makzimus | 14 points
Earlier, I provided the keys in an online pastebin. Nowadays, the keys I give require a little human effort to get them working. Still the links are being taken down.
What is the best way to delay the links from being banned or not banned at all?
Zip file interferes with raw file hash recognition, but file names are typically visible even if the zip is password encrypted, thus allowing bots to recognize the contents by name.
I create a .7z file with compression level "store". I always check "Encrypt file names" and apply a password. Thus, recognition of the raw file hash and file names are foiled.
Edit: I also give the .7z archive a name unrelated to its contents.
Not posting them publicly is the main way to avoid takedown. If the links are accessible publicly in any form they can be found and reported, and if they are shared on to another place (even if the original share was in a private group) they can be reported.
All good suggestions, but in the worst case, the link gets taken down, put the items in a folder and share only the folder. Once the link gets taken down, you can stick it into a new folder and the link and file will still be valid. It's a little trick that's been useful to me lately.
[-] eightballthrowaway | 1 points
you cant avoid it. upload the same file multiple times so if it gets taken down you can just get a new link right away and nobody gets inconvenienced. i do this with everything i upload, granted i would suggest using internet that you don't have to pay for like school wifi since it will eat your limit lol.
[-] [deleted] | 22 points | Mar 14 2017 04:39:19
Luck. They're not being taken down by bots, there are media watchdog companies that pay people peanuts to skulk on forums and report links to offending shares/torrents/etc. All you're doing is making more work for the people consuming your links, and delaying their takedown by the time it takes some schmuck making less than minimum wage to piece the link together and verify the content is in the share.
Source: I have done this work before for various microjob sites.
permalink
[-] makzimus | 3 points | Mar 14 2017 04:55:39
Thanks
permalink
[-] JWOINK | 1 points | Mar 15 2017 03:13:22
How low of a minimum wage are we talking? I thought they paid good money for people to do that since they seemed to care so much about it
permalink
[-] [deleted] | 3 points | Mar 15 2017 04:11:44
They care about it enough to pay about $.50 per link you submit that ends up resulting in a valid takedown. You'd think this would be great, but you get strikes against you for submitting links that end up not having the content in them, and you get too many you end up fired from being able to accept more microjobs to turn in links.
If I found a forum/subreddit where people were pushing links that hadn't been found by another worker yet you could turn in a bunch after downloading them and get maybe $10-$20 dollars worth for an hour or two of work depending on your internet speed, but the internet isn't as chock-full of piracy as you think. Most links in the obvious places have already been turned in, which results in you getting nothing.
It's something that you sometimes find gold that results in making $20 or so for just downloading and reporting some stuff (and of course keeping it afterwards, though you were supposed to delete it) but most of the time you end up scouring forums and subreddits, finding old news and maybe making $5-$15 in a whole afternoon.
Maybe that's okay if you're a bored high school kid that wants to make a little extra money, but there's no possible way you could do it full-time.
I'm sure there were people that did do it full time, but not via the microjob sites.
permalink
[-] JWOINK | 1 points | Mar 15 2017 05:27:35
ok, thanks for the elaboration!
permalink