.

Sneakernet beats all countermeasures ... (1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44530899)

Ship a hard drive around, among a circle of trusted friends.

While the drive stops at its various "nodes", content can be
added.

Let's the the RIAA / MPAA cabal beat THAT.

Re:Sneakernet beats all countermeasures ... (1)

brit74 (831798) | about a year ago | (#44530973)

Sneaknet is such a stupid idea. It's horrendously slow and takes a lot of work. You really think lazy pirates are going to be happy about having to get off their asses and physically move stuff around in order to get copies of stuff? In a sneakernet environment, most will start paying for the shit they steal. Not to mention that any hard drive that exists is only going to contain a small subset of all the stuff they want to steal ("What? This hard drive only has Photoshop from 2009 and no music? I wanted a copy of the latest Hollywood blockbuster.")

Re: Sneakernet beats all countermeasures ... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44531095)

I think you're missing the fact that he was making a joke.

Re: Sneakernet beats all countermeasures ... (1)

pipatron (966506) | about a year ago | (#44531533)

The MAFIAA doesn't seem to get jokes.

Re:Sneakernet beats all countermeasures ... (1)

SuricouRaven (1897204) | about a year ago | (#44531319)

These issues can be solved using a very simple piece of technology: The great big drive. We're up to four terabytes now, and growing rapidly. With advances in compression, a sixteen-terabyte box could easily hold enough media in diverse enough tastes to keep anyone happy for a year. The hard part will be just finding the good stuff.

Re:Sneakernet beats all countermeasures ... (1)

jones_supa (887896) | about a year ago | (#44532513)

We're up to four terabytes now, and growing rapidly.

Maybe I'm nitpicking, but we are not growing that rapidly... The 4TB disk has been available for over couple of years already. The next bump will require the research in perpendicular recording or heat-assisted magnetic recording to be incorporated into a real manufacturing process. The labs are probably working on it, but it's unknown when they have something which can be made into a serially manufactured product.

Re:Sneakernet beats all countermeasures ... (1)

SuricouRaven (1897204) | about a year ago | (#44534261)

It does seem to have hit a rut, true. But we are a long way from fundamental physical limitations still. Even four terabytes can store a lot of piracy.

Re:Sneakernet beats all countermeasures ... (1)

TangoMargarine (1617195) | about a year ago | (#44534227)

As The Man makes it harder and harder for the average person to get stuff off the Internet, you're always going to have some number of people who find a way to do it anyway, and damn the inconvenience, specifically *because* they (The Man) have shoved it up their (the people's) asses so far.

Re:Sneakernet beats all countermeasures ... (1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44530993)

Really?
What about being searched as you cross borders/state/count lines?

Anything physical can be confiscated.

I travelled extensively in Eastern Eurpoe when the Iron Curtain was up. People used to lob western magazines out of the train window for their relatives to catch as we sped past. Then they started searching everyone who got in the trains.
Then the people would travel to their relatives and recite the stories that the police (viz Stasi) had banned. They would be copied down much like you see prisoners of war doing in films.
In fact, we are all prisoners these days. It is just that the prison camp is a bit bigger than in WW2.

Re:Sneakernet beats all countermeasures ... (3, Funny)

captjc (453680) | about a year ago | (#44531057)

There's an old joke:

Never underestimate the bandwidth of a station wagon full of tapes hurtling down the highway. --Tanenbaum, Andrew S. (1996). Computer Networks. New Jersey: Prentice-Hall. p. 83. ISBN 0-13-349945-6.

Upgrade that to an SUV filled with Multi-Terrabyte hard drives. Latency's a bitch but throughput is pretty damn good.

Re:Sneakernet beats all countermeasures ... (1)

AmiMoJo (196126) | about a year ago | (#44533073)

If you could sustain a 120MB/sec copy speed a 3TB drive would still take over 7 hours to duplicate. We need faster storage.

Re:Sneakernet beats all countermeasures ... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44533603)

If you are moving 80 000 drives the 7 hours of copying is going to be dwarfed by the time needed to hook them all up. Also, you can't get heavy packages so far in 7 hours, door to door, on a global scale. The duplication time is not the bottleneck here.

I would install an extension (1)

wisnoskij (1206448) | about a year ago | (#44530931)

But I am not installing another browser just for torrenting.

Re:I would install an extension (1)

mcgrew (92797) | about a year ago | (#44531023)

You need more coffee, RTFS again. It has nothing to do with torrenting, it's for evading government censorship while visiting web sites.

Re:I would install an extension (1)

wisnoskij (1206448) | about a year ago | (#44531159)

And what type of sites do they normally block? I would not be using the browser to evade kiddy porn blockages.

Re:I would install an extension (1)

mrbester (200927) | about a year ago | (#44531271)

If you're on Sky, then torrentfreak.com for starters.

Re:I would install an extension (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44531087)

Well, that's good - since you don't actually "install" portable firefox. It runs from a USB key or a folder on your hard drive. No install required. Plus what mcgrew said.

And why should people trust it (3, Informative)

DrXym (126579) | about a year ago | (#44530937)

The Pirate Bay hosts some of the sleaziest and malicious advertising banners of any web site. Ads that pop up masquerading as system alerts, porn ads, ads which trigger downloads of files like executables and apks. This is not a site that I would trust in any way to provide the browsing or download software.

Re:And why should people trust it (2, Insightful)

melikamp (631205) | about a year ago | (#44531213)

That may be, but unlike other sites, TPB looks and works great without JavaScript, and the ad blocker does the rest. FORCING users to run non-free code and watch ads before they can get to the content is way sleazier than anything TPB does.

Re:And why should people trust it (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44533617)

I imagine the people that run TPB all use adblock themselves anyway. I have AdBlock and NoScript (and no Flash plugin) so ads have a hard time making it through to me. I just send a little bitcoin once in a while.

At this point, you either pretty much view ALL advertising as sleazy, or you are simply past caring which adverts are the best. Perhaps TPB owners are mostly in the second category and just accept whichever advertising pays the best.

Re:And why should people trust it (1)

deanrock0 (2977511) | about a year ago | (#44531227)

AdBlock/Ghostery helps a lot. But yeah, I agree that they have intruding ads. I guess there are not a lot of advertising companies that would allow advertising on such websites.

Re:And why should people trust it (1)

Trax3001BBS (2368736) | about a year ago | (#44533831)

AdBlock/Ghostery helps a lot. But yeah, I agree that they have intruding ads

Never heard of Ghostery so gave it a try, had a version for Opera which I thought special (Opera being the black sheep of browsers).

It's been mentioned that Windows will disable a HOSTS file, I've wondered about mine recently as sites are getting through that shouldn't.
Logging on to /. Ghostery claimed it was blocking two Google analytics sites and doubleclick; Ghostery should of never seen them.

Thank you for the heads up.

Re:And why should people trust it (1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44531247)

The Pirate Bay hosts some of the sleaziest and malicious advertising banners of any web site. Ads that pop up masquerading as system alerts, porn ads, ads which trigger downloads of files like executables and apks. This is not a site that I would trust in any way to provide the browsing or download software.

Use adblock while browsing the pirate bay. The pirate browser is a really cool idea for those that don't know how to set up individually the tor bundle and make it work with a generic (IE, Opera, Chrome, Safari or Firefox) browser. Just go to the torrent website through the pirate browser and download the torrent you want. Game over.
And for those that talk about a decentralised p2p web community somebody mentioned the old freesites on freenet, but there is also Osiris. And Osiris doesn't use fucking java and it works. You can publish a site on Osiris and it is replicated as many times as necessary. In fact there is one copy of the webportal for each Osiris user. And you can't censor shit unless you take down ALL the nodes.

Re:And why should people trust it (1)

Type44Q (1233630) | about a year ago | (#44531293)

Ads that pop up masquerading as system alerts, porn ads, ads which trigger downloads of files like executables and apks.

Those with enough knowledge and credibility to have valid perspectives and opinions regarding this subject also know enough to run Adblock and NoScript. Since the latter doesn't seem to apply to you, I suspect the former wouldn't, either.

Re:And why should people trust it (1)

DrXym (126579) | about a year ago | (#44531741)

I suggest in future you read the topic and comprehend the context and concerns in which I responded. It might allow you to formulate something a little less condescending and a little more thoughtful than the mastubatory ego trip you posted this time around.

Re:And why should people trust it (1)

SuricouRaven (1897204) | about a year ago | (#44531327)

Because of the dubious-at-best legality of the site, more 'respectable' advertisers refuse to do business with them. They have to take what they can get.

Re:And why should people trust it (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44531769)

You see ads?

You are not the target market for tpb then. You're the type they want to keep out of the site.

The target is pirates with a clue. And one of the first things a clue tells you is... Block those ads, stop that script, block that adnetwork.

Scummy ads work well to keep the average luser out.

Re:And why should people trust it (2)

DrXym (126579) | about a year ago | (#44531817)

Ah I see. So The Pirate Bay puts malicious ads in as some kind of l33t hacker test does it? And not as a form of revenue stream of taking money where they can get it? And that their own "Pirate browser", a bundle of browser and tor will block those ads and any action they perform? And that given all that they can be trusted on to produce and support this browser bundle? I thought I made my point fairly obvious the first time around but clearly not.

Re:And why should people trust it (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44531783)

ads which trigger downloads of files like executables and apks.

But, even if you download those files, NSA won't know that, because Tor is secure.

Re:And why should people trust it (1)

mrbcs (737902) | about a year ago | (#44532581)

Ever hear of a hosts file? Never seen and ad. The pop-up pops up to a blank page. Then I close it.

Re:And why should people trust it (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44533853)

LoL, n00b. HOSTS 2.0 closes the page automagicaly as well as blanking it. Upgrayyyyyed.

Re:And why should people trust it (1)

XcepticZP (1331217) | about a year ago | (#44532697)

I just opened up ThePirateBay, and I didn't see any ads. Just disable ads with whatever means you have available, and donate if you feel the site is worthy of your money. Just one donation of a few dollars will offset probably hundreds of casual users that disable ads. Let's be honest, you weren't really going to click any of those ads, so you might as well disable them.

Re:And why should people trust it (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44533455)

In other words, you can't trust someone for something they've done in the past or are still doing? How about Microsoft and Google sleeping with NSA w/ PRISM? Perhaps Firefox does this as well, I know Safari does. TPB used to have decent ads until they were blocked from almost all ad agencies. They couldn't even accept paypal donations or anything because major credit card companies and paypal blacklisted them. Now they accept bitcoin but bitcoin isn't exactly anonymous so not many will trust it. So far I have never had an ad on that site that asked me to download an executable or an APK. All I see are porn ads which is not a big deal since if you're torrenting, you've probably seen more porn than the average person.

Re:And why should people trust it (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44533843)

Learn how to use the internet and don't download that crap that pop up. PirateBay isnt a charity, they make money off idiots like everybody else.

Re:And why should people trust it (1)

DrXym (126579) | about a year ago | (#44534351)

11 responses and counting and very few who seem to have bothered to read the submission what it's supposed to do or the point I was making. It may very well be you can adblock but that is utterly beside the point when considering this software, it's purpose or the trustworthiness of who publishes it.

Countdown till Tor blockades begin. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44531189)

Don't worry, they'll block Tor eventually.

Re:Countdown till Tor blockades begin. (3, Interesting)

budgenator (254554) | about a year ago | (#44531605)

I don't think so, Governments use Tor for sensitive communications, if they banned Tor for civilians then only Governments would be using it. If you want to hide a tree, you hide it in a forest, not the middle of a wheat field!

Thanks Mozilla... (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44531253)

For again "fixing" something that wasn't broken, like javascript. It's not like this was used to backtrack tor users...

FUCK YOU, MOZILLA.

Why a browser and not a plugin? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44531381)

I might well be repeating what others have said already. But, why not have a Firefox plugin (which will then run on all OS's that Firefox runs on)? I already have to have a separate browser if I want to use Tor (and while I understand why, it is a pain in the neck to keep to versions of Firefox up to date).

So, why not just a plugin that can do all that stuff?

Re:Why a browser and not a plugin? (1)

pipatron (966506) | about a year ago | (#44531555)

Because the plugin would be Tor.

Re:Why a browser and not a plugin? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44532173)

So what's the bloody point of having a whole new fancy browser then? Why not just say "download Tor Browser" and be done with it? Oh wait, they are also bundling other stuff. Who knows what stuff, but whatever.

Re: Why a browser and not a plugin? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44532203)

its about reaching the masses. TPB is a great medium. 90% probably never heard about Tor. This simplifies things. I dont see any extra bundled software. Looks clean.

how long before it's blocked by a windows update? (1)

BACbKA (534028) | about a year ago | (#44531951)

Surely one of those patch Tuesdays will nuke it out of existance? Or the Windows Malicious Software Removal tool? :-)

Re:how long before it's blocked by a windows updat (1)

mysidia (191772) | about a year ago | (#44533403)

Surely one of those patch Tuesdays will nuke it out of existance? Or the Windows Malicious Software Removal tool? :-)

And then there will be a new patched version of the browser that removes the malware (Windows Update service) that nuked it.

Brilliant (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44533301)

I highly recommend anybody that supports freedom to download and use.

Turn About (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44533305)

I would love to see people start knocking government and corporate sites off the internet so that anytime somebody tried to get to them, all they get is a FBI page, or DHS, or Anonymous or something of this nature.

Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?