<div>Well, free speech does clash with copyright so I'm not going to argue that they are abusing the network. I know I've just seen it floating around places like zeropaid, pg forums, and a few others. Can't point you directly, but do this google query:
</div>
<div>inurl:<a href="http://p2psitehere.com">p2psitehere.com</a> "tor"<br><br> </div>
<div><span class="gmail_quote">On 5/20/06, <b class="gmail_sendername">Watson Ladd</b> <<a href="mailto:watsonbladd@gmail.com">watsonbladd@gmail.com</a>> wrote:</span>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="PADDING-LEFT: 1ex; MARGIN: 0px 0px 0px 0.8ex; BORDER-LEFT: #ccc 1px solid"><br>On May 20, 2006, at 2:39 PM, Ringo Kamens wrote:<br><br>> I'm not sure if you all know this, but on most of the large
<br>> filesharing forums, they are reccomending people use tor for<br>> filesharing (gnutella,ed2k, etc.) in order to increase anonymity which<br>> creates a HUGE network load.<br>Any urls? we could probably point out that that's a bad idea. And
<br>anyone doing it is killing freedom of speech in China.<br>> Can an exit node owner please tell us<br>> approx. how much traffic he gets on these ports? (Gnutella is 6346).<br>><br>> On 5/20/06, Watson Ladd <
<a href="mailto:watsonbladd@gmail.com">watsonbladd@gmail.com</a>> wrote:<br>>> Good point. Consider the idea abandoned.<br>>> On May 20, 2006, at 8:29 AM, Fabian Keil wrote:<br>>><br>>> > Watson Ladd <
<a href="mailto:watsonbladd@gmail.com">watsonbladd@gmail.com</a>> top posted:<br>>> ><br>>> >>> Watson Ladd <<a href="mailto:watsonbladd@gmail.com">watsonbladd@gmail.com</a>> wrote:<br>>> >>>
<br>>> >>>> If we created a P2P client using Tor that acted as an exit<br>>> node we<br>>> >>>> could get a lot more users, a lot more traffic, and a lot more<br>>> >>>> capacity, all adding to the anonymity Tor provides. Any
<br>>> downsides?<br>>> >>><br>>> >>> While it could motivate some people to run Tor on their servers<br>>> >>> and thus adding capacity, I believe it's more likely that it
<br>>> >>> would motivate more people to block as much Tor traffic<br>>> >>> as possible and lead to congestion of the network.<br>>> ><br>>> >> Who would do this blocking? Some examples would be nice. I
<br>>> think most<br>>> >> ISP's don't want customers to leave instead of use their full<br>>> >> bandwidth allocation.<br>>> ><br>>> > ISPs which offer flatrates but don't want them to be used as such.
<br>>> ><br>>> > Here in Germany many ISPs rate limit known P2P ports and are quite<br>>> > happy if P2P users decide to leave. Less P2P users means less<br>>> traffic<br>>> > and more profit.
<br>>> ><br>>> > Fabian<br>>> > --<br>>> > <a href="http://www.fabiankeil.de/">http://www.fabiankeil.de/</a><br>>><br>>> Sincerely,<br>>> Watson Ladd<br>>> ---<br>
>> "Those who would give up Essential Liberty to purchase a little<br>>> Temporary Safety deserve neither Liberty nor Safety."<br>>> -- Benjamin Franklin<br>>><br>>><br>>><br>
>><br><br>Sincerely,<br>Watson Ladd<br>---<br>"Those who would give up Essential Liberty to purchase a little<br>Temporary Safety deserve neither Liberty nor Safety."<br>-- Benjamin Franklin<br><br><br><br>
<br></blockquote></div><br>