While I really like the concept, I2P is one of those P2P network strongly associated with the darkest corner of the Internet in my mind and something I would rather stay away from (because I would rather not get arrested randomly because I have used it).
Now I was just going through the I2P Wikipedia page and I couldn't find anything about that. Are my fears irrational?
They do that because Tor users are a minority. The only way to combat this sort of discrimination is to convince a large number of people to use Tor. They can't afford to single us out if everyone is doing it.
I don't think authorities worry about I2P at this point, it is too small and requires some technical expertise to use. It is however much more anonymous and privacy-preserving than Tor, so yes, some corners are dark enough (you will rarely encounter them unless you want to go there, and from technical point of view, I2P is really interesting).
I think there is a basis for such worry, "Why Nation Fails" highlight the aspects of corruption and non-independent/transparent judiciary system and absue of police force as a big reasons why countries fail. And if you want to compare western police force corruption to others, I invite you to check what happened in egypt 10 yo.
Because spouting off the name of one person wrongfully convicted is meaningless. I didn't deny there are miscarriages of justice in any country. Iran's civil rights record is among the bottom in the world, bested only by NK and other hell holes.
In 3rd world countries they don't care about piracy, drug dealing, or inappropriate content, but they do care about what you're saying about government. In first world countries it's the exact opposite, you can openly criticize government, hell you can make fun of politicians, but better watch out when looking for pirated content.
The completely anonymous, built-in torrents in I2P are hugely undervalued. I expected that every big torrent tracker would set up a mirror in I2P in order to allow their users to stay anonymous. I don't understand why they don't do it.
I don't think public torrent trackers would have much incentive to do so, as their legal justification is that they aren't hosting or linking to files themselves. If they were to run services like I2P they would probably have a harder time making that claim.
Private trackers probably wouldn't want to do that because it probably would mess with the largely IP-based seed ratio requirements which most private trackers have.
That’s a really cool idea! I haven’t heard of it before.
> Torrents.csv is a collaborative git repository of torrents, consisting of a single, searchable torrents.csv file. Its initially populated with a January 2017 backup of the pirate bay, and new torrents are periodically added from various torrents sites. It comes with a self-hostable webserver, a command line search, and a folder scanner to add torrents.
Do you know of any other interesting projects that involve p2p/torrents/debrid/i2p/tor or adjacent things like dht/freenet/willow/veilid?
Here’s some interesting debrid stuff I found that may be of interest to you or others.
> What are you talking about? They don't store files either.
Running I2P would require more storage than the status quo of not running it. They usually store torrents and or magnet links, not the files themselves. I don’t know how much overhead running I2P would be over and above running a tracker also?
> I thought it was largely account-based, not IP-based.
Yes, those are not mutually exclusive. You have an account and the tracker binds the IP that downloads the torrent to a cookie or to a unique tracker announce url.
You can seed from multiple IPs, e.g. a seedbox and your home connection. All the private trackers I know of simply use a token passed via URL query parameter to the tracker.
Now I was just going through the I2P Wikipedia page and I couldn't find anything about that. Are my fears irrational?