this post was submitted on 03 Oct 2026
114 points (100.0% liked)

Piracy: ꜱᴀɪʟ ᴛʜᴇ ʜɪɢʜ ꜱᴇᴀꜱ

70726 readers
330 users here now

⚓ Dedicated to the discussion of digital piracy, including ethical problems and legal advancements.

Rules • Full Version

1. Posts must be related to the discussion of digital piracy

2. Don't request invites, trade, sell, or self-promote

3. Don't request or link to specific pirated titles, including DMs

4. Don't submit low-quality posts, be entitled, or harass others



Loot, Pillage, & Plunder

We heartily recommend visiting the free port of freemediaheckyeah (aka FMHY) while you sail the high seas, for all the freshest links the ocean has to offer.

📜 c/Piracy Wiki (Community Edition):

🏴‍☠️ Other communities

FUCK ADOBE!

Torrenting/P2P:

Gaming:


💰 Please help cover server costs.

Ko-Fi Liberapay
Ko-fi Liberapay

founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
 

There are now many technologies for P2P file sharing:

  • Usenet
  • Bittorrent
  • IPFS
  • Tenfinger
  • more?

And also several technologies for anonymization:

  • VPNs
  • Tor
  • I2P

AFAICT the most popular option is still Bittorrent with various public and private trackers and indexers. Private trackers seem to be the most effective option that communities have converged on.

I've tried all of the above solutions over the years and while I think something like I2P sounds great in theory, it doesn't seem to actually work well in practice. Because it's not terribly popular, it's hard to know what to expect.

We clearly still haven't found the ideal model that can provide both good performance, discovery, access, availability, and anonymity. But do you think we will actually make progress on these problems? We seem to have stabilized on a local maximum.

top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] DeadEndLink@lemmy.ca 4 points 6 days ago

Dead drops.

[–] NotFrenchJack@lemmy.dbzer0.com 4 points 6 days ago (1 children)

You included memes (IPFS), and omitted important shit (DC, original Freenet), not to mention some old networks (ed2k, gnutella/G2) that went out of fashion, but are not fully extinct.

As for the future, the situation could get grim at a much lower level, as both the "file" as an ubiquitously accessible unit, and desktop computers in general as ubiquitously available and affordable hardware, are both under threat, with the latter already affected by the semi-fake partial (for now) scarcity supposedly fully caused by the AI craze.

[–] Draconic_NEO@lemmy.dbzer0.com 1 points 6 days ago

Computers are probably going to hang around for a while. Just get out of the mindset that you necessarily need a brand new computer.

supposedly fully caused by the AI craze.

The silicon cartel. Gotta assign blame to the ones who dug this hole and not paint them as heroes or worse, a neutral party. They made this mess

[–] fartzo@lemmy.dbzer0.com 3 points 6 days ago (1 children)

That was my first too. But WinMX was more relevant and lasted much longer.

[–] LodeMike@lemmy.today 2 points 6 days ago

BitTorrent, IPFS, and maybe some airdrop standard like thing.

[–] scratchmex@lemmy.dbzer0.com 2 points 6 days ago
[–] lutindiscret@mastodon.libre-entreprise.com 2 points 6 days ago (1 children)

#utopeer it's hard to grasp but it's decentralized tracker (in the community of people sharing torrents file/magnets) over #nostr

@piracy

Reading through the docs about it here, it sounds like it's only an indexer, not a tracker.

[–] MrSulu@lemmy.ml 42 points 1 week ago (1 children)

I try alternatives but keep returning to 'old fashioned' BT + VPN.

[–] django@discuss.tchncs.de 29 points 1 week ago (1 children)

Bittorrent is peak filesharing technology.

[–] scratchmex@lemmy.dbzer0.com 3 points 6 days ago

When you share medium sizes Torrents yes. But too many small files or a bit collection and I think something like soul seek or ipfs wins. The problem with bittorrent is that is not file centered

[–] django@discuss.tchncs.de 23 points 1 week ago (1 children)

I guess anything too convenient is bound to be attacked by lawyers.

[–] ekky@sopuli.xyz 4 points 1 week ago

Yeah, of it either becomes too popular or too conventient, then it MUST be destroyed! :(

[–] UiUiUiUiUi@piefed.nl 20 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (3 children)

SoulSeek? Its like old limewire; dangerous and also full of really kind people too.

Nicotine+ is a client.

I think a combination of Soulseek and bittorrent, so you can share your library in the file structure you want, then collectively seed files with the same hash.

[–] hanrahan@slrpnk.net 1 points 5 days ago

is it like emule ?

[–] tatterdemalion@programming.dev 9 points 1 week ago* (last edited 6 days ago) (3 children)

I haven't tried SoulSeek. What does it do better than Bittorrent?

EDIT: After playing around with SoulSeek, it seems pretty cool, although the amount of time it takes to scan your files on startup is laughably bad.

[–] SolarPunker@slrpnk.net 12 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago)

Soukseek is great, I recently discovered people sharing also movies and other stuff, so not only music which is what is famous for. You can also ban Israel from your sharing!

[–] UiUiUiUiUi@piefed.nl 7 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (3 children)

It’s more like (old) Facebook where you make your media folder available to download, add buddies so you can check out their library later, thank them using the in built chat.

Just use a vpn with a port. And don’t add identifiable stuff to share.

load more comments (3 replies)
[–] dan@upvote.au 3 points 1 week ago (5 children)

It's like Napster or Limewire if you ever used them. You download files directly from individual users. You can also browse all of a user's shared files.

It requires inbound connectivity to work well, so you'll have to ensure your VPN supports port forwarding. The VPN that's usually recommended for Soulseek (and torrenting) is AirVPN.

load more comments (5 replies)
[–] MEtrINeS@lemmy.dbzer0.com 4 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (1 children)

so you can share your library in the file structure you want, then collectively seed files with the same hash.

So... .... .... emule and gnutella? Both have DHT and that's how they work...

[–] UiUiUiUiUi@piefed.nl 1 points 6 days ago* (last edited 6 days ago) (2 children)

Cool what client would you recommend?

It’s a bit suspicious to recommend two protocols as I question if you use it yourself or just looked it up.

[–] MEtrINeS@lemmy.dbzer0.com 3 points 6 days ago* (last edited 6 days ago) (1 children)

well gnutella is almost dead, the only usable client is gtk-gnutella https://sourceforge.net/projects/gtk-gnutella/, but there's not enough users. You might be lucky if you find anything you want.

For ed2k, you have amule https://github.com/amule-org/amule/releases/tag/3.1.0 . This network still has around 100k users (a drop in the number of torrent total users - but it's around the same number of users of soulseek) but you can still find lots of stuff there. Lately the amule client has been improving and improving and currently it's the best client for ed2k - my opinion.

For you to have high id you need to have 2 ports open, and some vpn don't allow that. They only allow one port. With ed2k you can search the network (imagine like searching directly the bittorrent DHT), or you can use any ed2k link sharing community to get the stuff you want - this way is safer

It’s a bit suspicious to recommend two protocols as I question if you use it yourself or just looked it up.

Well, i'm old enough to have used almost everything. And i like to know how stuff works.

[–] UiUiUiUiUi@piefed.nl 2 points 5 days ago (1 children)

I tried amule and it is technically better than soulseek but the client is not as friendly.

This one particularly is pretty sketchy where bold and colour define if it is shared or not. I’m currently not certain if I’m sharing my root dir recursively or not, I’ll come back once they’ve improved it.

https://github.com/amule-org/amule/issues/1519

[–] MEtrINeS@lemmy.dbzer0.com 1 points 5 days ago (1 children)

Awesome that you opened a github ticket. Most people just complain on forums/reddit/lemmy.

And yes i agree with you, there are some stuff that can be more user friendly and less confusing.

[–] UiUiUiUiUi@piefed.nl 2 points 5 days ago

I didn’t make that issue sorry, but hey you aren’t using Gnutella so even? xD

[–] supervent@lemmy.dbzer0.com 2 points 6 days ago

For ed2k/kad I am using rucio is written in rust. Also aMule was updated recently.

[–] mp3@lemmy.ca 19 points 1 week ago (1 children)

BitTorrent is a good middle ground between decentralization, adoption and user-friendliness. I think the transport layer is pretty solid, and there's no need to stick an anonymity layer at the protocol level, as the preferred method might change over time.

Combined with a VPN to handle the anonymity part, I think it's solid and modular enough.

I agree the transport layer is good and having anonymity in a different layer works. I think my main gripes with it today are:

  1. Anonymity is paid for and trust-based. It'd be awesome if something like I2P started working well enough that anyone could have anonymity for free without needing to trust a company or worry about poor performance.
  2. Private trackers. While I understand the logic behind this form of community (incentivize seeding and make bans meaningful), I think it's possible to solve those problems with a public tracker. I have ideas on how this could work if anyone is interested.
[–] dan@upvote.au 12 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (1 children)

Usenet is client-server, not P2P.

The issue with "good performance" on P2P systems is that you're reliant on other users' bandwidth, and there's a lot of people in the world that have slow upload speeds. Some users use a seedbox with a fast datacenter-grade 10Gbps or 40Gbps connection, but it's not common.

The obvious approach if you want to download something from people with slow connections is to download parts of the same files from a lot of them in parallel, which is exactly what BitTorrent does. That's good enough for plenty of use cases, which is why BitTorrent has been around for so long. The protocol is designed pretty well for this use case.

It's got plenty of legit use cases too, especially in research (where it's common to have data files that are tens or hundreds of gigabytes and need to be shared with other researchers) and in gaming (where it was common to use BitTorrent to download updates, at least outside of Steam).

[–] MEtrINeS@lemmy.dbzer0.com 5 points 6 days ago (1 children)

usenet is p2p: server p2p. The servers share the articles between themselves in a p2p manner

[–] dan@upvote.au 4 points 6 days ago (1 children)

That's not what P2P means though. With Usenet, the articles are stored on a server, and you download them from the server. P2P always means one peer directly connects to another. The reason P2P systems exist is that they avoid things like takedowns (since you'd need to take down every user instead of a central server), and Usenet doesn't have that advantage.

If Usenet is P2P, then every other system that lets people upload files is P2P, including things like Rapidshare, Google Drive, forums, etc. That wouldn't make sense.

[–] MEtrINeS@lemmy.dbzer0.com -1 points 6 days ago* (last edited 6 days ago) (1 children)

then every other system that lets people upload files is P2P, including things like Rapidshare, Google Drive, forums, etc. That wouldn’t make sense.

P2P means peer to peer.

Here you have a graphical description of usenet: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Usenet#/media/File:Usenet_servers_and_clients.svg

From wikipedia https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Usenet

When a user posts an article, it is initially only available on that user's news server. Each news server talks to one or more other servers (its "newsfeeds") and exchanges articles with them. In this fashion, the article is copied from server to server and should eventually reach every server in the network

Please pay attention to: Each news server talks to one or more other servers (its "newsfeeds") and exchanges articles with them.

hmmm... it sounds like p2p.

Here you have the fucking RFC for the command to share articles between servers: https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc3977/#section-6.3.2

Even if you check the article headers you can see the path the article it took to reach to you. If the article wasn't uploaded to your server, you can see that some articles that you are downloading came from different servers until it reached your server.

Tell me, if rapidshare, mega, google drive, etc works like this. Well i don't think so, because first you don't even have different servers from different providers... You just have their servers, so they can't share shit with anybody else's servers.

It's not p2p for the enduser, but that's why i said it was server p2p.

OR maybe you operated a NNTP server with only 1 feed? (which i doubt).

The reason P2P systems exist is that they avoid things like takedowns (since you’d need to take down every user instead of a central server), and Usenet doesn’t have that advantage.

If you had used usenet before obfuscation took place, you could see that some articles where removed from some server but still available on another ones. That's why there was a rule of having servers from different backbones https://cdn.rexum.space/usenet/Usenet%20Providers%20and%20Backbones%20%28Version%202025-06-30%29.svg

[–] dan@upvote.au 4 points 6 days ago* (last edited 6 days ago) (1 children)

Please pay attention to: Each news server talks to one or more other servers (its "newsfeeds") and exchanges articles with them.

hmmm... it sounds like p2p.

This is describing federation and decentralization, not P2P. The servers communicate with each other. P2P is when users communicate directly.

Would you consider Lemmy or email as P2P? They're also federated and decentralized.

It's not p2p for the enduser, but that's why i said it was server p2p.

Your definition of "server P2P" doesn't really make sense. Any CDN would fit this definition for example, because CDN edge servers fill data from origin servers when it's not cached locally, and a lot of that data would be user-uploaded, but I'm not sure anyone would describe Akamai, Fastly, or Cloudflare as P2P.

Usenet has companies running the servers, and you download from and upload to the company's servers. Nobody would reasonably describe that as P2P, regardless of how the servers are implemented.

[–] MEtrINeS@lemmy.dbzer0.com 2 points 6 days ago* (last edited 6 days ago) (1 children)

P2P is when users communicate directly.

P2P means peer to peer!

Definition of peer:

2. countable noun
Your peers are the people who are the same age as you or who have the same status as you.
His engaging personality made him popular with his peers.
Synonyms: equal, like, match, fellow [old-fashioned]   More Synonyms of peer

"The same status" , Synonyms: equal.

This is describing federation and decentralization, not P2P.

It's very similar but not the same. Using lemmy as example, when i request posts from another server, my server will request only those posts. It won't request everything. Do you see the difference?

A CDN is centralized in control but distributed in delivery: one content owner controls the authoritative data, while a CDN operator replicates it across its infrastructure. In p2p nobody controls the authoritative data - if one peer refuses to distribute the data, my server can still get the data from another feed.

Both federation or CDNs don't work in a P2P manner. They either have selective replication and/or centralized control.

Usenet has companies running the servers, and you download from and upload to the company’s servers.

Again this has nothing to do with being server p2p or not. And btw, stop moving the goal posts.

EDIT: because i have more than to do than keep replying to this. Here is the output of perplexity. Check the references. Maybe it will be enough for you:

Yes, Usenet newsgroup servers do share articles directly with one another in a peer-like fashion, and many technical descriptions characterize the server layer as having a “peer-to-peer character.” However, whether the whole system is accurately described as “P2P” depends on which layer you mean (servers vs end users) and how strictly you define P2P.

## How Usenet servers exchange articles

Usenet is built on a distributed network of news servers that exchange articles using the Network News Transfer Protocol (NNTP). Key points:

- Each news server connects to one or more other servers (its “newsfeeds”) and exchanges articles with them. [en.wikipedia](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/News_server)
- When a user posts an article, it first lands on their local server; that server then forwards it to its peers, which forward it further, propagating copies across the network. [alchetron](https://alchetron.com/Usenet)
- Servers use feed commands like `IHAVE`/`SENDME` to tell each other which articles they have or want, effectively coordinating replication without a single central master. [bestreviews](https://bestreviews.net/usenet-glossary/)

This server-to-server replication is inherently decentralized: there is no single authoritative Usenet server; instead, there is a changing mesh of servers that mutually share content. [en.wikipedia](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/News_server)

## Is this “P2P”?

There are two common perspectives:

### 1. Server layer: yes, it has P2P characteristics

Many sources explicitly describe the collection of Usenet servers as having a peer-to-peer character:

- “The collection of Usenet servers has thus a certain peer-to-peer character in that they share resources by exchanging them…” [alchetron](https://alchetron.com/Usenet)
- Some academic and technical discussions even call Usenet “perhaps the oldest and most successful P2P application,” focusing on the distributed, symmetric exchange of articles among hosts. [csd.uoc](https://www.csd.uoc.gr/~hy554/papers/iptps2004.pdf)
- NNTP-based newsfeeds are symmetric in the sense that each participating server can both send and receive articles from its peers. [en.wikipedia](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/News_server)

In this sense, the **server overlay** behaves like a P2P network: nodes (servers) are peers that both provide and consume content, and there’s no single central repository.

### 2. End-user layer: mostly client–server, not classic P2P

For typical end users, Usenet looks more like a client–server system:

- Users run a newsreader (client) that connects to a news server and downloads or uploads articles via NNTP. [alchetron](https://alchetron.com/Usenet)
- Downloaders are not directly connected to other users; they only talk to their provider’s server, unlike BitTorrent or Gnutella where peers connect directly to many other peers. [alchetron](https://alchetron.com/Usenet)
- The identity and address of downloaders are hidden from other users; only the server knows who is connecting. [alchetron](https://alchetron.com/Usenet)

Because of this, some analyses distinguish Usenet from “modern P2P services,” noting that:

- Content distribution among servers is P2P-like, but
- User access is via client–server, and the granularity/symmetry differs from file-sharing P2P networks. [alchetron](https://alchetron.com/Usenet)

## So can it be described as P2P?

- **Technically accurate**: “Usenet’s server network has a peer-to-peer architecture” or “Usenet uses a P2P-like server overlay.” [alchetron](https://alchetron.com/Usenet)
- **Potentially misleading without qualification**: Calling the whole Usenet experience “P2P” in the same sense as BitTorrent or Napster can confuse people, because end users don’t directly share with each other; they share via intermediate servers. [alchetron](https://alchetron.com/Usenet)

A precise description is:  
Usenet is a **distributed system** where **servers peer with each other** to replicate articles (P2P at the server layer), while **users interact in a client–server manner** with their chosen news provider. [en.wikipedia](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/News_server)

[–] hirihit640@sh.itjust.works 1 points 4 days ago (1 children)

Using lemmy as example, when i request posts from another server, my server will request only those posts. It won't request everything. Do you see the difference?

That's just how activitypub works because the alternative would be too costly. But you could design a federation system that replicates everything.

A precise description is:
Usenet is a distributed system where servers peer with each other to replicate articles (P2P at the server layer), while users interact in a client–server manner with their chosen news provider.

Even your perplexity output admits that it's not fully P2P like bittorrent. And if we count "partial P2P", then activitypub would also count since even selective replication, is some amount of replication, and tbus "partial P2P"

[–] MEtrINeS@lemmy.dbzer0.com 0 points 3 days ago

Even your perplexity output admits that it’s not fully P2P like bittorrent. And if we count “partial P2P”, then activitypub would also count since even selective replication, is some amount of replication, and tbus “partial P2P”

I wrote p2p at server level. Ofcourse it is not 100% p2p, if it was full p2p then it would be just p2p. usenet is p2p at server level, and you have the references above to prove it (you don't need to trust me).

[–] BlueEther@no.lastname.nz 11 points 1 week ago (2 children)

Ive trued private trackers, but there is very little for me to try and keep up the ratio them while on public my share ratio is well above 5.

Public trackers and no vpn gets it done

[–] Flames5123@sh.itjust.works 1 points 6 days ago

I’m on IP torrents. It’s 2 weeks or 1:1 health. And you get points just for seeding. I have my client auto delete after 3 weeks. And I can just zap stuff I don’t want with points. It’s so low management when I’m downloading stuff that’s newly releasing. I hardly ever login to the site anymore with my *arr setup.

[–] tatterdemalion@programming.dev 7 points 1 week ago (8 children)

Public trackers never seem to have as good of releases or swarm health, except for the most popular content.

load more comments (8 replies)
[–] sin_free_for_00_days@sopuli.xyz 10 points 1 week ago (1 children)

Some type of multi-dimensional quantum storage will be developed that will allow simultaneous, unlimited, instant sharing across as many different people as want to. This will all fit into something the size of a thumb drive and allow direct viewing/listening through implants.

[–] 14th_cylon@lemmy.zip 7 points 1 week ago (1 children)

I thought we will be running around with tablets, separate tablet for each new file, like in star trek :D

[–] django@discuss.tchncs.de 3 points 1 week ago

This, but batteries will not be replacable or rechargable. They will be disposable entertainment devices.

load more comments
view more: next ›