Disregarding the ethical issues (I personally think it is wrong), this is the problem with peer to peer sharing of files. You have no idea of what you are actually getting. The old adage still remains true; you don’t get something for nothing.
John, thank you for confirming what I felt would be logical — though I haven’t been concerned enough about moving files big enough to justify Bit Torrent. I download Leo’s podcast the old fashioned way. I tell Safari to get it when it’s available from Leo’s server. If the server’s up and running, that is. When iTunes starts with podcasts [next month?], that will get even simpler.
Peer-to-peer has always seemed like a disaster waiting to happen. I’m waiting for the Pentagon to start experimenting with it — probably just in time for the next US invasion of someone with spare oil or natural gas to be thwarted by a 14-year-old.
I am interested in acquiring video, especially HD video, online. Mostly to get HD quality copies of out-of-circulation old favorite films. I’m certain there will be collectors and movie buffs who will use the Web to make it work. I expect that iTunes and/or iVideo will set the stage. After all, Apple’s first exclusive contract for podcasts is with Sundance — certainly more of a movie source than music.
I hate suggesting this, but maybe it is time to truely criminalize and prosecute those who send malicious programing. The WWW just ain’t safe for content thieves anymore.
This article is HIGHLY misleading… The adware is not being slipped into the bits comprissing a particular download, they are put into an executable compressed file (for example a ‘zip’ archive can be set to ‘unzip’ itself and is thus a ‘.exe’ file) WITH the desired primary data (such as an mpeg file), usually by an unscrupulous uploader. When the ‘uninformed or ignorant’ downloader ‘runs’ the executable (versus using the winzip or winrar interface) the script built into the archive also runs the adware and spyware installer.
If you download the pure file (say for instance the TWIT mp3 file) there is NO WAY for it to be MAGICALLY corrupted by the bittorrent network and hide some executable payload. The danger here is ignorant users just running whatever executable they happen to get their hands on. It is more user error and ignorance and really a non-issue to bittorrent as a protocol.
The moral of the story is this… learn your file extensions and NEVER run any file ending in .exe that you download from a P2P network. but instead, the eweek writer paints bittorrent as this dangerous tool to be avoided. Bad reporting, end of story.
Yes, I think this situation does have to be further explained.
Conspiracy theory:
M$ is spreading FUD about BitTorrent, as they announce Avalanche.
I agree… The Bittorrents are “loaded” with bad bad stuff story hits the net the same day M$ announces its working on a safer Bittorrent alternative.
Please. The media, expecially the internet media, seems to be nothing more then editors for the latest corporate new release or spinmakers.
Talk about a bunch of cows chasing the food wagon! Get with it!
Comment Moderation is Active, so if your comment doesn't
- Monday’s PC Magazine Column Online and print columns posted for online viewing
- Spam! End it! Here’s How.
Subscribe to Main Blog feed here:
Subscribe to Comments too (below):
