this post was submitted on 13 Jan 2024
98 points (93.0% liked)
Piracy: ꜱᴀɪʟ ᴛʜᴇ ʜɪɢʜ ꜱᴇᴀꜱ
54669 readers
417 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
📜 c/Piracy Wiki (Community Edition):
💰 Please help cover server costs.
 |
 |
|---|---|
| Ko-fi | Liberapay |
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
The post has a pretty specific question, and including actions taken against users outside that scope is closer to fearmongering than answering the question at hand. Lumping all p2p usage together isn't useful as long as they're specifically targeting BT sharers; they're not going to accidentally gather IPs of Soulseek users with their torrent honeypots.
You can't guarantee that there won't be a lawyer logging in, writing down your IP
Survivorship bias is about surviving/passing a filter or selection process that's actually happened, not one that could theoretically happen one day.
It happened, that P2P users have been sued because lawyers were getting into the share and wrote down the IPs of the other user.
The statement to which you replied wasn't about p2p users; it was about Soulseek. His perspective isn't a matter of his bias, but rather the complete lack of lawsuits against Soulseek users.
You should change your scope then and stop looking only at the platform but at the technology, because it is the point of breach.