(June 21, 2009 at 2:39 am)Overmars Wrote: This is what others say about Peer Guardian:

"Awards are given to products that we think are excellent and above average in their category. Awards are given based on our experience and judgement, and only to products which the majority of our reviewers agree deserve it.

- Softpedia

So to round it all up, I think PeerGuardian 2 is worth the wait. Its very flexible and powerful.. 4.7/5 - P2Private

PG2 definitely gets my vote and I will suggest that as soon as a public beta or full version is available, that you download and try it out. - Afterdawn

The real trouble for media companies, though, could come if file-sharing networks begin to integrate personal firewall applications into their latest versions and create auto-updates, said David Weekly, a computer programmer who came to prominence for reverse-engineering the Napster software.

"If you built PeerGuardian into a next-generation Kazaa, for instance, everyone in the network could be blocking the RIAA," Weekly said. - Wired

A coder known on-line as "Method" has gone even further, creating a custom freeware application called PeerGuardian just for p2p users. PeerGuardian began life as an anti-spyware utility, but now also protects users from the prying eyes of anti-p2p police, using an IP blacklist that's updated periodically like a virus signature file.

"Right now only the top level p2p users are using that application," says Gonzalez. But he expects that to change as an unintended consequence of the RIAA's messaging campaign. Users may be frightened by the association's threats, but they'll respond by cloaking, instead of unplugging. "I would expect that next generation applications will start having these capabilities built in."

- SecurityFocus

Music fans swapping songs on-line are fighting industry efforts to watch and police what they do. - BBC"

Thanks for the update overmars....

I do have this program installed, but I would really like to know the best settings of what to check on blocked and what not to besides html.....

I have no qualms with downloading copywritten material, such as movies and music.

I feel that art has been commercialized and turned into a product, which goes against the whole idea of art as a form of expression. I download music I want to hear because technology has given us the gift to access endless libraries of art at the touch of a button, despite companies fighting to make it a profitable product for the last century. I shouldn't have to pay anybody to experience art.

I don't equte a download with lost revenue. I download as much music as I do (2 or 3 albums a week) because it's available, not because I'm filling a need. If I didn't have an internet connection there's no way I would be purchasing 2 or 3 albums a week. Honestly, I might buy 1 every couple months if I had no other access to music, but for $15-20 a pop I simply couldn't afford it at the rate I'm used to.

Music is an artform and is in need of a revoution. The truth is, music doesn't need to be profitable. Once the record industry collapses and it's no longer considered a "get rich" scheme to write music, we'll see more true artists creating music out of love for the artform, as opposed to people writing music to fulfill a contract or to fund their party habits. I don't think artists need us to buy plastic discs to promote truly great art. It just happens.

(June 21, 2009 at 2:03 pm)Samson Wrote: Thanks for the update overmars....

I do have this program installed, but I would really like to know the best settings of what to check on blocked and what not to besides html.....

Just leave everything checked except html, the least you should use is P2P blocking.

And don't forget that Peer Guardian doesn't guarantee you 100% privacy, the best advice is to stay away from private torrents.

(June 21, 2009 at 5:15 pm)Meatball Wrote: I have no qualms with downloading copywritten material, such as movies and music.

So you don't believe that the author of any piece of software, writing, music or art has any rights over their own work?

Just out of curiosity, if someone left a whole bunch of paintings that they had stolen from an art gallery in a public place would you pick one up and walk off with it?

Kyu

(June 22, 2009 at 4:14 am)Kyuuketsuki Wrote:

(June 21, 2009 at 5:15 pm)Meatball Wrote: I have no qualms with downloading copywritten material, such as movies and music.

So you don't believe that the author of any piece of software, writing, music or art has any rights over their own work?

Kyu

Not that you asked me,but I'll answer anyway

Me? NO. I reject the notion of intellectual property rights. A cynic might say that's because I don't have any and because holding such a position means I can condone internet piracy (which I do).The cynic is almost certainly right in part.

My position is also to me the logical extension of my rejection of innate rights of any kind. "Copyright" is a legal invention, not a '"right".It works only when the sanctions against it can be enforced.This view is I think graphically illustrated by the extent internet users ignore copyright and intellectual property laws.


I have not addressed the painting question,as I think it's a red herring.

People should have a right to ownership, not to copyright. Copyright kills creativity. Lawrence Lessig had a great interview on The Colbert Report where he explained his view:

http://www.colbertnation.com/the-colbert...nce-lessig

In a nutshell, there should not be laws against taking something that another person has made, making changes to it (improving it) and then selling it on. If you downloaded it without paying for it, then you have violated an ownership agreement, but there is no reason once you have purchased something, you should not be allowed to make improvements and sell it on.

(June 22, 2009 at 4:14 am)Kyuuketsuki Wrote:

(June 21, 2009 at 5:15 pm)Meatball Wrote: I have no qualms with downloading copywritten material, such as movies and music.

Just out of curiosity, if someone left a whole bunch of paintings that they had stolen from an art gallery in a public place would you pick one up and walk off with it?

A digital copy of a recording of a song is not the same as an original painting, and you know that. Who's looking for the missing copy of 'Yakety Sax' I downloaded last week? I made several more copies on my PC, is that hurting some record store's inventory?

Quote: Who's looking for the missing copy of 'Yakety Sax' I downloaded last week? I made several more copies on my PC, is that hurting some record store's inventory?

With respect,that argument is a rationalisation of dishonesty.You acknowledge the ownership ,but discount it because it's in your interest to do so or because your dishonesty is a matter of degree. The positions is disingenuous and immoral.

(June 22, 2009 at 5:16 pm)Meatball Wrote: I made several more copies on my PC, is that hurting some record store's inventory?

Hurting the store's inventory? No.

Hurting the store's inventory SALES? Yes.

(June 23, 2009 at 8:48 am)Dotard Wrote: Hurting the store's inventory SALES? Yes.

This is assuming Meatball would have purchased the album if he had not been able to download it.