Pretty sure I saw a thing from the instance admin that a sufficiently anonymous host costs about 3x as much as whatever he was using, and would need more donations prior.

For hire private 50 cent party. Typical PR move, beyond just Reddit. A statement like

You’re shilling for a different company lmfao…pot calling the kettle black…

is probably written by someone who doesn’t know or care about the details of what’s been happening. Which means they’re probably either using a script, or making assumptions to just do their job. The fact that decentralised communication is a far cry from corporations is completely missed because they probably just don’t know.

Ham radio enthusiasts will start feeling very pleased with themselves then. Until jammers are brought in anyway.

The tricky bit is that a smaller ownership structure makes the owners more personally liable, as arguments could more easily be made that the entire server exists to service the most active channel regardless of the other content. Larger platforms are better able to utilise Safe Harbour rules. As someone else has said, it also matters where the servers are located.

lol, have you got all your batteries and inverters setup lol. In all seriousness, I used to hoard, but it’s too much hassle, I’ve got too big a backlog of stuff to organise, and yeah I’ll just redownload stuff I know is popular enough to remain available. I do like watching my ratios though, making sure I’m doing my bit to keep the water flowing. Data in transit as storage. Treating torrents as a form of ephemeral storage, where it can come back to me if I wish for it again. Perhaps I’m describing something more like IPFS though.

I am aware of that, however, I want to be as discoverable as possible so that other people without port forwarding can connect to me, increasing my capacity to share and care.

Yes of course. Configuration of port forwards and split tunnelling etc are outside the scope of wireguard though.

Ah thanks for the review, Linux is 100% relevant to me.

Could be intentional to prevent torrent leakage direct from your IP too. Could potentially also not have a choice, due to proprietary configurations, cable modem or whatever.

Interesting, protonVPN is shown with a beta port forwarding, dynamic. Maybe I’m wrong about static/dynamic fowarding ports. Dynamic ports might actually help them not get hit by CP distributors, as a dynamic port isn’t something that can be bookmarked.

Edit: Yeah I see in their doco NAT-PMP. Guess I was straight up wrong about that stuff haha (sorry @[email protected] . I’m feeling more confident about proton now.

That’s correct, one side needs to have an open port. Side channel messaging solves who connects to who regardless of the one doing the downloading, but one must. Thus, being able to open publicly accessible ports is parrrt of people a good pirate citizen.

Wonder if maybe small uploads could be allowed, maybe in newer formats (eg webp) to preserve some quality when restricted to, say, 250KiB or less.

I think most people don’t want to deal with having to moderate to remove CP, basically. It’s a big risk for small timers. Once you get to a certain size, plausible deniability becomes a more functional excuse. Lemmy instances are pretty damn small (at least at the moment), so you can see why peeps want to avoid problems.

Yeah, they had authorities at their door, because it sounds like some bastards were using port forwards to serve CP. Dickheads ruining it for the rest of us is how it’s been described. It may well become a lot more common as providers try to shield themselves from discovery (which they can’t provide for with no log policies), authorities being frustrated and then compelling them to do more.

No it doesn’t stop it, just seed torrenting as you say. Makes it harder for others to download from you if they too do not have open ports. Got to facilitate sharing is caring.

A VPN acts like a NAT layer, so you basically have to open a port forward in order for traffic to dial your number, so to speak.

It may be in your case that you have UPnP or similar set up, so that your router automatically picks up your open port. Not viable for VPNs which tend to service enough clients to qualify as CGNAT, so we set up fixed ports.

Edit: Looks like I was wrong about not viable, seems like ProtonVPN has a NAT-PMP switch in their config