There seems so be alot of sues againts torrent clients but they always seem to lose

can torrents be coming to an end? or is it just impossible for that to happen?

(since torrents its like sharing)

As long as the individual has the right to control traffic on their PC’s then torrents will exist. Data sharing is not illegal, copyright infringements are.

As long as the individual has the right to control traffic on their PC’s then torrents will exist. Data sharing is not illegal, copyright infringements are.

Actually it's not about just the individuals right to control traffic on their PC, but their right to trafficking servers on the public sector and private networks.

There is discussion by a number of the worlds governments (under the thumb of the large corporates) to change some of the internet related laws, of course any legislation pushed forwards is aimed at 'Organised crime' but that is just a coating to push forwards otherwise ludicrous legislation.

If the governments have their way, then the internet you know today isn't going to be the same in the future. I still push forwards that they should consider running two internet's, the net nannied ultra-policed one they want and the one that currently exists. This would deal with their 'Organised crime' issues by having transactions done on the policed system and only those with an moderate to intermediate computer experience would be likely to use the 'Wild West' version.

Actually it's not about just the individuals right to control traffic on their PC, but their right to trafficking servers on the public sector and private networks.

There is discussion by a number of the worlds governments (under the thumb of the large corporates) to change some of the internet related laws, of course any legislation pushed forwards is aimed at 'Organised crime' but that is just a coating to push forwards otherwise ludicrous legislation.

If the governments have their way, then the internet you know today isn't going to be the same in the future. I still push forwards that they should consider running two internet's, the net nannied ultra-policed one they want and the one that currently exists. This would deal with their 'Organised crime' issues by having transactions done on the policed system and only those with an moderate to intermediate computer experience would be likely to use the 'Wild West' version.

Couldn't someone build another internet gateway into the internet itself? Then you could navigate to it and login, then access the real uncensored one?

IRC and usenet is where the wild west still exists, me thinks. As you say, it's a bit harder to navigate.

I still push forwards that they should consider running two internet's, the net nannied ultra-policed one they want and the one that currently exists. This would deal with their 'Organised crime' issues by having transactions done on the policed system and only those with an moderate to intermediate computer experience would be likely to use the 'Wild West' version.
don't they already have that?
after all banks wire money over the same 'net' as the one we at sciforums are using.

don't they already have that?
after all banks wire money over the same 'net' as the one we at sciforums are using.

They already have the ability to use HTTPS/SSL (Secure Socket layers) to transfer information over an encrypted tunnel which is difficult but not impossible to crack. (It's all dependent on if a hacker can gain access to a node on the tunnel for long enough to break the encryption). For the most part the usual exploits don't even involve attempting to go through the harder encryption possibilities but usually involves phishing or X-scripting exploits etc.

The point is that it's not as secure as it could of been because the connection is tunnelled across a public Intranet.

This was my point for two internet types, the public one we have now and the more structured and Identifying net nannied version. The two would be separate from one another, to connect to the secure one you'd have to use a secure registered ISP that might be run by a Bank, Building Society or Government office. You'd be given a static IP on an IP6 network with a specific Encryption system registered with the ISP similar to how PGP keys have private/public pairings.

Your entire connection would be tunnelled with the ISP (Such encryption would be necessary based upon certain governments laws in regards to encryption usage.)

It could be taken further so that the encrypted connection runs on a 'Live' OS CD or Encrypted partition that is separate from the usual OS. This stops the transfer of files between networks, especially if the only information that needs to be shared is already pieced together by the ISP's involved.

(No need to send credit details to a shop for a product to be delivered if the banks know your account number and address details. They would just require extra security checks like other passwords, identifying if your security pairing matches etc)

Now this kind of lays the fundamentals down since after all the governments want to create a network like this so they can deal with organised crime and terrorist communications, however it never rules out the usual weak links in any given system and that is people that are employed in the government offices, banks and building societies.

It only takes one corrupt person to output information to the wrong people. That is the main problem with any potential idea, corrupt people exist not just at the end of the consumer but within the companies and government themselves, this on occasion is proven and people are occasionally caught however the higher up they are the more 'Dug in' they are.

Torrents will be over when something better takes its place.