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."
No File Sharing? (Score:2, Funny)
Re:No File Sharing? (Score:5, Insightful)
Actually, it is a great move. Why should their resources be used for channels that title themselves "MP3 trading" or "0-Day Warez", where the only point is to trade files (mostly illegal). IRC (Internet Relay CHAT) is for online chatting. The only 'chatting' that goes on in the warez channels is queue updates.
Seriously, when was the last time you saw a "Public domain graphics" channel or "0-Day Open Source Trading". If I do a channel list to find interesting channels, I really don't want to have my list filled up with warez crap channels.
It's not like they are taking away the ability to send a file to someone. You still can DCC someone a file, just channels where the sole purpose is to trade files is prohibited.
Bravo!
Re:No File Sharing? (Score:5, Funny)
Exactly. I hate it when I can't find a good cybersex channel.
So why DALnet? (Score:4, Insightful)
So use openprojects.net...always fun techie people to chew the fat with.
I suppose there is one reasonable assumption -- most of the DDoSes that go on are likely warez-channel related, so perhaps it'll reduce warfare on DALnet...
Re:So why DALnet? (Score:5, Informative)
OFTC (Open and Free Technology Commmunity) [oftc.net] is all about opensource and code sharing. Essentially it was created when OPN started asking for money, and has a elected council to run the network. As far as i know, we have no warez channels.
Re:No File Sharing? (Score:2)
SERIOUSLY? other than cyba sexxor for ya homiez channels..
however this will cut their userbase by a nice amount. AND also make a fine statement of 'we choose what you do here'(no need to troll about that they have the right to do so, irc is becoming fast the only place on net where you can really say what you want and not get modded down, for good and bad). cutting the amount of users also by fine amount because they don't want to be on such network.
and some of those 'warez' channels also have casual chatter between. heck, now they just need to implement 'casual chatting simulation' to their bots and the channels won't be just file sharing.
and the irc protocol is really getting dated, too bad silc isn't widely spread yet.
Re:No File Sharing? (Score:3, Insightful)
You would think those chans would produce a hell of a lot of vigalante DDos attacks so why don't they close those first?
Re:No File Sharing? (Score:3, Insightful)
No Seriously, the anonymous coward has a semi-good point...
What is the point of IRC without the "l337" file sharing?
Hasn't its chatting capabilities been made obsolete by Instant Messengers and chat rooms such as Yahoo! chat?
Re:No File Sharing? (Score:5, Funny)
Lets see.
Real time group collaboration - As often seen there are millions of channels out there which are specialized around some subject. From Web Design to Hardware, Music production to graphics, Linux, General Help, BSD, Magic The Gathering, FPS gaming, Every other kind of gaming.. I can list channel designations all morning here. File sharing is not the final frontier in IRC.
It's a great place to kill time, learn, troubleshoot stuff, get relevant help, etc. IRC is essentially free tech support.
For example, couple of years ago I was vacationing in Palm Springs, in the middle of nowhere. I was in the Hotel Room surfing the web at 4am in the morning with my laptop and didn't want to drive all the way to the closest supermarket to buy cigarettes. All I had was a small package of really expensive british tobacco and no rolling paper. I got on IRC, and joined #help on Efnet. Asked them how to deal with the situation. Some guy suggested to tear out the last remaing pages from the Bible (found in every hotel room), because the pages are really thin and burn like zig-zags. Well, that night I smoked half of that tobacco, and at the same time felt closer to God.
Thank you IRC!
Re:No File Sharing? (Score:2, Insightful)
I don't think that its "chatting capabilities" have been made obsolete by IMs, because with an IM, you only have your friends on your list, and you wouldn't meet any one new.
I can sort of agree with things like Yahoo chat, although I don't use it. Its kind of like IRC, or talkers (they still exist), but with pictures. The younger crowd (not the l337 h4ck3r5) who don't know about things like IRC or talkers, will use what they come across first, which is most likely, yahoo, or msn. They'll also use what their friends use.
So, I don't think IRC has been made obsolete, but uptake of it by newer users might not be brilliant.
Re:No File Sharing? (Score:2)
Sure, AIM and Yahoo! are filled with people in that age range, but... have you ever actually joined an AIM chat? The second you step into one you're flooded with shit like A?S?L??@??#?@#@(#(@*!@!@0// PRESSS 111 FPR CYBARSECHS@?@/2/2//32#L@K#JL@KJl3jl2 LOLOROOFJKLMANOROFLL:K@j32 in yellow-highlighted green 32-point italic Times New Roman.
Not a place i'd like to hang out in. That's why i got "addicted" to IRC. The good majority of people i've met on IRC are actually intelligent. Most of them know how to spell the words "you" and "are", and some of them even separate ideas with punctuation marks and/or new lines.
Cybersex? (Score:2)
Is DALnet going to form DALnet, Inc, start running ads, and do an IPO next?
IRC is for chatting?!!? (Score:5, Funny)
Wa43Z sp33K!!! (Score:2)
Oh, come on. Warez channels have had a major cultural impact on the world!
(AFAI can tell, warez speak came from people on AOL channels trying to avoid keyword-based systems for tagging warez channels, though I'd be interested if anyone knows that the source was other than AOL).
Re:Wa43Z sp33K!!! [OT] (Score:3, Informative)
Re:IRC is for chatting?!!? (Score:4, Funny)
Re:IRC is for chatting?!!? (Score:5, Funny)
Staggering blow? (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Staggering blow? (Score:2)
Of course, the response of the warez kiddies is the "staggering blow", like before.
Re:Staggering blow? (Score:5, Insightful)
-Berj
Re:Staggering blow? (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Staggering blow? (Score:5, Insightful)
Just speculating.
-Berj
Finally. (Score:5, Interesting)
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:Finally. (Score:3)
Anyway, thanks for that time, I love IRC and feel people like you are important and undervalued - but I do the helping for love of the art and knowledge, not expecting anything in return. Networks come and go, and its good you left for other parts of the net.
Me, I am afraid that Undernet will meet the same ridiculous destiny - die by such stupid attackers... I love undernet, its an excelent tool for my work. Still chances are there will be a replacement.
Anyway....
THANKS!! that's all I wanted to say initially, after reading all the stupid replies to your message. And I know what you mean by community, I try to give that feeling to the channels I participate in.
Re:Finally. (Score:5, Funny)
spent 6 years as an administrator on Dalnet
Those that used BBS's in the day
Avid BeOS User.
You really underestimate IRC people. (Score:3, Insightful)
Trying to get fuckers on IRC to switch networks is like pulling teeth. They act like you've asked them to switch blood type. A few people might leave, but people on IRC are so lazy, shiftless, and stupid in their network-loyalty that getting them to move would require tactical nuclear devices, not simply the removal of a few large fserv channels.
- A.P.
Re:Staggering blow? (Score:3, Insightful)
Having been exposed to the kind of script kiddies and l33t h4x0rz that IRC attracts during my days on Undernet (I worked as a junior channel op on #quake3 and #trinity) though, I highly doubt that this will mark an end to the DOSing that DALnet has been experiencing.
I fully expect a mass tantrum from the Ju4r3z kiddies, and more attacks on the network.
It is one reason I stopped IRCing about 5 years ago. Children who have never learned "NO" and "not yours, don't touch" from their parents. I could have spent the last 5 years tracking them and helping law enforcement teach "NO" and "not yours, don't touch" through incarceration, injunction, and equipment confiscation. Instead, I decided to walk away and concentrate on my career.
I wish DALnet the best, but I really fear that IRC is living on borrowed time, thanks to the poorly socialized children shitting in the sandbox.
Re:Staggering blow? (Score:3, Interesting)
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.
Re:Staggering blow? (Score:2)
When I see someone doing that in the channel I op, I kick them with the message to come back when they are at the keyboard.
When I go into my channel, I like to find people to chat with, not a dozen or so idle connections of people who have gone out for the evening having left their connection up and want to kibitz on my conversation when they return without having contributed anything to it.
Frankly, I think it's a little creepy.
phrohibit?? (Score:5, Funny)
Freenet Anyway (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:Freenet Anyway (Score:5, Interesting)
If your idea holds, sounds like DALnet will be rid of the warez kiddies one way or the other.
Re:Freenet Anyway (Score:2)
And DALNet should care about losing warez kiddies because. . ?
Face it: they're a waste of server bandwidth. DALNet is better off if they leave, not worse. And it may not be all that difficult for the IRCops to program a bot that could collect enough information about a channel to determine whether it was a #warez-kiddie channel, and act accordingly.
Re:Freenet Anyway (Score:5, Informative)
The way it will be enforced is to manually shut down any groups whose sole purpose is deemed to be file transfering. You're right that it could be tough to squash all the hundreds of new groups that will innevitably be created to temporarily bypass a closure, but attracting a supply of users to the new channels could be even harder. Dalnet sharers will have to find some totally new way to go about business that is not reliant on lurking around preset channels, or they'll have to go elsewhere.
Re:Freenet Anyway (Score:3, Insightful)
Okay, here's a problem. I have a channel on DALnet which I use solely for the purpose of being locatable so that people can get a script from me via XDCC. Basically, it is a filesharing channel. That's all it is. The purpose for the channel is to get files from me. I am, according to DALnet staff who I mentioned this to, actually violating the policy.
My script is in the public domain though, and I'm certainly not violating any laws. Besides this channel, any group of people who, say, engage in shareware/freeware trading will also get bitten. I think it's a shame that legitimate users are going to get screwed by this misguided policy.
Or we would if there were any hope of it being enforced.
Re:Freenet Anyway (Score:2)
Oh yeah. IRC is the first place I think of when I want to download shareware!
Re:Freenet Anyway (Score:2)
Won't miss it (Score:2)
Whew! (Score:3, Funny)
Re:Whew! (Score:5, Funny)
IRC sucks for file sharing (Score:2, Insightful)
I fail to see the problem!
Re:IRC sucks for file sharing (Score:3, Interesting)
don't matter (Score:2, Informative)
Conspiracy Theory (Score:5, Funny)
Think the RIAA were DDoSing them all this time and they finally surrendered to their terms?
[conspiracy mode off]
Before making new rules... (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Before making new rules... (Score:2)
> it is, but its only a matter of time till some
> idiot assembles a floodnet and aims at EFnet,
> destroying another free, non-profit internet
> resource for no reason.
Actually EFnet has a good defense aginst this, and has prevented it from happening for the past 4-5 years.
Their secret?
They let the idiots be opers so they have better ways to harass users than DoS
[ducks]
(Laugh, it was funny!)
what does this have to do with rights online? (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:what does this have to do with rights online? (Score:5, Insightful)
-- iCEBaLM
Re:what does this have to do with rights online? (Score:2)
My remark was "since when is filesharing a right?". It isn't. Like some many things on internet it is something that's allowed by the owner of the system and NOT a right of the user. (compare email, newsgroups, ftpaccess etc. etc. You don't have a right (an no, free speech doesn't have anything to do with it either), you use a service payed for and offered by someone else.
Hence, since when is filesharing over IRC a right..
Re:what does this have to do with rights online? (Score:4, Informative)
Sounds like DALnet disagrees with you, although it does seem to be a limited right.
Re:what does this have to do with rights online? (Score:2)
compare: "freedom of speech" but not using my newspaper/magazine/website/resources..
Re:what does this have to do with rights online? (Score:2)
Do you even have the tiniest idea of how file sharing works on IRC? All the "bandwide" was used in client-to-client connections. Although there is some extra bandwidth used in file lists sent via @msg, the files themselves never touch the IRC network.
If they really want to trade their juarezzzzz that bad, then they can go to some other IRC network, or even start their own. Since when was DALnet the only IRC network in the world?
Besides, trad^H^H^H^Hleeching files via IRC can be a real bitch. Spending 24 hours in a queue to get the latest anime fansub release at a plunderful 4800 bps is not my idea of fun. This new bittorrent thing is a cool idea, has an OS X version, and is a perfect match for the kind of files I want (new fansub releases).
Re:Since always (Score:2)
A right is something noone can take from me and as such there are very few rights..
What's the point? (Score:5, Interesting)
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!" ;)
Re:What's the point? (Score:2)
You could at least have used EFNET as an example, where there is quite a lot of interesting chat. But there are also filesharing channels. The two uses of the network sit side-by-side, with very few problems.
Re:What's the point? (Score:3, Funny)
There are a lot of non-specific clan channels that have friendly banter. Banter, anyway
#tjd sad topic for the day. =/ Today we have been proving that Ian Fleming was a geek:
Daemons are Forever
The World is Not Enum
function Tomorrow()
{
return 1;
die("I'm dead");
}
while (!true) say("never again");
07016534671571
die("another day");
$ ps aux | grep daylights
jil01 5980 0.0 0.4 1544 580 pts/2 S 13:40 0:00 daylights
(!enough)?The World:;
for (i=1;i=2; i++) YouOnlyLive();
Select * FROM Russia WITH love;
You get the idea!
Re:What's the point? (Score:2)
and just about everyone is to some degree online games player. this is either bad or good depending on the person..
but just about every irc network is 99% full of crap by everyones standards, the one remaining 1% is what matters.
Why is "policy" in quotation marks? (Score:3, Interesting)
Why is the word "policy" in quotation marks here? I assume these are supposed to be "sarcastic quotation marks", as in
or
or
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
Re:Why is "policy" in quotation marks? (Score:2)
Are you whom I think you are?
Reply to me privately if it is indeed you...
(me: Duranos -- #irchelp -- DalNet)
Bad idea.. (Score:5, Insightful)
Way back in the day there was a lot of talk about banning child pornography (which is something that everyone can actually agree is morally wrong, as well as illegal). It was decided not to, on what I think was good advice, because the second you become a moderator of content you open yourself up to legal trouble if you fail to properly moderate that content.
Now some might say that DALnet isn't actually moderating any content, because it's worded in such a way that it simply disallows the channels. However, to disallow these channels DALnet must explicitly moderate content. It must find this 'abusive' content and put an end to it, thereby making it a moderator.
It is, in fact, the official position of DALnet staff (or so I hear) that this is the belief on the network. That the way this clause in their AUP [dal.net] is written prevents them from being considered a moderator. I think this is a big mistake on their part, and will ultimately come back to haunt them.
That said, DALnet has a long history of being utterly incapable of enforcing their own policies, and this is just one more of them that will probably not ever see any real enforcement. For example, DALnet was (when people could get on it) the haven of mass advertising, not to mention a breeding ground for drones and IRC worms. Despite some futile attempts to stop these activities, DALnet has been basically completely incapable of doing any serious work on these fronts.
To add to this, DALnet and its sponsors have been beleaguered by kiddies with a massive array of DDoS weaponry. They have utterly failed to address the issues which have, in large part, led to their current troubles. The main issue is that DALnet harbors a group of extremely absuive operators who basically take enjoyment out of pissing off the kiddies because they feel "invulnerable." Instead of actually just removing these destructive individuals, DALnet has kept them on and "told them not to do it anymore." Basically tantamount to saying "we don't care, keep DDoSing us."
I don't think that the few people left on DALnet right now need to worry too much about this policy, it won't likely be enforced much, if at all.
Re:Bad idea.. (Score:2)
I think any time you try making blanket statements about morality, you're going to find that you've got a pretty tough task.
Re:Bad idea.. (Score:2)
Re:Bad idea.. (Score:4, Informative)
Would it help? (Score:3, Insightful)
I'm not saying you should facilitate them but by pissing 'm off there's no way the DDoS attacks will stop. Ignoring just might be the way to go. But then again, that's just my 2 cents
I envision.... (Score:5, Funny)
Because god knows every channel on Dalnet seems to have some lamo trivia bot or three....
Cleaning up the internet (Score:3, Insightful)
KFG
EFNet? (Score:2)
Re:EFNet? (Score:3, Informative)
users channels
1. EFnet 115877 42693
2. QuakeNet 112496 134879
3. IRCnet 110942 54206
4. Undernet 99825 43173
you may notice that for example, quakenet is just full of cr**(more channels than users, meaning theres just shitloads of channels with one person)
Somehow, I just don't get it... (Score:5, Insightful)
And unlike Napster/KaZaA, IRC does not come with built-in search, a good file server, minimum shared, quotas or "ranking" of contribution. Nothing that should bring them at legal risk unless paper manufacturers gets sued for what you can write on the paper.
Also, will this mean that OPs will start logging DCCs and crossreference with the channels you're on to determine if a channel is being used to transfer files? Or is this some "Uh, yeah if we see 'em" policy? Because the first would be a rather big invasion of privacy, the second would simply lead to more hidden channels...
But I suppose everyone that cared about chatting has found a more stable home than Dalnet in the last month or two anyway (we did), why not scare off the file traders (that usually only care about making their sends/gets connected) too...
Kjella
Re:Somehow, I just don't get it... (Score:3, Informative)
Except that filesharing bots do not always remain on their own channels without bothering anyone else. You also get bots and "users" who like to "advertise" their services and channels.
Re:Somehow, I just don't get it... (Score:2, Insightful)
so what, (Score:5, Interesting)
Hmm (Score:2, Insightful)
sigh. (Score:2, Interesting)
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!
Moderation? (Score:3, Insightful)
To me moderation in the technical sense means one of two things.
1) Messages are reviewed by a moderating team before being publicly posted such as mailing lists
2) Messages are freely posted but a moderating team montiors them and removes ones that do not abide by the terms of use.
Since when did restricting what services your users can use become 'moderation'?
DALnet is still an unmoderated medium for CHAT - you can say what you like, organise a bank heist, tell all your l33t friends about the latest hijacked webserver your using to serve your warez. Nothing in this policy implies any moderation of speech.
I can speculate why they are enforcing this policy. When you run a community service where time, money, resources and effort are donnated by a large number of people for a certain purpose and a large number of the users use it for an entirely differnet purpose, costing you a lot of resources, and then also attack the service so that user you want to support can't use it, I guess I personally would be a little pissed.
The users they want are the users that want the services DALnet was originally designed for.
Do you think losing lots of hangers on is really going to worry them - every user on the system costs some supporter of DALnet money somewhere, its not like a membership site where they get revenue. Explain to me if I run a DALnet server why exactly I should be worried about losing users that use my box to swap warez, p0rn or coordinate a Sub7 attack on another machine?
When I find my webserver compromised and used as a warez server, are you saying I shouldn't lock it down because this will " undoubtedly upset someone with the means to launch an attack equivalent to the attacks {I} suffered recently"??
DALNet is a free service, they are not required to provide YOU with what YOU want, they are not a government aganecy or a paid membership site. YOU have a choice of IRC servers, and if you don't like any of them go ahead and set your own up.
Not to sound paranoid... (Score:2, Insightful)
No filesharing, no this, no that... (Score:2, Interesting)
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.
And does the policy work? (Score:2)
And that's just DALnet.
Seems to me that the only real losers from this are the dudes who now have to add this moderation to their job description. DALnet won't miss the leechers, the leechers won't miss DALnet.
EFNet's New Slogan (Score:2, Funny)
BTW: Not a troll, I enjoy DALnet too...
So help me (and others, I'm sure) understand... (Score:2, Insightful)
The people running it decide to enforce a policy against channels designed exclusively for file trading -- chat channels not being used for chat.
Because someone has once again made it a little harder for people to steal software and music and exchange pornography (much of it going to under 18 year old children) these people are threatening to leave an entirely free network?
DALnet is provided as a free service to thousands using not-free bandwidth and servers and other resources of those that run and support it. "If you don't like it, go somewhere else" seems appropriate to say here.
Where is the legitimate complaint? They won't shut you down if you do a few exchanges of files (even if those files or that activity might be considered illegal by some). They are only shutting down channels that spew files and are not for the purposes of the network they built and offer. DALnet never claimed to be a file trading network and now they intend to lightly enforce their use policy. How is that unfair to the unpaying, leeching hordes complaining now?
Sounds to me like Napster whiners. Sounds to me what Kazaa users will be whinning about when it too is shut down.
Now... imagine; what if the usenet stopped allowing binary posts (ignore the technical aspect for a moment, assume it became a "policy" somehow). Ooohh.. I can hear the kiddies crying out as if a trillion posts were suddenly canceled.
It is their network, but you happen to be an ass (Score:5, Interesting)
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.
Re:It is their network, but you happen to be an as (Score:3, Troll)
It's not censorship if the government doesn't do it, but your point is well made - if they decide they're going to crack down on illegal file traders, they become responsible for all illegal file traders. Thing is, they don't care if it's illegal or not, so I don't think that applies. You could be trading pictures of kittens, homemade kitten.mpg movies you made of your kitten playing with string, they'd still boot you off (sadly so).
Personally I think its a moral mistake to enforce their beliefs on others when they offer a free service, but that is their choice.
Your pronoun use is a little ambiguous, but I take this to mean that it's a moral mistake for Dalnet to enforce their beliefs on others when they (Dalnet) provide a free service, which doesn't make any sense, because, to be cliche, 'beggars can't be choosers' - if you want to use the network, use it for what it's provided to you for. Perhaps you meant something else, but who knows.
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'.
Except that file sharing channels, if you've ever been to one, are always flooded with text. I find it hard to keep up personally, and I only go to the smaller ones. The larger ones are even worse. Combine that constant advertising of your fserve with the trivia bots, and send that to a dozen or a hundred or two hundred people (depending on the channel), and that's a lot of traffic, a lot of memory for the servers to store userdata for, a lot of bandwidth to share that user data around whenever a netsplit occurs (you can send gigs of traffic a day just syncing, since the new link has to carry data about half the users one way, and half the users another way, and then the two servers have to route it to every other server on the network).
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.
Whiners? Definately. They don't pay for it. They don't contribute financially. They just use bandwidth and cpu time and memory of people who felt like being nice and linking servers to Dalnet to provide a service to people. You'd have to be a pretty big jerk to throw that in their face because they're not giving you enough for free. Take the service as it is given, or don't take it at all, but no one is 'entitled' to anything on Dalnet any more than they are entitled to anything in my home. It's a private domain, not a public one, and that's all there is to it.
--Dan
Disclaimer: I opered on an IRC network once, and got a little bitter about people demanding that I fix what was 'wrong' with the network, or insisting they had 'a right to free speech'. IRC networks are private property, you're not entitled to anything, and you have no rights.
Knee jerk (Score:2)
Good riddance to bad rubbish.
This isnt suprising. (Score:2, Interesting)
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.
Oh, great . . . (Score:2, Funny)
DALNet has always been the lowest on the IRC evolutionary totem pole, with all kinds of goofy restrictions on people, that's of course "for their own protection." Even before this you couldn't actually receive a file by DCC without first registering your nick, a process that was too long for me to bother with in the first place. Oh, and don't let me forget the asinine regulation added recently where only clients using identd may connect. Come on, please, what purpose does identd actually serve in 2003?
And if nickserv doesn't annoy you to all hell, the five hundred msgs from users of Turkish IRC scripts probably will. Literally, I've left my IRC client on DALNet idling for a little while and have come back with about 20 spam messages. And if you can somehow manage to bear the spam, you'll probably end up being annoyed by the other 50 morons trying to DCC you viruses, that, of course only affect Windows users.
Can someone explain to me what banning file-sharing channels over IRC actually does to make its quality any better? I seriously don't see the warez kiddies being the perpetrators of DOS attacks, that is until now. Warez on IRC isn't going to go away because of this regulation, it's only going to change form. Instead of offer bots you'll have individuals advertising their Hotline or Directconnect servers; I've already seen this on a certain unnamed Undernet warez channel.
People are talking about DALNet sucking now? It's sucked as long as I can remember. It's almost a perfect example of what happens when a government thinks improving life and security only occurs by creating more and more regulations (instead of changing the people themselves). What you end up having is a huge group of disenfranchised people who end up attacking you.
DALNet admins: can you make a splinter network especially for those people kicked off of DALNet, just so they don't fill up my queues on EFNet. Also, when I'm looking for movies to download I'd prefer to be able to actually read the offer bots, so can you inform your users that not everyone on IRC can view mIRC colors? Thanks, love you baby.
Oh, and if I offended any DALNet users out there, please try to resist the urge to begin your reply with "m/Turkish/25 ASL!!?!!???"
oh come on now, really (Score:2, Interesting)
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
Primary? and How do they plan to enforce (Score:3, Interesting)
Transferrs are done via DCC and dont even go thru their servers its direct client to client
Re:Primary? and How do they plan to enforce (Score:2)
Cant Realistcally stop privmsg (Score:2)
If they were to enforce a 'open channel chat only' rule.. there wouldn't be enough users to even care about.
IRC sucks anyway (Score:2, Interesting)
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.
Caving to the RIAA's attacks (Score:2)
I like techno/euro/rave/house music. There's not a very big shelf for that kind of thing down at the local CD shop. Much of the best of this kind of music isn't even available on store shelves anywhere. But it *could* be found, lurking on the Internet. Like many others, I tried Kazaa, and was immediately turned off by all the adware and spyware. I uninstalled it, ran AdAware, and did the best I could to clean up my system.
That's where IRC came in. I really liked getting my underground music through DALnet's IRC network. Sure, it took a little more work than using Kazaa, but I liked knowing that I had complete control over what was being downloaded onto my computer. DALnet's network was always pretty well stocked. However, as the DDOS attacks persisted, it became more and more difficult to get onto DALnet at a convenient time to find the latest tracks from the likes of Mistress Barbara, Carl Cox, et. al.
I view this as a loss. I've gone ahead and installed KazaaLite on my desktop, but I'm still leery about software that indiscriminately writes to my disk and offers up arbitrary folders for sharing. I don't have the source code for it, so I don't know what it's doing.
Flame away,
Kombat
Re:Caving to the RIAA's attacks (Score:2, Interesting)
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 . .
it should improve DALNet (Score:2)
why were they still there in the first place? (Score:3, Interesting)
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
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
Are we talking about kiddie porn, then? And if so, good riddence!
nlh
All major IRC networks will be doing this soon (Score:5, Informative)
Legal Action.
Surely, the RIAA knows about the abundance of MP3 and warez sites on IRC. They've gone after everyone else. It stands to reason that they'll come after IRC sooner or later. And like Napster, they have a central authority they can go to in order to take action.
This policy is a smart pre-emtptive move on DALnet's part.
Did you have friends on Dalnet? (Score:4, Informative)
Because of recent difficulties maintaining a connection to Dalnet, and because of the (understandable) wish for discretion on the part of Dalnet management, some of the assertions in this posting are unconfirmed and unsupported. This nonwithstanding, the following speculation is offered in the hope of illuminating to the best of my ability to percieve it, what's been really going on:
At about the middle of January this year, Dalnet servers were hit with a wave of massive DDoS attacks, quantified as greater than 1G per second per server with sweepingly damaging results.
There never were that many Dalnet login servers to begin with. The attack wave was successful in disabling all of them, and keeping them out of service entirely for over 7 days.
To complicate matters further, there have been credible reports on ircnews.com, irc-junkie.org and elsewhere of a certain degree of dissention within Dalnet, and the senior sysadmins and management of the companies providing server hosting. I mention this with reluctance, because the problem is bad enough anyway, but it is nevertheless true that the operational list of Dalnet servers available at this moment is quite different from the array online before the attack wave began, and that some of the defections are permanent, including some of the largest hubs.
Dalnet have commented officially on their website newsletter that the volume of DDoS garbage going into their hosts' servers was sufficient to not only knock Dalnet offline, but bad enough to interfere with the hosts' other (revenue earning) internet services.
At present also, login servers are resolving under slightly different names, making joining problematic for large numbers of users still, but as of last week at least, the expectation of a reasonably reliable login is plausible.
Dalnet is probably correct in having determined that their attackers method of acquiring zombies is by the use of worms, trojans.......use your favorite term - by sending files like XXXSallyXXX.GIF.vbs, or whatever, and that these OwN3d systems are the ones being enlisted to carry out DDoS waves.
They note with equal accuracy that a handful of filesharing channels are some of the most crowded on their network, and may be not carefully enough managed, and have hypothecated these as being most likely sources of widespread damage and infection, to several thousand users' systems, to Dalnet, other IRC networks and the internet overall.
The sociology of a filesharing channel is also a factor in this policy change. Where else in the world wide world would a user be so inclined to accept, click on and tinker with a file they acquired five minutes ago from an anonymous stranger with absolutely no verification? Windoze users are requested to NOT post lengthy replies babbling on and on about their firewalls. They're meaningless in this context. The file transferred and was run. Think about it.
All Dalnet have done, is announce they intend to shut down these channels. They had to do something.
Does this mean they're trying to ban filesharing via Dalnet alltogether? No. Even if the IRC protocol permitted this, which it doesn't, their response at server level is thought through and restrained in scope, and respected here accordingly.
Elsewhere on this thread it has been suggested that this decision is motivated by the desire to take away IRC users' freedom. I refute this with the comment that the freedom to unknowingly download a trojan to allow your billyware to be used in DDoS attacks is an unfortunate and unsuitable choice for a cause to defend in the name of liberty.
Re:well no kidding.. (Score:5, Informative)
Re:hmm RIAA Rang (Score:2)
Do you have any facts to back this up?
Re:You thought the DMCA/RIAA wouldn't use dDOS (Score:2)
Re:The biggest threat to ANY IRC network? (Score:2)
Does this poor, misguided fool really think that if all copies of mIRC just suddenly vanished (ha!) script kiddies wouldn't just use another IRC client for their means?
And did anyone read the part about how he wants the RIAA/MPAA to sue the makers of mIRC, thereby setting a nasty precident for all other IRC clients? Not to mention newsreaders, FTP clients, web browsers, and anything else that could conceivably be used for copyright infringement.
Whatever you're high on, mods, can I have some? Just for *ahem* scientific analysis. : )