Surf Forbidden Sites With Pirate Bay's PirateBrowser


With even "free" countries like the United Kingdom and Australia imposing Internet censorship on certain types of of online content and specific Websites (often in wildly inappropriate and overreaching ways — I'm talking about you, Oz), clever means for accessing verboten Websites are of interest to more than a few of the world's Web users. Enter Pirate Bay, that storied gateway to shared media and information government officials don't want you to have, which has introduced the PirateBrowser, specifically designed to bypass censorship.
At Pirate Bay, the PirateBrowser is described thusly:
PirateBrowser is a bundle package of the Tor client (Vidalia), FireFox Portable browser (with foxyproxy addon) and some custom configs that allows you to circumvent censorship that certain countries such as Iran, North Korea, United Kingdom, The Netherlands, Belgium, Finland, Denmark, Italy and Ireland impose onto their citizens.
Despite the use of Tor in the browser, PirateBrowser is designed to bypass Internet blockades of Websites, not to guarantee anonymity. That means users who risk legal penalties for accessing restricted Websites will want to look for another solution. But for Web surfers in countries, like Australia, that secretly force ISPs to block seemingly legal Websites, or the U.K., where people may have to go on record to opt out of Internet restrictions, Pirate Browser could prove very useful. (Pirate Bay recommends, "If you are looking for something more secure you may want to try a VPN like PrivacyIO.")
Pirate Bay itself is a frequent target of online censors, and a likely beneficiary of any tool that bypasses such controls.
According to TorrentFreak, PirateBrowser was downloaded more than 100,000 times in the first three days of its launch this past Saturday, as part of Pirate Bay's celebration of its tenth anniversary.
Get PirateBrowser here.
Editor's Note: As of February 29, 2024, commenting privileges on reason.com posts are limited to Reason Plus subscribers. Past commenters are grandfathered in for a temporary period. Subscribe here to preserve your ability to comment. Your Reason Plus subscription also gives you an ad-free version of reason.com, along with full access to the digital edition and archives of Reason magazine. We request that comments be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment and ban commenters for any reason at any time. Comments may only be edited within 5 minutes of posting. Report abuses.
Please
to post comments
As an added bonus, the browser will automatically peer share all your media files for you.
Soooo....this won't help me look at porn while at work.
Moving on...
Yeah, I was thinking about that thing with Lawrence Fishburne's daughter...but then again...maybe not such a good idea.
Wow, she's better looking than I'd have thought, what with her dad's complexion.
Also, he named his daughter Montana, and then got pissed when she became a porn star? Jesus, why not just call her Lexxxi and be done with it?
To be fair, she has the complexion, but it has migrated to a less noticeable area(unless you happen to be in a porn flick)
"Now appearing on the stage - PORSHUH!
*googles*
DAYYYYYUMMM...
I was afraid that she'd look like pops, but not so.
I'd never heard about teh pron thing w/her.
Agree w/the General...DAYYYYUMMM! No bad.
*makes note to Bing her nekkid when have access to personal computer*
best way to view porn at work is tunnel it through some port the it guy won't expect. like an ssh tunnel
http://www.breitbart.com/Big-G.....h-Cronyism
So the New York Times seems to have actually printed something honest about St. Hillary. A lot of people in the Democratic Party hate the Clintons guts. Is this report the NYT doing their bidding? Or is it the NYT getting bad news they knew would come out anyway out early so they can spin it as "old news" when people start paying attention? Not sure which.
The latter. No question in my mind. Why else publish this story now, when Hillary is out of office and not running for anything?
They could have published this story any time that Hillary was SecState, but that might have raised uncomfortable conflict-of-interest questions about who was funding the Clinton empire. They could have waited until she formally announced for President, but that might actually have a negative impact on her.
Long live the Pirate Bay, oh yeah!
http://www.Tactical-Anon.tk