7 ms·
> Last year, Libgen also told users that it's primarily funded through Google advertising. In the video, Libgen was warning users that while admins are difficul
by chimeracoder 2y ago
> Last year, Libgen also told users that it's primarily funded through Google advertising. In the video, Libgen was warning users that while admins are difficult to unmask, "Google gets informed of every download, and if a user has ever registered with Google, then Google knows exactly who they are, what they've downloaded, and when they downloaded it."
This seems like... a bad plan if your goal is to run a website whose primary purpose is not entirely legal.
- crtasm 2y agoWhile I see googletagmanager embedded on the .li site I don't think they can tell if you click the download link or just viewed the page for a book, at least.
- arccy 2y agotag manager can inject scripts that can observe pretty much why interaction with the site
- tedivm 2y agoHow are they even able to stay anonymous if they're using google ads? I assume they have to provide a bank account to get paid, and with all the KYC laws it's not exactly trivial to hide your identity.
- squigz 2y agoReminds me of the Nintendo Switch emulator developers setting up a Patreon.
- ksynwa 2y agoRyujinx still has a patreon so running a patreon is not what solely did them in.
- squigz 2y agoI didn't mean to imply that. It just doesn't seem to have helped their case very much.
- mindslight 2y agoThe biggest vulnerability for hackers has always been trying to get normie clout for our actions. Whether back in the day from pure social bragging, or now from trying to tie in to contemporary surveillance media. It's painful to watch, but if they had been more reserved you likely wouldn't hearing about them in the first place.
- squigz 2y agoI don't know man, plenty of hackers manage to get by and get eyes on their work without getting sued.
- johnnyanmac 2y agoReally depends. Worst thing you can do as a hacker is have a brand. Anything more than "that guy who did X" is putting you as a flight risk for corporate. You can't put a face or even handle on yourself, ideally. But that's all social media is these days.
- red_admiral 2y agoDon't kids use TOR anymore these days?
- mrkramer 2y agoYou mean man in the middle deeply suspicious project maintained by who knows who which promotes itself as privacy protecting service.
- Scoundreller 2y agoYabbut, why burn your « reputation » as a privacy protecting service by taking down book pirates?
- gardnr 2y agoParallel construction is legal in the USA
- EasyMark 2y agoThe people running Tor for intel don’t give a damn about you downloading “C Structures for the Down and Out” or “Horus Lupercal, Saint or Savior—Another Take”, they have bigger fish to fry and don’t need that distraction
- gardnr 2y agoFor those readers wondering if “ C Structures for the Down and Out” is a real book: please be patient. Claude is writing it as we speak.
- sham1 2y agoI mean, the latter seems to be a bit heretical. In fact, inquisitors have been dispatched to get rid of that. The Emperor Protects! --- But that is a good point. It's doubtful that the intelligence community would care too much about people downloading books in the TOR Network. Or if they did get an interest in that, it works have to be a very special book, indeed.
- Laaas 2y agoI’m not sure using it is illegal.
- IncreasePosts 2y agoYes - don't take my advice, but isn't the precedent with BitTorrent piracy that downloaders aren't gone after, only uploaders?
- ang_cire 2y agoNo, it's not. They go after downloaders as well. I speak from experience. :)
- sureglymop 2y agoNo. It just depends on the jurisdiction you are in. It's not illegal where I am located.
- big-green-man 2y agoSo the distinction is, using bittorrent is not illegal (yet). It's just a protocol for sharing files. But using it as a tool for illegal activity is illegal, because youre doing something illegal. The same applies to Tor, for now.
- krick 2y agoSure, but how do you even keep it sustainable? All most useful things in the world are kinda fundamentally non-monetizable, illegal, or both. Wikipedia is the only thing that succeeded, and even that I'm starting to have some doubts about, because of how heavily politically influenced it is.