OFF Demo Disk Released

[Lord_of_the_Dense]

We have got a Demo of OFF.

It does not have network capability yet but you can store files in it and retreive them out.

Our demo has a pile of free music on it (nothing illegal) and it shows the power of OFF.

Get a copy at our Sourceforge project here:http://offsystem.sourceforge.net/

For help please post in our forums here: http://thebighack.org/modules.php?op...BB2&file=index

[aqlo]

So what do you guys think about this? Some "real" code from out of the "fictional" conspiracy to destroy digital copyright?

In the weird world of The Big Hack this system is supposed to be death to the music industry, or at least the incompetent parts of it whose revenues depend on their attempt to copyright numbers.

But at SourceForge it appears to be just another method of storing files. The people who made the demo have gone to a certain amount of trouble to make sure there is nothing copyrighted on it. (Not to say indies aren't great, and those who are willing to share the greatest.)

But is this everything the audience wanted it to be? Is truth ever really even better than fiction? Stranger maybe, but better? You tell me.

[cpugeniusmv]

interesting concept. it would be interesting to see if it stood up in court.

[Stellar]

So what do you guys think about this? Some "real" code from out of the "fictional" conspiracy to destroy digital copyright?

In the weird world of The Big Hack this system is supposed to be death to the music industry, or at least the incompetent parts of it whose revenues depend on their attempt to copyright numbers.

But at SourceForge it appears to be just another method of storing files. The people who made the demo have gone to a certain amount of trouble to make sure there is nothing copyrighted on it. (Not to say indies aren't great, and those who are willing to share the greatest.)

But is this everything the audience wanted it to be? Is truth ever really even better than fiction? Stranger maybe, but better? You tell me.

Why aren't you thrilled? This is a big step in a huge battle.

So it's a demo, and it works. If it's not everything it could be yet, it's the best chance I'm seeing to really protect our rights from those RIAA bastards who like to sue little kids.

I think this is really fabulous. WAY TO GO guys, bring us a final version soon.

[wonderboy2005]

ok... i read the info page, and it all seems promising. however, im not going to get the demo - there's not point for me. i do have a few questions though

1) say i have song A, which OFF has split up into numbers A1, A2, A3, A4, etc. Lets also say i have song B, made up of numbers B1, B2, B3, B4, etc. now, given some information from an outside source (likely on a network), will i be able to compile numbers A1, B3, B2, A4, etc. to make song C?

or is this just a clever distrobution method of splitting up a song so that the individual parts are meaningless?

2) is network/filesharing in OFF's future?

3) assuming a networked future for OFF, will download speeds be comparable to other FS apps? or will it be slower due to the complexity of the app?

4) since OFF relies on mathmatical equations, would it be possible to shrink the file size of a song, or will using equations increase the file size?
ex.

equation = 9^9 = 387420489 ; notice the equation uses only 3 characters, while the number the equation represents uses 9 characters

-or-

123456789+123456789 = 246913578 ; notice that the equation uses 19 characters, where the number it represents uses only 9 characters

hope that makes sense...

[Sephiroth]

The whole idea is based off a fictional movie which is why i think they ought to call it, The Big Joke. So their crazy scheme might sound good and they might make alot of big promises but that doesnt mean it will really work.

You can split files up however you want but if you can search a network then can anyone else because its whats being served not how its being served that is important.

[l33ts0n]

1) It is possible, yes.

2) Yes.

3) Presumably. Node speed is always a variable (if bandwidth were infinite...).

4) I'm starting to regret crackerjack ever brought up the numbers anology. Its a precise anaology of how OFF works, but... eh. Can someone else from TBH with more time on their hands field this one?

You can split files up however you want but if you can search a network then can anyone else because its whats being served not how its being served that is important.

That is exactly the issue The OFF System addresses, Sephiroth. If I give you a file that is both The Bible and a Britney Spears mp3, how can you claim to hold copyright over it, or even go so far as to claim that I'm going to use the "infringing" part?

[Otto42]

4) since OFF relies on mathmatical equations, would it be possible to shrink the file size of a song, or will using equations increase the file size?
ex.

equation = 9^9 = 387420489 ; notice the equation uses only 3 characters, while the number the equation represents uses 9 characters

-or-

123456789+123456789 = 246913578 ; notice that the equation uses 19 characters, where the number it represents uses only 9 characters

hope that makes sense...

Shrinking the file isn't possible given the scheme being used. And there's no point in trying to make it compress the file anyway. Firstly, MP3 and other song formats in use are already pretty darn compressed. Secondly, there's plenty of compression programs around already. If you want to compress something before inserting it into the network, then that's easy enough to do.

Increasing the size is quite likely, sort of. First, you need to understand that when you're getting a file off the network, for every block of data that you get, three blocks are required. So the maximum size is basically 3x the original size. However, the blocks are multi-use, so you may already have several of the blocks needed for the file and won't be downloading them, as well as the fact that multiple blocks in the file may use the same block in different sections.

Inserting something into the network *always* creates blocks of the same size as the file itself is, since it's using preexisting blocks to create the new ones (the "multi-use" part). Pulling something out of the network will require at least 4 blocks more than the original file size, and potentially up to 3 times more than the original file size. This is why you want the node on a box with a lot of bandwidth.

But the network portion isn't totally worked out, really. This CD demos the concept by showing that multi-use blocks can produce files and that you can store files in such a node. It's a demo of the concept, not of the networking side of things.

[method]

As long as the OFF system doesn't transmit a full mpeg video frame, you may be alright. - If it does you'll be breaching copyright even with just that! :/

It's an interesting idea though.

[MonkeyMadness]

If I understand the idea here, the problem will be with the search function. This is a problem FreeNet has. You have to know the "key" to retrieve the material. The schemes necessary to protect anonymity and deniability (distributed, encrypted, chopped up file bits, and encrypted retrieval keys, and distributed search functions) make searching impossible... at least without compromising the anonymity and deniability.

[shawners]

lol.. i would of named it "on".. It needs a cool name so 14 year olds would use it =).. Like OFFazza.

[FreakinWeasel]

lol.. i would of named it "on".. It needs a cool name so 14 year olds would use it =).. Like OFFazza.

LOL shawners, how about I get my music OFF the net? or OFFnet?

[Otto42]

If I understand the idea here, the problem will be with the search function. This is a problem FreeNet has. You have to know the "key" to retrieve the material. The schemes necessary to protect anonymity and deniability (distributed, encrypted, chopped up file bits, and encrypted retrieval keys, and distributed search functions) make searching impossible... at least without compromising the anonymity and deniability.

This is true, but at the same time, indexing sites, ala ShareReactor, are becoming more and more popular. With these, the key could be distributed and searching added on that way.

But you're essentially right, it won't have any search function. At no time does the network contain copyrighted data, or even the filenames, in fact. There's nothing in which to search for anything. Every block in the whole thing is essentially "random" garbage... it's just random garbage with interesting properties. :)

But hey, look at the popularity of BitTorrent. It has no search functions either. It doesn't have a constantly "up" network, and "file existence times", sort of thing, can be measured in days or weeks, at most. It's still pretty popular.

[Sephiroth]

That is exactly the issue The OFF System addresses, Sephiroth. If I give you a file that is both The Bible and a Britney Spears mp3, how can you claim to hold copyright over it, or even go so far as to claim that I'm going to use the "infringing" part?

There is numerous problems with that like how someone is suppose to get their completed file from two seperate files. Because if any one on the network can make the file they requested from any parts then it accomplishes nothing.

That it will waste a huge amount of bandwidth and resources wasting 3 times more bandwidth per file. Plus the actual content of the dummy file becuase i dont think some people will like that their file will get mixed up with porno and etc.

So i dont think that it offers any kind of protection and that the system is so wasteful that it will never work because why would anyone in their right mind waste three times more bandwidth and time to get the same file that is on other networks for supposed security that is unproven and was taken from a movie.

Which to others who want to know one of people who is behind this and has posted here is Captain Morgan.

[l33ts0n]

So i dont think that it offers any kind of protection and that the system is so wasteful that it will never work because why would anyone in their right mind waste three times more bandwidth and time to get the same file that is on other networks for supposed security that is unproven and was taken from a movie.

Because it is 100% legal to transfer blocks over OFF. No one but you, yourself, know what you are assembling those blocks to be. Yes, it is very possible that any given multi-use block you download could be potentially used to reconstruct child pornography. Or a digital sketch of The Mona Lisa. Or a videotape of your parents-in-law having sex.

This is the concept of a brightnet: to prove that nothing illegal is going on by transferring files through the network. The concept of a darknet--FreeNET, MUTE, for instance--is the exact opposite; they seek to disguise what's really going on in the network, because they are doing "illegal" things.

The primary objective of a brightnet is not to obfuscate, because by its inheritent nature everything on the network is 100% legal, as ownerless as a block of data produced by this pseudo-code:

for(int i = 0; 1024 * 128; i++)
OFFBlock[i] = rand(255);

Who do the results belong to? Nobody. Utterly random (well, hopefully).


To explain the concept of OFF in more simple terms, think of a bucket of building blocks: they are all the same size, shape, weight, and uniform in every sense of the word. They are ownerless, and by themselves, they are worthless.

Now, assume you were to build a "structure" with these building blocks. This structure now belongs to someone--consider it akin to a file on a computer, copyrighted. In this form it is easily identifable as being someone (your's) work.

However, assume we take a sledgehammer to the structure, and depreciate the contents back into their raw state--now they are nothing more than a pile of uniform blocks scattered all over the floor. The blocks are no longer a recognizable structure, a copyrighted file!

To take this another step, assume that I pick up these scattered blocks... and assemble the greatest, most fantastic, almost orgasmic recreation of the Battle of Buffalo. The blocks now have two meanings.

This is called "multi-use encoding." Every block I used now has another meaning: they can be used to construct the first structure (copyrighted file), or they can be used the Battle of Buffalo.

Why is this relevant? Because you are no longer able to definitively single out any block I used and say, "The only use for this block is to recreate a copyright infringing structure/file!" because the very duality of its nature it belongs to two seperate functions.

But what if I destroy the Battle of Buffalo and construct an entirely different structure? And then repeat myself, ad nasuem?

This is what OFF seeks to do--through the fascinating wonders of multi-use encoding every block stored in the cache will be given 2, 3, 4, 5, 6 (!!!) meanings. It will become impossible to point at any given block in the network and claim that its only use is for reconstructing a copyrighted file.

To complicate matters, there are no searching functions in OFF. It works similar to Freenet: you supply a key to your "private" OFF node, which will dissemiate the information and download the constitutent blocks without alerting other nodes what file it will be constructing.

Someone above mentioned the flaw of inflating the download size by 3 (three constituent blocks to recreate one original block). You're right! However, OFF has been designed so that it can be hosted on a webserver. Essentially, you host it on your "free" web account, provided by your ISP (aww, they're so nice). Their phat-bandwidth handles the brunt of downloading the inflated file, while the end-user gets the entire file--no more, no less. Crafty users will sign up for one of those $9.99 web hosts on the internet and rape their bandwidth for all its worth.

To the end user, they simply click a link, a few seconds later the web server is streaming back the entire file to them.


What happens if someone wants to abuse this system and start sharing copyrighted content?

Well, that's up to them.