It searches through libgens, z-library and has it's own mirrors of the files they serve on top of that. I think it was created as a response to Z-Library's domain getting seized but I could be wrong.
I know the last time this came up there was a lot of user resistance to the torrent scheme. I'd be willing to seed 200-500gb but having minimum torrent archive sizes of like 1.5TB and larger really limits the number of people willing to give up that storage, as well as defeats a lot of the resiliency of torrents with how bloody long it takes to get a complete copy. I know that 1.5TB takes a massive chunk out of my already pretty full NAS, and I passed on seeding the first time for that reason.
It feels like they didn't really subdivide the database as much as they should have...
There are plenty of small torrents. Use the torrent generator and tell the script how much space you have and it will give you the “best” (least seeded) torrents whose sum is the size you give it. It doesn’t have to be big, even a few GB is suitable for some smaller torrents.
Almost all the small torrents that I see pop up are already seeded relatively good (~10 seeders) though, which reinforces the fact that A. the torrents most desperately needing seeders are the older, largest ones and B. large torrents don't attract seeders because of unreasonable space requirements.
Admittedly, newer torrents seem to be split into 300gb or less pieces, which is good, but there's still a lot of monster torrents in that list.
Is hosting all that stuff even legal? I mean, they’re not making any money off of it, but they’re still a “piracy” hub. How have they survived this long?
It's very illegal. iirc it was created by a group called "Pirate Library Mirror" after the guy that runs z-library got arrested, so I assume they're taking anonymity seriously to avoid arrest.
Right now most of them are 20T each. I started smaller at first, but they’ve dropped so much in price. I usually wait until a sale and grab a bunch. There are… math… 62 drives?
When I first started, I only had the 6 bay… I chose synology because I wanted something that was managed for me. I don’t want to have to focus on setting things up and possibly doing things wrong. It comes with amazing tools. Also, the server buy-in was a lot less than the other “professional” rack mounted solutions.
I had such a great experience that I just kept with them. It is a pretty expensive hobby though, but so is buying physical movies. And, some things never get a physical release, so having it digitally protects me from when Netflix, or whomever, decides to drop something.
It’s an investment. It’s like the price of a small car. But it was built over time, so not like one lump sum.
Originally, it was to have easier access to my already insane Blu-ray collection. But I started getting discs from Redbox, rental stores, libraries, etc. they are full rip, not that compressed PB stuff. Now there are like 3000 movies and fuck knows how many tv shows.
A lot of my effort was to have the best release available. Or, have things that got canceled. Like the Simpsons episode with MJ, which is unavailable to stream.
Snags… well, synology is sooo easy. Once you figure out how you want you drives set up, there’s nothing to it.
Whatever you do, always have redundant drives. Yes, you lose space, but eventually one of them is gonna die and you don’t want to lose data.
Correct me if I'm wrong, but they only index shadow libraries and do not host any files themselves (unless you count the torrents). So, you don't need 900+ TB of storage to create a mirror.
Could anyone broad-stroke the security requirements for something like this? Looks like they'll pay for hosting up to a certain amount, and between that and a pipeline to keep the mirror updated I'd think it wouldn't be tough to get one up and running.
Just looking for theory - what are the logistics behind keeping a mirror like this secure?