Editorial Pirate Bay Mines Coins in Your Browser - Revenue Model of the Future?

[Gundem]

I can't help but sit here and laugh - when you visit sketchy sites to download pirated contents, what do you expect? It is like getting robbed by a drug dealer. You know the risks going in. Are you going to report to the police?

Don't blame JavaScript. Don't blame the tool. It is like blaming the drug dealer's gun for robbing you. Blame the site operator.

I couldn't have said it better myself

 

[BiggieShady]

More proof JavaScript needs to die.

Et tu mi fili Brute ... that's its majesty JavaScript saying to you Brutus while you are stabbing it in the back

... now seriously, who are you and what did you do with our Ford?

 

[FordGT90Concept]

The video tag is just as static as an img tag, or is your argument that an animated gif is a dynamic html element? Marquee was removed because it was too limited and functionality is implemented much better by JS or even CSS

GIF is an image as far as HTML is concerned. The magic is in the binary of the GIF itself. Browser simply has to decide to carry out those orders or not. SVG would be a better equivalent (expanding the power of browsers, in a restrictive way, to replace lots of statics like GIF, PNG, JPG, etc.).

Video requires rather significant work on the browsers behalf and it especially replaced something that was formerly a function of Flash. Video is a perfect example of what HTML should be doing more of.

I think marquee was obsoleted because it was rendered in CPU instead of GPU. The animations were never smooth...still aren't.

 

[Dave65]

More proof JavaScript needs to die.

This!

 

[damric]

Pirates stealing...this is news?

 

[Gasaraki]

Pretty cool way to generate revenue if we don't have to watch ads. As long as it's reasonable.

There should be a browser setting that knows to limit cpu usage to 50% for example across all tabs, etc.

 

[dyonoctis]

With what I've been taught , I still don't see how the video tag in html 5 is showing that html could replace Js. The video tag is pretty limited in what it can do, and you still need DOM reference (therefore script) to add more functionality.
https://www.w3schools.com/tags/ref_av_dom.asp

A video is still an external element linked to the webpage,
http://img.techpowerup.org/170918/webv.jpg

I really don't see how you can compare video playback to being able to add, modify on the fly element (HTLM DOM) of the webpage.
Flash was a plug-in , but Js isn't a plug-in, like css it's a language that was made to communicate with hmtl and extend what you can do with a webpage (it can do more but that's what it's more used for)

With the way thing are working now If I want to make a slideshow that would have the same behavior on x page and another behavior in xx page, i can just use JS/Jquery and write once all the parameters that i want on an external .js file, and I'm done. If they added a slideshow tag in html, i would have to copy paste those parameters on everysingle webpage, that's as impraticable as writing the css into the html page.

 

[Rowsol]

I'll gladly take this over ads.

 

[xorbe]

So basically, browsers should rate limit js execution after ~10 seconds of crunch time (such that actual pages with user-facing js aren't impacted). Which would render this endeavor much less fruitful.

 

[FordGT90Concept]

With what I've been taught , I still don't see how the video tag in html 5 is showing that html could replace Js. The video tag is pretty limited in what it can do, and you still need DOM reference (therefore script) to add more functionality.
https://www.w3schools.com/tags/ref_av_dom.asp

A video is still an external element linked to the webpage,
http://img.techpowerup.org/170918/webv.jpg

I really don't see how you can compare video playback to being able to add, modify on the fly element (HTLM DOM) of the webpage.
Flash was a plug-in , but Js isn't a plug-in, like css it's a language that was made to communicate with hmtl and extend what you can do with a webpage (it can do more but that's what it's more used for)

With the way thing are working now If I want to make a slideshow that would have the same behavior on x page and another behavior in xx page, i can just use JS/Jquery and write once all the parameters that i want on an external .js file, and I'm done. If they added a slideshow tag in html, i would have to copy paste those parameters on everysingle webpage, that's as impraticable as writing the css into the html page.

No reason why there couldn't be a <slideshow> tag which has a path="source.xml" update="persistent" and when the page loads, the "persistent" tells it to fetch the contents and keeps the TCP port open to the server to receive more. The browsers and the server are on the same page without active scripting trying to bridge the gap. The thread on both can go into a wait state so neither are wasting resources trying to connect for more info. Processing on both sides is minimal--almost nonexistent. Update attribute would have a lot more arguments to define the relationship between server and client for the specific element. Right now, this simply isn't possible without a plethora of JavaScript. And it's stupid.

 

[bug]

No reason why there couldn't be a <slideshow> tag which has a path="source.xml" update="persistent" and when the page loads, the "persistent" tells it to fetch the contents and keeps the TCP port open to the server to receive more. The browsers and the server are on the same page without active scripting trying to bridge the gap. The thread on both can go into a wait state so neither are wasting resources trying to connect for more info. Processing on both sides is minimal--almost nonexistent. Update attribute would have a lot more arguments to define the relationship between server and client for the specific element. Right now, this simply isn't possible without a plethora of JavaScript. And it's stupid.

So basically, implement a subset of what JS can do directly in the browser?

As for your update="persistent" comment, you could've quit while you were behind (hint: websockets aren't that new).

 

[kn00tcn]

We are surprised that the site that has been brought to criminal court on 2 occasions I know of and shut down by various governments no less than 9 times, is shady. I would not have guessed. I mean they have to pay those lawyers somehow.

but ownership changed with a hostile takeover, it hasnt been the original site or people for at least 1-2 years

 

[dyonoctis]

No reason why there couldn't be a <slideshow> tag which has a path="source.xml" update="persistent" and when the page loads, the "persistent" tells it to fetch the contents and keeps the TCP port open to the server to receive more. The browsers and the server are on the same page without active scripting trying to bridge the gap. The thread on both can go into a wait state so neither are wasting resources trying to connect for more info. Processing on both sides is minimal--almost nonexistent. Update attribute would have a lot more arguments to define the relationship between server and client for the specific element. Right now, this simply isn't possible without a plethora of JavaScript. And it's stupid.

That's sound very back end , Im more front-end, but I've been taught simple ways to optimise Js (letting the web page load first before letting the script begin, make sure that I don't have a loop that's going to freeze the whole page) Everytime that I've heard of slow Js, it had more to do with how poorly it was coded, or a specific slow Js engine than a server issue.

This website is doing crazy thing with the help of Js and it's not slow at all:
http://resn.co.nz/

Js is even steeping outside the web to get on the desktop : bracket and atom are higly regarded text editor made with javascript.
https://www.wired.com/2016/05/javascript-conquered-web-now-taking-desktop/


As for the way Js was used by the piratebay, those guys managed to survive when the first megaupload, kickasstorrent and other website dissapeared for good. You could make a clause that's making mandatory to let the user know that xx script is doing xx on your computer, but hydrabay would not abide to it anyway.

 

[FordGT90Concept]

So basically, implement a subset of what JS can do directly in the browser?

Yes, make dynamic data communication fundamental to design. That, by itself, eliminates 75% of the reason to use JavaScript in the first place.

As for your update="persistent" comment, you could've quit while you were behind (hint: websockets aren't that new).

It's something that's super simple to do in ASP.NET (using a crapload of hidden JavaScript on the client side) that could and should be done by browsers natively.

What it boils down to is that I trust browser developers to do things intelligently and securely more so than web developers. The more code that's moved to platform native and localized, the better.

This website is doing crazy thing with the help of Js and it's not slow at all:
http://resn.co.nz/

Because of an enormous effort put into it by browser developers.

Edit: I tried that link...not working so good on Edge. Score point for killing JavaScript.

Edit: Reload and it works but it hitches. Would be many times better implemented in D3D or Vulkan.

 

[Solaris17]

I can't help but sit here and laugh - when you visit sketchy sites to download pirated contents, what do you expect? It is like getting robbed by a drug dealer. You know the risks going in. Are you going to report to the police?

Don't blame JavaScript. Don't blame the tool. It is like blaming the drug dealer's gun for robbing you. Blame the site operator.

oh? I'm curious why you think this will stop at the pirate bay? What you think that sketch websites are going to be the only ones leveraging this system? What happens when yahoo MSN CNN BBC or other avg home user landing pages take in this concept?

Negative ghost rider. I would rather this entire faux "industry" collapse and watch hard core miners lose thousands then allow someone another way to profit ontop of my energy usage. Miners already fucked the GPU market. Please do not ruin the internet as a whole.

 

[dyonoctis]

Because of an enormous effort put into it by browser developers.

Edit: I tried that link...not working so good on Edge. Score point for killing JavaScript.

Edit: Reload and it works but it hitches. Would be many times better implemented in D3D or Vulkan.

The closest thing that you would get to vulkan in a browser is this:

https://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=news_item&px=Mozilla-Obsidian-Graphics-API

For the graphics this website is using webgl, made by the khronos group (open gl es rethinked for browser), those still need to use javascript to run, but the api itself is implemented in the browser. As far as i know direct x haven't stepped foot in 3d for the web, microsoft choose to support webgl rather than fight it.

As for getting it work flawlessy on every browser...that would be the point were i get some concern, websites always had the tendancy to not have the exact same behavior on every browser, the "work best on firefox/chrome" have always been present and doesn't seems to go anywhere. I'm getting some odd issue with facebook and tpu with firefox.

 

[FordGT90Concept]

If MS supported D3D in browsers, they'd have to support Linux, Mac, Android, etc. They're not going to do that because they see D3D has a motive for developers to support Windows first.

It's much easier for browser developers to support a HTML element then make all browsers execute JavaScript the same way. Like I said, JavaScript is a can of worms; problems are inevitable.

Facebook is 99% JavaScript. I avoid it like the plague.

 

[LFaWolf]

oh? I'm curious why you think this will stop at the pirate bay? What you think that sketch websites are going to be the only ones leveraging this system? What happens when yahoo MSN CNN BBC or other avg home user landing pages take in this concept?

Negative ghost rider. I would rather this entire faux "industry" collapse and watch hard core miners lose thousands then allow someone another way to profit ontop of my energy usage. Miners already fucked the GPU market. Please do not ruin the internet as a whole.

Uh, simple. If Yahoo is doing this, the average home user's computer will slow to a crawl. Home user goes to CNN, "hey I can get my news here too and it is faster than using Yahoo!" Home user never returns to Yahoo. Yahoo loses ad revenue from Home User. It is bad for business.

If the public finds out Yahoo is doing this, there will be a public outcry. Users will avoid using Yahoo. Yahoo loses ad revenues. It is bad for business.

Lastly, Businesses earn far more in ad revenues or other means from users/visitors to site than the fraction from coin mining. Small businesses need to grow. And to grow require more users. And yet, if that trust is broken, users will never come back, because there are other competitor sites out there. It is bad for business.

Pirate sites could care less. There is always another user looking for the latest Transformer movie to download. I never visited Pirate Bay. Does any legitimate business advertise there at all?

 

[Jism]

It's very simple. Stop integrating ads from different party's who in their return can buy ads on some sort of network and be shown upon every max bid. Every site should sell some adspace at least which should be made automaticly and without the use of external banner sources.

The biggest problem is whenever some bogus advertiser is hacked, malware is usually being distributed, or annoy various users on various platforms to keep clicking ads nobody wants to see.

I've recently installed an adblocker just to visit tomshardware.com on my Iphone 7. It's bullshit your being hijacked upon readin an article and the only way back is to restart your browser and head for the URL manually. I understand good content should be available with at least some form of ads, but not the ones hijacking stuff onto your screen stating i just won another phone.

To keep it simple: keep your website clean of "unwanted" and "annoying" ads and everything is fine.

 

[R-T-B]

oh? I'm curious why you think this will stop at the pirate bay?

Mainly because of outcry and the low income. You need a HUGE userbase to make this profitable and that equals huge outcry to profit ratio.

These tools to mine in browsers have existed since the birth of bitcoin... they aren't popular for a reason.

 

[evernessince]

More proof there is no honor among thieves.

I hate to point this out but this has happened on non torrent websites as well. Not to mention, it wasn't TPB itself doing it. In order for your analogy to work out, TPB would have to be the one's doing it.

I'd also like to point out that pirating is not stealing. It is creating a copy of it. I'm a content creator and it SUCKS having your work stolen but I hate it when people turn it into a hyperbole. I do not want to throw people in jail for creating a copy of 0s and 1s, that's just stupid and isn't going to solve anything.

 

[laszlo]

so if this would be implemented by other sites also without user knowledge will eventually use cpu at max if you have multiple open tabs which contain this revenue software

if in 20 sec they can mine 0.000005 $ ,they would need at least 2 M visitors /day to make 10 $/day...i don't really see a future in this instead of ads if numbers are ok..

can someone confirm if my calc. is ok?

 

[evernessince]

so if this would be implemented by other sites also without user knowledge will eventually use cpu at max if you have multiple open tabs which contain this revenue software

if in 20 sec they can mine 0.000005 $ ,they would need at least 2 M visitors /day to make 10 $/day...i don't really see a future in this instead of ads if numbers are ok..

can someone confirm if my calc. is ok?

Bitcoin mining with regular graphics cards died a long time ago. As your numbers suggest, it would not be worth it. You'd make more money with ads.

 

[R-T-B]

Bitcoin mining with regular graphics cards died a long time ago. As your numbers suggest, it would not be worth it. You'd make more money with ads.

But this is Monero. They trade it for bitcoin.

 

[evernessince]

But this is Monero. They trade it for bitcoin.

Looking at the coin calculator, it doesn't look like Monero is much better profitability wise.