Suprnova.org is back... with a vengeance?!
December 29, 2004 6:06 PM   Subscribe

Suprnova.org is back... with a vengeance?! It was just last week when suprnova.org, the most popular site online for finding BitTorrent downloads, shut down their site. The MPAA and RIAA crowed, but it appears the celebration was a tad premature. Suprnova's new site mentions a special announcement tomorrow at 9 PM GMT on NovaStream.org radio. Rumors suggest that it will introduce Exeem, a decentralized, BitTorrent-driven software client that turns every user into a tracker, removing the requirement for a centralized site such as suprnova, while providing users with easy searchability, the swarming powers of BitTorrent, and a network that is far harder to shut down.
posted by insomnia_lj (73 comments total)
 
Say hello to another Hydra head, yaoming?
posted by yerfatma at 6:21 PM on December 29, 2004


*fingers crossed*
posted by graventy at 6:28 PM on December 29, 2004


Indeed. If it can be digitized, it will be shared, and if it can be locked down with DRM, that DRM will be broken, and circumvented.

It continues to amaze me that organizations like the RIAA and the MPAA and whatever the equivalent might be for television are not jumping all over technologies like bittorrent, legitimizing it for the vast majority of people who would use it to acquire media legally and pay for it, were that an option.

They just don't get it, do they?
posted by stavrosthewonderchicken at 6:28 PM on December 29, 2004


Sharing movies is illegal.
posted by orange clock at 6:31 PM on December 29, 2004


Always grows back thicker.
posted by sled at 6:32 PM on December 29, 2004


So how will exeem be any different from edonkey? Doesn't edonkey already do all the swarming and sharing stuff? And it's slow as shit most of the time that I've used it...
posted by Space Coyote at 6:42 PM on December 29, 2004


Huzzah! I knew the Nova wouldn't bow out so easily.
posted by baphomet at 6:54 PM on December 29, 2004


Space Coyote: The method used by BitTorrent to distribute files parallels to a large extent the one used by the eDonkey2000 network, but nodes in eDonkey's file sharing network usually share and download a much larger number of files, making the bandwidth available to each transfer much smaller. BitTorrent transfers are typically very fast, because all nodes in a group concentrate on transferring a single file or collection of files. - from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/BitTorrent
posted by nicwolff at 6:58 PM on December 29, 2004


But what will become of the Best Boy whose salary depends on me not downloading "Meet the Fockers"?
posted by unsupervised at 7:00 PM on December 29, 2004


What's to keep the ??AA from using Exeem to bust hundreds at a time like they do with MP3 traders, unless its encrypted.

Space Coyote : One thing a popular torrent isn't is slow.
posted by Enron Hubbard at 7:02 PM on December 29, 2004


Space Coyote: I think eDonkey is slower than BitTorrent because of a two factors:
- BitTorrent mandates that users "share the wealth," in that download speeds are tied to upload speeds.
- eDonkey users are sharing a larger number of files, whereas BitTorrent users are spreading their bandwidth among just a few torrents.

I'm also under the impression that BitTorrent is able to allocate slices of files more intelligently than eDonkey.

On preview: beaten by nicwolff
posted by SemiSophos at 7:02 PM on December 29, 2004


Indeed. If it can be digitized, it will be shared

I can't wait for transporters, man.
posted by WolfDaddy at 7:14 PM on December 29, 2004


"Doesn't edonkey already do all the swarming and sharing stuff? And it's slow as shit most of the time that I've used it..."

The big difference should be that it won't be slow as shit. What nikwolff said... The initial review of Exeem seems to indicate that downloads are at more or less the same speed as standard torrent downloads, which should be considerably faster than downloads from other services. Part of the reason for this is that BitTorrent is designed to allow quicker downloads for those who share generously with their files / bandwidth. "Give and ye shall receive..."

One thing that occurs to me is how much easier this could make adding torrent links to any site. Rather than fussing around trying to get a Torrent online, all you should have to do is go on Exeem, find the name of the file in question, and then link to it. The link *should* then be able to open up Exeem and initiate the download. In other words, there is no reason that Exeem can't power both direct web links *AND* searches from within the client. Powerful.

In addition to a greater degree of sharing per user, I think we're also likely to quickly see more users for Exeem than other applications... and when there's a larger swarm, there's faster swarming. Should be interesting.
posted by insomnia_lj at 7:14 PM on December 29, 2004


aw, WolfDaddy, you're such a pervert.
posted by graventy at 7:44 PM on December 29, 2004


Arrrrrrrrrrrrrrr!
posted by kavasa at 7:49 PM on December 29, 2004


I can't wait for this. I'm all aflutter.
posted by puke & cry at 7:57 PM on December 29, 2004


Hopefully they won't announce that they've struck a deal with lawyers and are providing IPs of thier users.
posted by tomplus2 at 7:59 PM on December 29, 2004


The thing about Bit Torrent is that the nodes' IP's are accessible to anyone with the torrent. The RIAA and MPAA don't have any trouble getting your IP themselves. So...

Don't worry? Or worry more.
posted by Evstar at 8:28 PM on December 29, 2004


I'm gonna stick my fingers deep into the wound before I believe in this. Aren't these the same claims that were being made for MULE or whatever it is six months ago?
posted by PinkStainlessTail at 8:39 PM on December 29, 2004


But suprnova isnt a tracker at all. Its just a website that points to torrents. The question here is whether its illegal to do this. The 2600 case from not so long ago pretty much ruled that it is.

I'm so sick of seeing them going after the technology. Go after the users. Thanks. At least the RIAA is going after users and not trying to make P2P illegal. Well, anymore.
posted by skallas at 8:44 PM on December 29, 2004


I keep asking this again and again, and nobody has a solid answer - Isn't there a single country out of the RIAA/MPAA/(acronym)'s reach/influence, and why haven't servers been placed there?
posted by bhance at 8:51 PM on December 29, 2004


bhance, welcome to Sealand -- where freedom starts at $750USD a month for a 128k connection.
posted by tumult at 8:58 PM on December 29, 2004


The thing about Bit Torrent is that the nodes' IP's are accessible to anyone with the torrent. The RIAA and MPAA don't have any trouble getting your IP themselves. So...

Each tracker lists one file, only one. Going after ten million people sharing partial copies of five hundred thousand different files is a legal challenge more difficult than sorting the username list in Napster by the file count column and starting from the top.

Also, the rumor has been that ip-masking is to be a part of eXeem.
posted by airguitar at 9:05 PM on December 29, 2004


Is eXeem Windows-only? Because that would suck.
posted by IshmaelGraves at 9:11 PM on December 29, 2004


Exeem combined with a system like TOR might be able to provide enough layers of security to foil ??AA investigators. I have a friend who works for the technology group at a major music corporation. Basically they try to fight systems like gnutella, edonkey, etc. He'll be the first to admit that he will loose the war, but he thinks that the next few rounds will go to the Music Companies, primarily because there isn't enough bandwidth at the end points to provide a truly anonymous network. Freenet's sluggishness is a prime example. Once bandwidth increases and encryption becomes standard, there will be no controlling it.
posted by Freen at 9:13 PM on December 29, 2004


Hypothetically speaking, I wonder what would stop the RIAA or MPAA from hiring a crew with rocket launchers to wipe out Sealand? There doesn't seem much Sealand can do to defend itself militarily from disgruntled corp's.
posted by AlexReynolds at 9:15 PM on December 29, 2004


I keep asking this again and again, and nobody has a solid answer - Isn't there a single country out of the RIAA/MPAA/(acronym)'s reach/influence, and why haven't servers been placed there?

(this is a guess) What about Cuba? Last time I checked, it wasn't exactly a friend of America.
posted by puke & cry at 9:20 PM on December 29, 2004


Avast ye swabbies! Hoist the cable modem and unfurl the routers for it's o'er the briny internets we go. Aye, thar's pieces of eight and moving pictures and shanties to be had for sure'n.
posted by TimeFactor at 9:24 PM on December 29, 2004



I keep asking this again and again, and nobody has a solid answer - Isn't there a single country out of the RIAA/MPAA/(acronym)'s reach/influence, and why haven't servers been placed there?


Earthstation 5 is in Palestine. (or is it?)
posted by calwatch at 9:32 PM on December 29, 2004


Um... could someone shiver me timbers? Please?
posted by Freen at 9:33 PM on December 29, 2004


bhance --

As best I understand it, yes, there are plenty of countries where the *AA doesn't rule, and there's no local equivalent with any teeth. Russia's a fine example.

However, (1) The *AA tends to have a great deal of pull with the United States government. Ditto for foreign equivalents and their governments. There's very little return for a country which could persuade them to throw roadblocks in the way of trade negotiations by doing this. (2) Even many countries without a *AA equivalent are nominal signatories to various copyright treaties which they want to at least pay lip service to

There are, of course, countries where they simply wouldn't care about (or would be pleased about) irritating the US and/or observing those treaties. Those, however, are generally countries with poor internet infrastructure and their own far more draconian censorship policies. I wouldn't expect to see, say, Iran, Cuba, or North Korea hosting any high-traffic free exchange sites any time soon. (Not to mention that anyone paying for hosting in those nations in the name of "freedom" might be a tad hypocritical; or that doing technology business with those countries might get one looked at by people who make the *AA look like lap kittens)
posted by tyllwin at 9:39 PM on December 29, 2004


true story:

i went on suprnova and got the new nirvana box set minus the dvd cuz it wasnt being shared like that

i listened to it a few times to see if it would make me sad + angry + joyful + etc

oddly it made me happy.

so when moms called to ask, what would you like for Christmas i didnt say franz friggin ferdinand which i had long since deleted, i didnt say the streets which i played once and deleted, i didnt say the new eminem which i actually liked for two days and ignored, i didnt say the new wilco which bored me, i didnt say the new morrissey which had two songs that were decent and well the whole thing was pretty good actually

but it didnt come with a dvd

so i asked for the new nirvana box set

and when i got it i loved it.

and thats why the riaa are dumbasses for going after lazy kids with no money who sit infront of pandoras box every day.

people will buy the things that they like. give em a chance to like it.

and when morrissey comes out with that dvd i will get it.
posted by tsarfan at 9:59 PM on December 29, 2004


Latest wired has examples of record execs seeding artists as part of promotional efforts, to create "buzz."
posted by mecran01 at 10:33 PM on December 29, 2004


oddly it made me happy.

so when moms called to ask, what would you like for Christmas i didnt say franz friggin ferdinand which i had long since deleted, i didnt say the streets which i played once and deleted, i didnt say the new eminem which i actually liked for two days and ignored, i didnt say the new wilco which bored me, i didnt say the new morrissey which had two songs that were decent and well the whole thing was pretty good actually


Ok, I glimpsed the inside of your mind. It looks like gaping anus, which I will ignore in thirty seconds.

----

This is good news, though. I like to keep up on television this way.
posted by The God Complex at 10:33 PM on December 29, 2004


"Is eXeem Windows-only? Because that would suck."

It would suck... temporarily.

If this is indeed the case, expect there to be a big move to make clients for all the major platforms to access the same network.

More interesting exeem links:
A more detailed review, with numerous new screenshots.

An early FAQ / "how to" written by one of the creators that was apparently leaked by one of the beta testers. Apparently, it's been in beta since late November, and has improved greatly since then.
posted by insomnia_lj at 10:52 PM on December 29, 2004


Slightly offtopic: is Sealand in any way related to the Crypt in Kinukata, in Neal Stephenson's Cryptonomicon? It appears that Sealand started doing this sort of thing around 2000, and Cryptonomicon came out in 1999.....
posted by pikachulolita at 11:17 PM on December 29, 2004


pika: The idea of a "data haven" has been growing in popularity at least since the first use of the phrase in Bruce Sterling's 1989 novel Islands in the Net.
posted by nicwolff at 11:43 PM on December 29, 2004


hey guys, slow down on the celebrating... think of Manny Perry. Alls he wants to do is make movies without you leaches stealing his money!

/sarcasm. thick and juicy.
posted by menace303 at 12:01 AM on December 30, 2004


Aren't these the same claims that were being made for MULE or whatever it is six months ago?

No.

With KaZaa / eMule / eDonkey / eHorse / eQuine, the entire file is being transported over the top network layer. That's hundreds of megs of overhead, when all you really need to do is set up a decentralized server for VERY SMALL FILES (the .torrent files). Basically, imagine Gnutella2, only instead of sharing the entire 700 Mb DivX, you're only sharing a 2 k .torrent file. That means your latency goes down, down, down.

But as someone else has already pointed out, this does nothing, absolutely nothing to stop the RI/MPAA from getting your IP once connected to your peers. If they wish to send legal notices to individual users, it will still be trivial.
posted by Civil_Disobedient at 12:52 AM on December 30, 2004


Isn't there a single country out of the RIAA/MPAA/(acronym)'s reach/influence?

I suspect Sweden, in the heart of communist Shandyland, is beyond the grasp of the evil acronyms, as evidenced by the responses to legal threats received by The Pirate Bay :

"Hello and thank you for contacting us. We have shut down the website in question. Oh wait, just kidding. We haven't, [since] we have sane copyright laws here. But we also have polar bears roaming the streets and attacking people :-(."
posted by Mr Bismarck at 1:16 AM on December 30, 2004


gaping anus

thanks, the god complex, i nearly forgot i was on the internets.
posted by tsarfan at 1:43 AM on December 30, 2004


god complex, methinks you visit goatse.cx a little too often.
posted by randomstriker at 1:59 AM on December 30, 2004


actually, tsarfan was the first person to reveal himself as being youthful since i read the metatalk thread about keyser soze, plus he didn't use capitalization, so i thought i'd kill two birds with one stone. it was meant only in jest ;)
posted by The God Complex at 2:45 AM on December 30, 2004


A better time for this FPP would have been later today, when there is actually a development in the story other than "there is an announcement of unknown content on the horizon."

Back on topic, even the exeem testers have no idea what this announcement will be about. I but I think we all know.
posted by mek at 3:53 AM on December 30, 2004


tsarfan i love you.
posted by goodnewsfortheinsane at 4:14 AM on December 30, 2004


I didn't know that suprnova went down. I very, very rarely got movies via bittorrent, but that is how I watched the few TV shows that I watched. Also frowned upon by the IP folks, but more tolerable, I think. Damn. This is annoying. Gotta love USENET, though. It just keeps on keepin on.
posted by Ethereal Bligh at 5:39 AM on December 30, 2004


y'know, if the MPAA/RIAA would just make the fine reasonable - say, $10-$15 for downloading a CD or $20-$30 for downloading a movie - i think they'd get a little more respect and stop looking like the money-hungry bully-sluts they are. asking $30,000 to $150,000 for copying a movie that i could buy at a local store for $30? that's insane. especially considering there isn't anything physically being removed from the MPAA/RIAA. nothing. it's like being fined $1000 for making $1 worth of photocopies.

sure, there are freaks who spend hours online downloading hundreds of movies because they can. but the average person i'm guessing is like most of us - picking up new music to try it out before buying, finding that episode of a show we missed, or rounding out a collection of out-of-print music or video. i doubt the average person using filesharing is a bloodthirsty pirate out to shut down the industry.

the industry, on the other hand, is doing its best to sour public relations, shoot the consumers that drive it, and stifle the creativity of the artists that fuel it.

...and if they want me to feel bad for the little guys in the biz who get shafted, how about making a movie that doesn't suck? you heard me, george lucas - stop fucking making shit movies and i'll start thinking about your key grip before downloading! deal?

and for the love of christ stop fucking re-editing your finished works, you no-talent hack! we liked them fine the first time, don't ruin them by reminding us you suck when left to your megalomaniac self! fucking wanker.
posted by caution live frogs at 5:44 AM on December 30, 2004


PinkStainlessTail, maybe you were thinking of MUTE? It is still around, but I don't know how popular it is... but nobody's been sued yet, at least. Easy targets first...

Evstar: The thing about Bit Torrent is that the nodes' IP's are accessible to anyone with the torrent. The RIAA and MPAA don't have any trouble getting your IP themselves. So... Don't worry? Or worry more.

I'd say don't worry much but that doesn't mean you won't be C&D'd. It's much easier to sue a server-based file sharing system - because the server centralizes all the sharing. It's also easier to sue someone on, say, Kazaa - they're probably sharing a lot of files. BitTorrent is harder - they can C&D you, but you're only sharing one file at a time, which means the damages they can claim are much lower and it's less worth their while. They can shut down the trackers - they've been working on that. But what if each person is only sharing one file at a time, and there are no trackers? They're back to filing John Doe lawsuits against hundreds of individuals, but this time for sharing only one file - and you might only be sharing it for 2 hours at a time, rather than days at a time like someone on Kazaa or any regular multi-file P2P system.
posted by drstupid at 6:02 AM on December 30, 2004


ME: Aren't these the same claims that were being made for MULE or whatever it is six months ago?

CD: No.

With KaZaa / eMule / eDonkey / eHorse / eQuine, the entire file is being transported over the top network layer.


drs: PinkStainlessTail, maybe you were thinking of MUTE? It is still around, but I don't know how popular it is... but nobody's been sued yet, at least. Easy targets first...

MUTE! That's what I was thinking of! Anybody tried it?
posted by PinkStainlessTail at 6:36 AM on December 30, 2004


MUTE! That's what I was thinking of! Anybody tried it?

Sure. Clever Cactus too. They're both quite nice, but even if you had a large network of tech-savvy friends with very different tastes, the connection speeds are disappointing. I suppose that's due to the asynchronous cable modem connections my friends and I have, plus some overhead.
posted by yerfatma at 7:12 AM on December 30, 2004


whaaaaaaa!
I want a beta serial key!
posted by phredhead at 8:05 AM on December 30, 2004


pikachulolita:

Some information on Sealand. (Fascinating in & of itself, really.)
posted by chicobangs at 8:28 AM on December 30, 2004


HavenCo: What Really Happened
posted by sonofsamiam at 8:36 AM on December 30, 2004


drstupid: Yes, I agree that it's more difficult to track someone's filesharing behaviour through bit torrent, but they can still monitor torrents for repeat IP's to litigate, which I believe has been done. Also, I don't think the MP/RIAA expects to make a profit suing file sharers. They really just want scare others from sharing.
posted by Evstar at 8:39 AM on December 30, 2004


LokiTorrent has a message on its FP claiming that it is being sued by the MPAA. They also have a scan of the legal writ.
posted by Darkman at 8:41 AM on December 30, 2004


but you're only sharing one file at a time, which means the damages they can claim are much lower and it's less worth their while

Evidently you've never seen my Azureus client.

I can tell you, looking right now, that it's quite possible to be downloading and seeding several *things* at the same time. At this point the uplink speed is the only hindrance from sharing more.

But you're right in that it's not like some giant shared "Public" folder.
posted by Civil_Disobedient at 8:54 AM on December 30, 2004


but they can still monitor torrents for repeat IP's to litigate

Most ISP's use DHCP unless you cough up the extra cash for a static IP. Most ISP's will require *AA to get a court (not just a subpoena) order to release personal info. It becomes quite difficult to track individual users and their sharing habits for these reasons.
posted by Nauip at 9:30 AM on December 30, 2004


has anyone tried the beta pc download yet? (and where's the mac version, as others have said)
posted by amberglow at 9:34 AM on December 30, 2004


nevermind--apparently you need a key to run it.
posted by amberglow at 9:39 AM on December 30, 2004


[This is arrrrr]
posted by dazed_one at 10:59 AM on December 30, 2004


I can't wait. I felt like an addict with out a fix when Suprnova went down.
posted by SweetJesus at 11:23 AM on December 30, 2004


Well, I managed to connect to NovaStream for about 120 seconds before the feed got real choppy and the DJs were saying that all connections were totally full. Dropped the connection, oops, no way I'm getting back on now...
posted by chuma at 12:43 PM on December 30, 2004


I heard about every third word. Did anyone hear the whole thing?
posted by shawnj at 1:24 PM on December 30, 2004


The announcement was that exeem will be entering public beta testing in 2-4 weeks. General summary of the discussion here.
posted by mek at 1:50 PM on December 30, 2004


General summary of the discussion here. (fixed url)
posted by t r a c y at 2:01 PM on December 30, 2004


here's an mp3 of the novastream interview.
posted by t r a c y at 3:05 PM on December 30, 2004


aaaaand it's another first post
posted by pantsrobot at 5:50 PM on December 30, 2004


anyone try bi-torrent?

might just be the droid youre looking for.
posted by tsarfan at 6:09 PM on December 30, 2004


If memory serves, bi-torrent is only a mirror of SuprNova up until the day it stopped. Nothing new is being added, but torrents that still have seeders still work. Loki and Pirate's still work, IIRC.
posted by Civil_Disobedient at 7:07 PM on December 30, 2004


so basically its windows only, binary only adware. meh. nothing to see here.
posted by clubfoote at 7:24 PM on December 30, 2004


i cant wait till people hack out the spyware and then the xeem people start crying about pirates stealing theirprogram.

Like what happened with Kazaa
posted by Iax at 7:52 PM on December 30, 2004


That is the suck that exeem's going to be loaded with adware/spyware/crapware. Ah well, as Iax suggests, a 'clean' version should follow pretty soon.
posted by stavrosthewonderchicken at 10:00 PM on December 30, 2004


Looks like it's in public beta now. There's already an exeem lite at exlite.net.
posted by amarynth at 3:45 PM on January 21, 2005


« Older Kurds are the Closest Relatives of Jews   |   HorizonZero Newer »


This thread has been archived and is closed to new comments