Net users face web ban for illegal downloads


Recommended Posts

Doesn't really matter. One way or another, there will be an active response to accessing illegal materials. Maybe not today, maybe not tomorrow...but as soon as there is, a lot of the stuff pirates take for granted will change significantly.

Doesn't really matter. One way or another, there will be an active response to accessing illegal materials. Maybe not today, maybe not tomorrow...but as soon as there is, a lot of the stuff pirates take for granted will change significantly.

Unless there's a world-wide reform and every single net-connected country does it, it'll never happen. Look at the pirate bay, originally it was based in sweeden and as soon as it got attacked, it was moved to at least 3 different countries.

Misleading thread title.

There is nothing "web" about this.

It's not about web downloading, or blocking web traffic of any kind.

Why mention "web" ???

People can use the Internet without ever visiting a web site, and people can use web sites all day without ever getting on the Internet.

Internet != Web

Erm....I think you're arguing semantics here, but isn't "web" in reference to the "web" of computers connected around the globe to form the internet? Net and Web just being two words that describe the same thing?

I can't help but laugh at the OP's actual name, and then seeing this post in the title :laugh:

Yeah, this stuff is really getting more and more momentum. I'll tell you what - I can't stand having to constantly pay higher cable bills (and the like) only to see that my every move is inevitably going to be watched...or already is. :shiftyninja:

Thats just ignorant. So tired of you trolls, really Neowin has gone down the tubes, what a shame to.

Jeez, lighten up Francis. I'm pretty sure it was a joke. :rolleyes:

Look up "stupid laws" if you don't believe silly stuff like that is actually on the books.

the thing is, in the UK their is alot of people (everyone i know) aged 15 - 20 who download music via limewire etc because they either dont have a job to buy the music and think it is a good way to do it because in the UK it is rarely enforced unlike the US where u will lose your bank account to riaa for doing anything as such

... some US ISPs already do this.... "a friend of mine" ISPs rec'd a letter from Universal Studios with the exact file name, date, time, program used of a certain movie... they played dumb about knowing anything... claimed they might have an unprotected wireless network.... the lady basically said... secure it.. because you are liable for anything downloaded from your IP address, she stated that this is basically a warning, but if they receive any future notices... his service will be terminated that day.... currently in his area there is only one other ISP(verizon 3mb DSL) so.. long story short... he is now pirate free...

Erm....I think you're arguing semantics here, but isn't "web" in reference to the "web" of computers connected around the globe to form the internet? Net and Web just being two words that describe the same thing?
Why don't you see WSP instead of ISP then?

Internet != web. The web is part of the Internet, not the entire Internet.

The International Network, or more commonly known as the Internet and the World Wide Web are not synonymous. The Internet is a collection of interconnected computer networks, linked by copper wires, fiber-optic cables, wireless connections, etc. In contrast, the Web is a collection of interconnected documents and other resources, linked by hyperlinks and URLs. The World Wide Web is one of the services accessible via the Internet, along with various others including e-mail, file sharing, online gaming and others...
- taken from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Internet

Not trying to argue, just pointing out a fact.

*edit- self-censored.....

Edited by Regression_88
Misleading thread title.

There is nothing "web" about this.

It's not about web downloading, or blocking web traffic of any kind.

Why mention "web" ???

People can use the Internet without ever visiting a web site, and people can use web sites all day without ever getting on the Internet.

Internet != Web

Semantics.

I can see this falling before it gets off the ground, who will pay for all the new equipment ISPs will have to install for monitoring usage?

I doubt the ISPs would happily do that, what about encryption?

It doesn't sound very well thought through at this stage.

I can see this falling before it gets off the ground, who will pay for all the new equipment ISPs will have to install for monitoring usage?

I doubt the ISPs would happily do that, what about encryption?

It doesn't sound very well thought through at this stage.

So funny to see the entertainment industries dwindling income being passed on to the consumer, what next a blanket tax/fee on internet usage... get a grip

I'd be happy to go see a movie at the cinema, but ?5.70 to sit for three hours in a grimey, filthy and generally nasty cinema populated by smug-arsed 16yr old dropouts from school - no thanks.

As for music, yep I used to use the usual suspects, Limewire, Morpheus... damn back in the day it was Audiogalaxy Satelite. And yet now I find myself paying for the music I use/listen to. Purely for the niche of dance music i use and find - i have no quims paying $1.49 a track.

I think right now we're at a crossroads, ISP's really just can't cope with the volume of data demanded by UK customers so they look for ways to punt customers out and "traffic management" with the result that the ISP's just don't provide anywhere near the service they did 3-5 years ago.

Most of the anger from this bill will go to the goverment, but alot of the backlash surely has to lie with the ISP's if they accept this voluntary code.

Unless there's a world-wide reform and every single net-connected country does it, it'll never happen. Look at the pirate bay, originally it was based in sweeden and as soon as it got attacked, it was moved to at least 3 different countries.

Once ISP monitoring is in place, why would any other country have to do it? Your ISP is only sending you data in one country. And they'd be bound by law to monitor you, assuming you're in the country that passed the law.

Once ISP monitoring is in place, why would any other country have to do it? Your ISP is only sending you data in one country. And they'd be bound by law to monitor you, assuming you're in the country that passed the law.

Because it's not as easy to monitor what you download as you think, there will always be a program our guide out there to show you how to not get caught and they can't easily get rid of that.

Disclaimer: Non-Brit.

Lol, you'll get "an e-mail warning"? What if you use an e-mail not affiliated with your ISP, like gmail or something? What if someone is using BitTorrent to share open source work, how exactly are the ISPs to know about that, and how would this affect BitTorrent traffic?

Unfortunately, I think the EFF only deals with US legislation. Is there something similar over there?

Misleading thread title.

More like "misleading article title." +zer0day named this thread after the title of the article he linked, which seems to be a typical news poster thing. Sure, the worldwide web exists in/on the internet, but most people will use the terms interchangably. No biggie.

Edited by SakuraKira

this is just another one of the governments badly thought out proposals.

in the end, all that will happen is that encryption, instead of something used only by big businesses and power users will become an everyday thing for everybody wanting to protect their privacy.

i'm sure they'll ban encryption next followed shortly by the internet.

Still no answer if usenet will be safe from moitoring as that's all I use. I some times use my isps news server but most of time I stick to giganews as it's got long retention and there's never really any damaged file.

I hope the ISPs send warning letters instead of emails since I've never used my ISPs email address.

Email warnings... doesnt that just scream "keep going until you get a warning", that is, if they can send you an email atall.

Rather than carrying out this legislation, they should just cut us off completely. practically EVERYONE under the age of 70 here downloads illegally,

According to a report I read on the PC Pro website, copyrighted filesharing in the UK is set to become virtually impossible.

The government is set to bring in new laws which will legally force ISP's to crack down and eventually ban filesharing of copyrighted material.

Scary stuff, if only for the implications surrounding the level of control the government now (openly) has over our activities on the internet. Pirates beware

PC Pro article

not really, software devs will always create new ways to hide users activities. Its up to the media companies to embrace the new distribution methods offered and use them without insane restrictions that are currently employed.

It this really about protecting the artists and intellectual property though? I heard on the radio that the estimated losses for the UK record industry is ?1 billion a year. I'm betting the government would love a 17.5% slice of VAT on that.

I'm also interested to know how ISPs are going to catch anything more than people running crap applications like Limewire and Morpheus anyway. Anybody who is technically inclined will be using more secure methods to get their files, and will move from any ISP that threatens to stop them.

Typical government response though, don't target the root cause and make profits in the process, genius. They'll be sticking the BPI losses on fuel duty next too.

Yeah, even 17.5% of ?1billion wouldn't cover the cost of this. Plus, has anyone considered the folly of charging ISP's with the task of banning their OWN customers? Particularly the ones likely to opt for the faster, more expensive packages. That wont go down well.

This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
  • Posts

    • My father still uses a programme written in dbase3. Still manages to work with a little help from dosbox. 
    • Microsoft hides these secret Windows 11 performance boost settings available on every PC by Sayan Sen Windows enthusiasts often look for ways to extract as much performance out of their systems as possible, and it's often the case that they try and do so while trying to minimize the heat and power consumption. This is especially relevant in the case of mobile Windows PCs since laptops and notebooks tend to get hot and management of that heat and power is harder in such a form factor. As such users often turn to techniques like under-volting which can be used to squeeze out the maximum capabilities of a chip while also maintaining lowered power levels. There are official apps from AMD and Intel with the likes of Ryzen Master and XTU (Extreme Tuning Utility). While these are quite handy, most enthusiasts probably prefer to dig into the BIOS and play around with settings there like Curve Optimizer on Ryzen, which lets users set various frequency-voltage scaling values. These are essentially called P-States. If you are not familiar with them, Processor Power Management is done through Advanced Configuration and Power Interface (ACPI) P-states and C-states. While P-states or performance pwoer states handle CPU voltage-frequency scaling, C-states deal with CPU sleep states so that some of the CPU functions, which are not necessary at that moment, can be disabled. The P-states and C-states work together to make the processor run more efficiently. It helps the OS and apps determine which cores can be parked and which should be boosted. Of course not every user is an enthusiast or knows the technicalities and integrities of how things like overclocking or undervolting work. Thankfully for them Windows itself offers something pretty cool, though it is hidden by default on all systems. By default, Windows only has two P-States, "Minimum Processor State" and "Maximum Processor State." However, this can be changed with a Registry trick to expand the options under a secret "Processor performance boost mode" dropdown. This essentially enables the HWP or hardware P-States available on a device, and these are not controlled just by the OS itself as the underlying hardware gets involved too. In total there are five Processor Performance Boost Mode profiles that control how Windows requests and allows CPU turbo/boost behavior under the different power policies. They are: Disabled: In this mode, processor boosting is effectively turned off. The CPU will avoid entering turbo or boost frequencies and instead operate closer to its base frequency ceiling. This can significantly reduce power consumption and heat output, but at the cost of reduced burst performance and responsiveness in short workloads. Enabled: This is the standard behavior where boost functionality is allowed under normal conditions. The processor can opportunistically increase frequency when workload demands it, balancing performance gains with power and thermal constraints as managed by the system. Aggressive: Aggressive mode favors performance more heavily, allowing the CPU to enter higher boost states more readily and sustain them longer. This should in theory improve responsiveness under bursty or heavy workloads but increases power draw and thermal output compared to the default enabled behavior. Efficient Enabled: This mode still allows boosting, but with a stronger bias toward energy efficiency. The system attempts to use boost more selectively, avoiding unnecessary frequency spikes when the performance gain is marginal. Efficient Aggressive: This is a hybrid approach where boost is still performance-responsive, but the system continuously weighs efficiency more heavily than in Aggressive mode. It aims to deliver noticeable performance improvements while reducing wasted power in less demanding scenarios. Here's how to enable the Processor performance boost mode: Open Registry Editor: Press Win+R, type regedit, and click OK. Go to: HKLM\SYSTEM\CurrentControlSet\Control\Power\PowerSettings\54533251-82be-4824-96c1-47b60b740d00\be337238-0d82-4146-a960-4f3749d470c7 (where HKLM stands for HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE_) Modify the value of Attributes from 1 to 2 (you can find modify option by right-clicking) After that, exit Registry, you should now be able to see the new "Processor performance boost mode" dropdown menu: As you can see there are now five new P-States or CPPC states or power profile available that help define the boost mode processor setting on your PC. Wrapping it up here's a quick run-down of the settings as defined by Microsoft itself. Setting Description Disabled The corresponding P-state-based behaviour is disabled. Collaborative Processor Performance Control (CPPC) behaviour is disabled. Enabled The corresponding P-state-based behaviour is enabled. CPPC behaviour is Efficient Enabled. Aggressive The corresponding P-state-based behaviour is enabled. CPPC behaviour is Aggressive. Efficient Enabled The corresponding P-state-based behaviour is Efficient. CPPC behaviour is Efficient Enabled. Efficient Aggressive The corresponding P-state-based behaviour is Efficient. CPPC behaviour is Aggressive. Aggressive At Guaranteed Windows calculates the desired extra performance above the guaranteed performance level, and asks the processor to deliver that specific performance level. Efficient Aggressive At Guaranteed Windows always asks the processor to deliver the highest possible performance above the guaranteed performance level. In the next part we shall be comparing these settings to explore how much of a benefit or regression they can provide in terms of performance and power efficiency. If you decide to change the values on your system and are experiencing problems like crashes or an overheating PC, make sure to revert the steps back to the original state.
    • I think he means you haven't reviewed previous UFC games. Of course it doesn't matter... Every time you just report on something that involves the President even if just simply what happened you guys usually get accused of being anti-Trump. We live in fun times.
    • So how did you solve the problem? Disabling Secure Boot isn’t a solution.
  • Recent Achievements

    • One Month Later
      Leroy Jethro Gibbs earned a badge
      One Month Later
    • Conversation Starter
      flexorcist earned a badge
      Conversation Starter
    • One Month Later
      AndreaB earned a badge
      One Month Later
    • One Month Later
      agatameier earned a badge
      One Month Later
    • Week One Done
      agatameier earned a badge
      Week One Done
  • Popular Contributors

    1. 1
      +primortal
      518
    2. 2
      +Edouard
      198
    3. 3
      PsYcHoKiLLa
      147
    4. 4
      ATLien_0
      93
    5. 5
      Steven P.
      77
  • Tell a friend

    Love Neowin? Tell a friend!