Become a fan of Slashdot on Facebook

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
×
The Internet Your Rights Online

DALnet For Chatting, Not File Sharing 442

PFAK writes "DALnet IRC Network, formerly the world's largest IRC Network has announced that the IRC network has implemented a new "policy" that will phrohibit "Using a channel for the primary purpose of facilitating the transfer of files", as of March 1st, 2003. This will be another staggering blow for the formerly largest IRC network in the world, this comes after one of the many suprises on DALnet, such as the recent DDoS attacks against the network."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

DALnet For Chatting, Not File Sharing

Comments Filter:
  • Freenet Anyway (Score:5, Interesting)

    by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday February 04, 2003 @05:10AM (#5221500)
    We have freenet now anyway. DALnet will discover
    1. how hard it is to enforce this, and
    2. how quickly people will leave/turn against them if they try.
  • What's the point? (Score:5, Interesting)

    by Munra ( 580414 ) <slashdot@jonathanlo v e . co.uk> on Tuesday February 04, 2003 @05:30AM (#5221565) Homepage
    A lot of people seem to be asking "What's the point of an IRC service that prevents file users sharing warez?".

    Well, if there was no point, why would the (arguably) largest IRC network [netsplit.de] have a very strict anti-warez [quakenet.org] rules? That's Quakenet [quakenet.org], by the way - and yes, it is my choice of IRC network.

    Clearly there is a demand for a warez-free (OK, no specific file transfer channel) network. And yes, I've just continued the trend and said "Don't worry, the IRC network I use rocks, even if Dalnet sucks!" ;)

  • by TheFrood ( 163934 ) on Tuesday February 04, 2003 @05:32AM (#5221570) Homepage Journal
    From the article:
    DALnet IRC Network, formerly the world's largest IRC Network has announced that the IRC network has implemented a new "policy" that will phrohibit...

    Why is the word "policy" in quotation marks here? I assume these are supposed to be "sarcastic quotation marks", as in
    I'm not hungry; I ate a McDonald's "hamburger" for lunch.

    or
    The RIAA is taking strong steps to "protect" artists from peer-to-peer filesharing.

    or
    I installed Microsoft's new "improved" version of Windows, and the additional "features" made my computing experience much more "enjoyable".

    But in this case, I don't see why you would sarcastically call the new rules a "policy". They are a policy.

    (Oh, that's on top of misspelling "prohibit". Nice work, dude.)

    TheFrood
  • so what, (Score:5, Interesting)

    by gladbach ( 527602 ) on Tuesday February 04, 2003 @06:25AM (#5221689)
    Everyone is starting to use bit torrent anyways. Sure, a lot of it goes on in irc, but also on websites, instant message etc.
  • by Anonymous Hack ( 637833 ) on Tuesday February 04, 2003 @06:30AM (#5221700)
    Me too. I used IRC for years, and DCC was always the number one shittiest thing on it. It takes ten times as long as it would to transfer the same file over HTTP. Even FTP for crying out loud. Most of my... umm... larger downloads came from usenet (w00t for uuencoding), then the web, and more recently friends' FTP sites. I just don't understand how DCC got so popular amongst the warez/mp3 crowd.

  • sigh. (Score:2, Interesting)

    by clfrd ( 545421 ) <jsearles@satx.rr.LISPcom minus language> on Tuesday February 04, 2003 @06:36AM (#5221713) Journal

    the servers on dalnet used to have a little message in their motd's about irc being an "unmoderated medium". apparently, this is no longer the case.

    i can only speculate about why this policy is being enacted, but as far as the result, wd had it pegged. they're shooting themselves in the foot. if it's enforced at all, a good chunk of the users that stuck around despite the recent attacks will abandon it without a moments hesitation.

    as well, this will undoubtedly upset someone with the means to launch an attack equivalent to the attacks they suffered recently.

    this is a bad idea, and they know it.

    as a side note, support for this policy on the (moderated) mailing list is overwhelming!

  • by mrselfdestrukt ( 149193 ) <nollie_A7_firstcounsel_com> on Tuesday February 04, 2003 @06:49AM (#5221730) Homepage Journal
    Man! The more I read stuff like this the more I long for a society where information can be free.
    Just think where we would've been today if we were allowed access to all and any information. Well, it would probably be overrun by porn and spam.. Nevermind.
    Anyhoo.. I don't chat on Kazaa and I don't download on Dalnet.
  • Finally. (Score:5, Interesting)

    by technix4beos ( 471838 ) <cshaiku@gmail.com> on Tuesday February 04, 2003 @08:01AM (#5221871) Homepage Journal
    I see this as a huge breath of fresh air, after having to inhale the fumes of chain-smoking file-sharing 31337 script kiddies who clog the network with absurd questions about how to lock down their channel from other "haxors", so they can share the latest Britney and UT patch file.

    Biased? Just a little peeved?

    You better believe it.

    I spent 6 years as an administrator on Dalnet, in the #1 help channel, often spending as much as 8-10 hours at a stretch JUST TYPING.

    I have helped literally thousands of anonymous (nicknamed) people come and go about Dalnet, from 1994 - 2000, and have watched with sickening disdain how polluted it got over time.

    It was bad enough to have the hordes of AOL users find Dalnet when they first got on the "real" internet, but these days, it's chock full of kids who have NO IDEA how online communities -should- behave.

    Those that used BBS's in the day (anything after 1992 don't even bother posting.) will remember what I mean about netiquette and online communities.

    I stand up, and applaud DalNet for taking this action. It's about time the filth that has clogged a valuable service has been flushed out of the system.

    And I know you're curious as to what nickname I used on DalNet.

    I am Duranos. I was one of the original help crew who volunteered their time in setting up #irchelp on Dalnet, still miss quite a few people to this day. I still check in from time to time, but have moved onto other avenues of internet life.

    Flame away slashbots. ;)
  • Re:Freenet Anyway (Score:5, Interesting)

    by FeloniousPunk ( 591389 ) on Tuesday February 04, 2003 @08:20AM (#5221921)
    So let's see, you're saying that DALnet won't be able to stop users from using their network for warez, but they'll leave anyway if DALnet tries?
    If your idea holds, sounds like DALnet will be rid of the warez kiddies one way or the other.
  • This isnt suprising. (Score:2, Interesting)

    by Mark19960 ( 539856 ) <<Mark> <at> <lowcountrybilling.com>> on Tuesday February 04, 2003 @08:39AM (#5221971) Journal
    DALnet has operators and admins that just dont care.
    Lets go back in history some.
    Everyone knows that there are some DALnet admins that were also packet kiddies.
    these admins basically tell the existing kiddies "you are free to do what you want, just dont attack my server"
    meanwhile, dalnet holds the largest kiddie population and they dont do anything about it.
    a network that I have a server on was attacked by these same kiddies. naturally, I find them on DALnet staging attacks.
    I have told the admins, opers and the EB of DALnet about this.
    I just get ignored or in some cases, killed.
    they dont want to hear it.
    a lot of the opers and admins have 'made deals with the devil'
    I am labeled as a threatening user because I hate packet kiddies.

    NOW, as far as the trading if files, that will never stop.
    what are they going to do about it?
    they cant possibly close all of those channels
    or stop all of those people from doing it.
    looks like another DCC restriction.
    if you are looking for a network to put a server, dont even think about DALnet.
    I can get into many, many things but this would turn into a flame war.
    if you want to know more contact me off /.
    I can fill your inbox with logs, and incriminating information.
    such as, admins that ARE packet kiddies.
    and I will leave it at that.
  • by XO ( 250276 ) <blade.eric@g m a i l .com> on Tuesday February 04, 2003 @09:04AM (#5222082) Homepage Journal
    What does this have to do with "YOUR" Rights Online? It's THEIR network. I think this would have to do with DALnet's rights online.

    I'm sure that DCC bots generate quite a bit of useless junk traffic on their network.. that sort of thing didn't exist when I was big time into IRC development.. in fact, DCC was a brand new capability, and didn't include file transfers at that point.
    I was against even having the clients having the ability to script responses to certain things. Unfortunatly, people went through with it.

    Next, they should make an idle time-out (anyone idle more than an hour gets /kill'ed with a 10 minute ban against relogging in), and banish any clients that automatically respond to anything.

  • by nurb432 ( 527695 ) on Tuesday February 04, 2003 @09:06AM (#5222087) Homepage Journal
    Who is going to police this and how, its pretty hard to tell if a person is talking, transferring or a bot..

    Transferrs are done via DCC and dont even go thru their servers its direct client to client .. sort of hard to track, and sort of hard to complain..

  • by nurb432 ( 527695 ) on Tuesday February 04, 2003 @09:24AM (#5222165) Homepage Journal
    Sure they have a right to do what they want with THEIR network.. They can censor it if they want, even though that does get into a sticky legal issue. Once you start, you are libel for content under your control.

    Personally I think its a moral mistake to enforce their beliefs on others when they offer a free service, but that is their choice.

    But you sir are an ass for your attitude toward people that do things other then simple chat.

    Not all 'transfers' are illegal in all parts of the global network. If they are in your area, then consult your legislature, that's not my problem.

    People that do use IRC for transfers don't leech any bandwidth, the key component to DCC is *DIRECT*, it does NOT load the IRC network at all. In reality they use LESS resources then a 8 hour a day 'chatter'.

    Whiners? Not really, just people that would like to keep what they have now, ( or expand features )if you don't speak out you loose it, regardless of the topic.

  • IRC sucks anyway (Score:2, Interesting)

    by Powercntrl ( 458442 ) on Tuesday February 04, 2003 @09:46AM (#5222298) Homepage
    I used to love to chat. On my 2 node BBS back in '92 to around '96 I used to frequently get paged by a few of the regular users just to shoot the breese.

    I never liked IRC from the moment I first tried it. Happen to get into an argument with someone who is buddy-buddy with the admins in a channel? Wham, bam... banned. If you can play by the rules and not upset anyone (or you're lucky enough to be in a channel that actually has some mature admins), you'll probably enjoy IRC.
  • by phuturephunk ( 617641 ) on Tuesday February 04, 2003 @10:09AM (#5222443)
    Excellent points. I too am an avid fan of underground electronic music as well as a bedroom DJ. Having collected records since 97, I can tell you that its hard enough to find these tracks on press, and once their gone its usually years before someone represses the tune again, if ever. The chance of it coming out on CD is virutally Nil, so that leaves only one other avenue to aquire the music: File Sharing.

    I've got hundreds of tracks in my bin that were regional to the area that I lived at the time (Florida) and outside of the southeast, probably have never been heard. Just for fun, during the height of napster and AG popularity I would plug in various names of groups and producers that I'd like and I'd maybe get a handful of hits , say 5 or so for even big run stuff on vinyl.. Now, with Soulseek I don't get anything..

    IRC was kind of a saving grace in a way once AG disappeared. I could turn to there and get the tracks that I wanted (most of them at least) and even better, I could download the stuff that i REALLY wanted to get, even moreso than individual tracks: Live sets.. THAT was the true benefit, being able to hear your favorite DJ's throw down live ..

    This is a big blow to electronic music..hopefully Efnet won't follow suit . .
  • by nlh ( 80031 ) on Tuesday February 04, 2003 @11:20AM (#5222844) Homepage
    Could somone explain to me why the warez kiddies are (were) on DALnet in the first place after all this time?

    IIRC, the last time I checked out a DCC channel, it seemed like the most inefficient and slowest possible way to transfer files amongst people ... you had to wait in line for hours to get a DCC "slot", and when you did, the server usually transferred to you at 56k modem speed.

    Hasn't Kazaa/eMule/Overnet/etc. made the whole IRC file-sharing thing completely depreciated? I mean, sure, back when the only way to get warez was to have access to a private FTP site or a BBS, the public warez movement on IRC made sense ... "bring the files to the masses!" ... But now that there are clearly more efficient ways to move the bits around, it seems like a relic.

    Are we talking about kiddie porn, then? And if so, good riddence!

    nlh
  • Re:Staggering blow? (Score:3, Interesting)

    by NoMoreNicksLeft ( 516230 ) <john.oyler@ c o m c ast.net> on Tuesday February 04, 2003 @11:45AM (#5223009) Journal
    No?

    Not yours?

    You see, copyrighted works aren't owned, rather the copyright holder is granted an exclusive, though limited monopoly. That is, they are the only ones allowed to sell software, which is more than OK by me. I think copyright is a great idea, as it is expressed in the Constitution of the United states. If anything, I might even lengthen it a bit, 14 years is somewhat short.

    However, there are politicians and executives that never learned that they can't steal justice, law enforcement, or the goverment, that it isn't theirs to take. So, before you start serving life sentences to 14 yr olds that can't afford $20 for an album that costs all of 75 cents to produce, why don't you do us all a favor, and take your holy war to these subhuman pols and CEOs.

    Or, failing that, drop dead.

A failure will not appear until a unit has passed final inspection.

Working...