After a few days of the pirate bay being raided, Isohunt has reloaded into a new search engine. Isohunt previously has resurrected isohunt.com. source: http://venturebeat.com/2014/12/12/isohunt-unofficially-resurrects-the-pirate-bay/
This discussion has been archived.
No new comments can be posted.
Oldpiratebay.org New Pirate Bay Search Engine
|
Log In/Create an Account
| Top
| 28 comments
| Search Discussion
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday December 15 2014, @03:59AM
Why are there laws outlawing spam? Using the same kind of logic the piracy advocates use, there is no harm done by spam... if you don't like it, delete the messages. What can be easier? Censorship is damage!
The difference is, nobody on /. will defend spammers, and they'll all insist that the laws be enforced, while 95 percent of those who respond to a piracy thread will support the pirates.
It all comes down to where people sit relative to personal self interest... then high falutin slogans follow.
(Score: 1) by KilroySmith on Monday December 15 2014, @04:22AM
I doubt you'll find many people on here who believe that laws will have any impact on SPAM - as a matter of fact, both here and on the old-site-not-to-be-named, I heard nothing but derision when various anti-spam laws were proposed.
You're not likely to find many here who support spam - but the consensus will be finding technical solutions that make spam unpossible or easily filtered, not illegal. I have no need to stifle a spammer; but just because a spammer wants to send mail to me doesn't mean that I have to see it or even receive it.
(Score: 2, Funny) by drgibbon on Monday December 15 2014, @12:30PM
Unpossible was a joke, right? ...
Certified Soylent Fresh!
(Score: 3, Insightful) by ticho on Monday December 15 2014, @01:52PM
Can we stop being childish and start referring to Slashdot normally, like to any other site out there? This makes us look like bunch of butthurt teenagers. Thank you.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday December 15 2014, @02:03PM
Thanks for saying that. I've been waiting for that "joke" to die after the second month of being live.
(Score: 2) by Phoenix666 on Monday December 15 2014, @02:14PM
I see where you're coming from, but you might as well ask Americans to stop referring to Britons as "Limies" or the French as "Frogs" or "Surrender Monkeys." Memes can, it seems, live forever. And flippancy is too ingrained in mankind. For the Internet user it is tantamount to a birthright.
Washington DC delenda est.
(Score: 2) by ticho on Monday December 15 2014, @02:57PM
Yes, I know, momentum is a bitch. :-) Can't hurt to try, tough, right?
(Score: 1) by wantkitteh on Monday December 15 2014, @09:09PM
One does not simply stop all the memes!
(Score: 2) by NotSanguine on Monday December 15 2014, @04:45AM
Why are there laws outlawing spam? Using the same kind of logic the piracy advocates use, there is no harm done by spam... if you don't like it, delete the messages. What can be easier? Censorship is damage!
The difference, it seems to me, is that UCE negatively affects a much larger group of people. What is more, many folks are getting more and more annoyed at the big media companies for their anti-competitive and price-gouging ways.
Whether that makes it right, I'm not going to weigh in. But I get it. Don't you?
No, no, you're not thinking; you're just being logical. --Niels Bohr
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday December 15 2014, @07:47AM
Stopping you from delivering a message that the recipient doesn't want to hear is not censorship. Censorship is stopping you from delivering a message that *I* don't want the recipient to hear.
Using the same kind of logic the piracy advocates use, there is no harm done by spam
Using the least-sensible point made by a group of people doesn't prove anything beyond your own intellectual dishonesty. You cannot assume that an opinion supported by a bullshit argument is false purely on that premise (other arguments could be made).
(Score: 0, Troll) by Anal Pumpernickel on Monday December 15 2014, @11:43AM
Stopping you from delivering a message that the recipient doesn't want to hear is not censorship.
Yes, it is, and especially if the government is involved. Government thugs have no place stopping people from sending "spam" messages.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday December 15 2014, @01:51PM
> Yes, it is, and especially if the government is involved. Government thugs have no place stopping people from sending "spam" messages.
Which is more important, freedom of expression or property rights?
The deal in the USA is that you can speak all you want as long as you don't use someone's else property to do it without their consent,
Spam is unauthorized use.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday December 15 2014, @04:37PM
haha, i think the phrase is "it's as long as you don't take someone else's property without their consent" there bud, which has nothing to do with copying data on computers... We have a great tradition of stealing ideas and our patent system is designed to facilitate idea spreading after the minimal amount of time possible. Just because Disney hacked the system and set their own property rights to last 120 years after the authors death so they could continue extracting money out of mickey mouse for the maximum amount of time, doesn't mean that everyone is going to follow the shitty rule they made up which has a side effect of preventing many other ideas from being exchanged freely after a reasonable amount of time.
Then there's a second copyright argument that involves math. Math is not being copyrightable and everything being digital it is essentially converted to a mathematical representation of the content and being only a representation of the content in mathematical form it is thus not copyrightable.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday December 15 2014, @04:51PM
> haha, i think the phrase is "it's as long as you don't take someone else's property without their consent" there bud,
No, spam has nothing to do with copyright.
(Score: 1) by Anal Pumpernickel on Tuesday December 16 2014, @02:03AM
Which is more important, freedom of expression or property rights?
Freedom of speech.
Also, that's bullshit. If you don't like spam, you can try to block it. The spammers are (unless we're talking about malware and botnets) using their own property to send the spam.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday December 15 2014, @04:49PM
Your right to freedom of speech does not extend to a right to deliver your message in any way you see fit. My rights triumph your rights as soon as your actions begin to affect me.
Government thugs have no place stopping people from sending "spam" messages.
My government has not only the right, but duty to protect my well-being, as this is literally their stated purpose.
(Score: 1) by Anal Pumpernickel on Tuesday December 16 2014, @02:06AM
Your right to freedom of speech does not extend to a right to deliver your message in any way you see fit. My rights triumph your rights as soon as your actions begin to affect me.
Your rights are not being violated in any way, shape, or form just because you received a message (or many) that you did not like.
My government has not only the right
Governments don't have "rights"; they have powers. Wallow in your own ignorance.
but duty to protect my well-being
To 'protect' you from others' free speech which you allow to be sent to you? Haha.
(Score: 1) by wantkitteh on Monday December 15 2014, @09:24PM
While I think everyone gets the whole argument about restrained interference with our expression rights to deal with receiving unwanted messages, the words "restrained" and "government" can't sit in the same sentence, ever. Any mechanism put in place for a noble purpose with the possibility of extension for other purposes will always be abused. When the UK government had ISPs implement blocking of child porn, everyone nodded and said how good it was and no-one who shouldn't already have been seeking mental health assistance noticed it. When Big Media pointed out that this existing solution could also be used to prevent copyright infringement at minimal expense, everyone pounded their heads into the desk and started wondering how we fell for the ol' "think of the children" line again and failed to see this coming in the long game.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday December 16 2014, @02:10AM
When the UK government had ISPs implement blocking of child porn, everyone nodded and said how good it was and no-one who shouldn't already have been seeking mental health assistance noticed it.
Nonsense. I know they are few and far between, but some people actually have brains and are not completely and utterly ignorant of history. Plenty of perfectly intelligent people realize that censorship will inevitably be abused, based on simple historical evidence.
(Score: 0, Troll) by Anal Pumpernickel on Monday December 15 2014, @11:41AM
The difference is, nobody on /. will defend spammers
This isn't Slashdot, but I do go there. You're full of shit. I would defend spammers. I'm 100% anti-censorship. There are likely others who think the same way.
(Score: 2) by rts008 on Monday December 15 2014, @02:04PM
What difference does it make who will do what on /. ?
You are either very confused about which site you are at, forgot to edit the copy-paste comment from that site, or something.
I could not care less about /. and anyone there, much less what they do.
Oh, copyright infringement is NOT the same as spam. Piracy does not overwhelm my inbox.
But I await the day when media companies start flooding my inbox with mp3's, mp4's,e-books, and software. :-)
In other words, take your silly arguments back to /. where they belong.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday December 15 2014, @04:56PM
> But I await the day when media companies start flooding my inbox with mp3's, mp4's,e-books, and software. :-)
U2 tried that, it made a lot of people angry as fuck.
But it also generated 2M paid downloads of their back catalog, so...
(Score: 2) by c0lo on Monday December 15 2014, @04:49AM
(this is regarding TFA title: "IsoHunt unofficially resurrects The Pirate Bay" when put together with TFS and brought to a logical conclusion)
Got it! It's now officially unofficial that the oldpiratebay.org is the brand new old thepiratebay.org; isn't this convolutedly simple?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aoFiw2jMy-0 https://soylentnews.org/~MichaelDavidCrawford
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday December 15 2014, @05:05AM
For a "search engine" it seems kind of clunky.
I couldn't find any documentation of the search syntax.
The previous piratebay accepted wildards - for example "S01E*" - but that gets treated as a literal on the new site and I haven't be able to figure out any repalcement syntax, simple stemming doesn't work. At least you can do boolean negatives, like "-XXX" to filter out most of the pron.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday December 15 2014, @05:28AM
http://www.iarpa.gov/piratebay-mirror/red5-standingby.html [iarpa.gov]
(Score: 2) by cyrano on Monday December 15 2014, @05:54AM
error 404...
The quieter you become, the more you are able to hear. - Kali [kali.org]
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday December 15 2014, @05:46PM
IARPA is run by the Office of the Director of National Intelligence... ha. You're on a list, now.
No, I'm not the OP so don't whine at me... just an FYI
(Score: 1) by m2o2r2g2 on Monday December 15 2014, @11:30PM
No one seems to be mentioning...
All these new sites putting up the old DB of torrents from tpb, are only putting up the torrents. They do not put up the old comments about content or quality from fellow users. This means that once more all entries must be sifted through to determine the wheat from the chaff.
IMHO Most of the value of tpb over googling "filetype:torrent" is the verification of what the torrent contains.