Yes… You are correct. You definitely are able to just select the specific video(s) that you're looking for. I however don't like doing that because it makes it really hard to bring said torrent back to life in the future should it ever start to die down in seed poplarity
You'd have to do some digging to find a cracked copy, but I would be inclined to recommend Final Cut Pro…. It's what I've used in the film industry while doing editing for many years now, with absolutely NO regrets.
I do understand where you're coming from there zoomp…. Sadly, there are too many users (especially newer ones) who just cannot wrap their brains around the concept of a ratio in the first place. Regardless of the size of the torrent collection, there would be too many people who either wouldn't bother to check the size, or would otherwise download one of (or multiple) the torrents, along with a whole slew of other torrents, without understanding the ratio requirement.
These people would either be in the position where they need to donate, or they need to otherwise dig themselves out of the rut that they would get themselves into by participating in the forum and seeding their torrents religiously to maximize the impact to their SBP balance that they can cash in on to be able to get upload credit in lieu of being able to actually upload content.
Ummmm…. I'm not sure what formulation that they're on (whether it's Atripla, or otherwise separate), but I must forewarn you that Efavirenz should be avoided like the plague. It's more commonly known as Sustiva, and while your friend may not realize it now, but Sustiva is a very evil drug. I have seen first hand the kind of damage that Sustiva (Efavirenz) can do to a person with long-term use. For example, thanks to Sustiva, my ex now suffers from a severe case of peripheral neuropathy. To go along with this, he still frequently suffers from brain farts as I like to call them where he'll mean to say one thing, but will reverse the order of a few words, or otherwise associate the wrong word with something, leaving the person that he's talking to very confused.
I would strongly recommend that your friend get off of Sustiva ASAP for their own good. I'm not saying this to be a bitch or anything, but rather out of serious concern because I have seen first hand what Sustiva will do to a person with long-term use. I would be more inclined to recommend the switch to something like Truvada (Tenofovir 300mg / Emtricitabine 200mg) & Isentress (Raltegravir 400mg) as a substitute in the meantime. There are two down sides to this regime, however they're more manageable when paired up with something like Lomotil. The first down side is that Truvada often causes dry mouth and (and I say this from first hand experience of having been on it myself) can make for a rather "shitty" situation, if you catch my drift. The other down side is that Isentress in its standalone formation needs to be taken twice a day, which is statistically proven to be harder to adhere to than a once a day treatment.
Once on that regime, I would be inclined to recommend that they get a blood test done known as the HLA-B5701, which tests to see if you will have a rather serious reaction to Abacavir. If this test comes back negative, I would be inclined to recommend at that point making another switch from the Truvada/Isentress combination over to Triumeq. It falls under the same drug class as Isentress, however is formulated differently as to only need to be taken once a day. This would roll them down into one pill once a day. That being said though, I would not recommend just starting the Triumeq blindly as the reaction that the HLA-B5701 tests for is a severe body rash that can blister and become quite painful. To my understanding, it is the most common side effect and is thought on the most part to be the only real known side effect. I have been on this regime now for a while and have noticed no side effects to speak of. Also, on that note, it just so happens that the class of drugs that the Isentress falls into happens to now be regarded as the most powerful class of medications when combatting HIV in the world. It is responsible for me finally breaking the 700 mark in my CD4 count and coming in at an all time high of 1040 as of the last test.
Triumeq is a combination drug that mixes Dolutegravir, Abacavir, & Lamivudine, however it is rolled down into one pill. It's similar to a solution such as Atripla (which more or less is Tenofovir & Emtricitabine (or Truvada) and Sustiva (Efavirenz) all rolled into one pill), only it uses the newer medications and is all rolled into one pill that is taken once daily. In all seriousness though, I strongly recommend the discontinuation of Sustiva ASAP for their own good. If they're comfortable staying on the Sustiva for 3 months or so for the HLA-B*5701 test to come back, it may make more sense to make the switch over to Triumeq right off the top. It's proven to be much more effective, without the hassles of the nasty side effects. I know this may sound like I'm out to lunch, but this is something that I happen to have years of first hand experience with. I would not recommend making such a switch if I did not feel so strongly against the use of Sustiva. It's seriously saddening to see what 13 years of Sustiva has done to my ex, and I seriously would not wish that kind of life on anyone.
Again, understand that this is my opinion based on the years of experience that I have first hand with these medications. I seriously think that they would be much better off with one of the newer options such as Triumeq because it's easier to manage, without the hassles of the side effects. I know that they're happy enough dealing with the side effects for now, but I can say first hand from my own experience that there WILL come a time where the side effects will eventually become quite depressing, which can cause a number of other issues. What I'm getting at here is why deal with the side effects if there is an alternative that is clinically proven to be more effective that will help them manage, without the side effects? In all seriousness I'm not trying to criticize their decision to stick with it. My only intent is to offer my experience to try to help by providing a better solution that is easier to manage both physically and for long-term mental & physical health.
All this being said, Triumeq is rather new, so it's possible that at the time that their doctor put them on the Sustiva option, the option of using Triumeq may not have existed at that time. It only came out within the last about 4 months or so, so I would imagine that this is likely the reason why their doctor hasn't yet recommended it.
Most of them end up coming to Canada because we have a much better healthcare system in terms of the costs and such…. For example: in Canada, if you call an ambulance because you're having a heart attack, get rushed to the hospital by ambulance only to go in for an emergency quadruple bypass surgery and spend 48 hours in the ICU recovering before being transferred to a more suitable location in the hospital where you spend the next week, the ONLY bill that you'll ever see is a mere $50 for the ambulance... As for our counter-part in the USA, this is not the case.
I'm kind of with you on the idea of moving to the EU, simply because there's a lot of stuff that seems much better off there, healthcare being one such thing. As for the US gun laws, I've never understood them myself.... After all, the US is the country that put out such advertising campaigns as "Ladies, teach your daughters to shoot... After all, a restraining order is just a piece of paper!" :lolp:
Granted, that ad does have some truth to it, but nevertheless, it is still way too easy to acquire a gun in the United States, even compared to Canada, which is why you hear more about mass stabbings in Canada than shootings. :hehe:
All that being said though, I'd rather be in the cold, white North than in the deep south where the motto is "I fucks what I feeds!" lol
I think that this studio is one that more militantly monitors their content for illegal distribution. For this reason, I think it's safe to say that the DMCA strikes again because this studio happens to be one that's more on top of monitoring the distribution of their materials.
Smaller size should be better
Since, it will attract more seederThat's in most cases true but not always!
:cheesy2:
I would have to say that I agree with the general consensus that smaller is better in this case…. Funny thing is that I never thought I'd hear myself say smaller is better because well...... with some things, bigger is better >;-)
I say the smaller is better because there are some people who either do not wish to download the entire torrent, or in cases like mine, I'll download a torrent for one or two specific videos, but have to download the torrent in its entirety due to the simple fact that I want to get credit for actually seeding the content, and not get caught in the endless leecher staus. If I were to have to download 100GB+ in order to get those one or two files, I'd be more inclined to just pass right on by and look for just those files elsewhere. Also, it's a lot easier for the ratio if you're downloading a smaller collection, rather than having to download the whole enchilada just for a tiny piece of it..... That's just my two cents.
It can be even more annoying to try to download a large file on the kind of internet connection that I'm currently on until the end of the month… It's included in the rent, but I share it with 9 or 10 other apartments, so suddenly it isn't so fast.....
The promised speed: 2mbit DL / 800kbit UL
Actual Speeds: 1.1mbit (if I'm lucky) / 128kbit (if I'm lucky)
Downloading larger files with this kind of speed can be reeeeeeeeeeeally frustrating. That being said, I cannot wait until October 30th when I get my own connection hooked up, which will run me a whopping 50mbit DL / 5mbit UL... That's even faster than what I had in the city of Kitchener. Even there I was only able to pull in a mere 6mbit DL / 800kbit UL.....
So.... On that note.... Excessively large files that do not warrant such a size (such as a DVD size for a VHS rip) are extremely annoying in my view.
The one thing I will say about Vuze is that in my opinion, Vuze is the devil's tool and should be avoided like the plague lol
Trying to get full and unrestricted access to Usenet these days seems very hard if not impossible… At least not for free anyway. A lot of providers now filter some of the content, and even entire newsgroups out of their systems as to make some content inaccessible. A lot of this has to do with providers being sued for having content that was deemed to be "questionable" within it.
The great part about torrents is that such content is not as filtered, and in a lot of cases, is pretty well impossible to wipe out from the internet given the nature of how torrents work, as compared to the nature of how newsgroups work in general.
Without being able to see you in the process of seeding, it's hard to say for sure, but I do see one thing that's particularly troubling. It seems that none of the torrents on your profile are showing as having any leechers actively downloading them. This is most likely the reason why you're not getting your upload credit from seeding torrents. I would recommend that you leave at least one torrent seeding at all times so that you can accumulate SBP to be able to exchange for upload credit to improve your ratio. Also, did you know that we have a First Time Uploader program? You can take advantage of this program to cash in your 600 SBP reward for your first successful upload.
If you want to take advantage of the First Time Uploader Program (FTUP), I would suggest sending a PM to ozyme to claim your credits for this program.
Now I see more clearly what you're getting at… Perhaps I should have been more clear about what I was getting at. 
I will concede that out in public to the masses, it is not always possible to determine the source target of infection. In the majority of cases, when a new infection occurs, it is usually either known or reasonably suspected where the source infection originated (on the most part, but not in all cases). As for the studies themselves, when a new infection occurred, in every case a genotype test was run to determine whether or not the infection was passed on from the partner with an undetectable viral load. In each of these cases, it cold be scientifically concluded that the source of the infection most definitely was NOT the partner with an undetectable viral load.
In the masses on the other hand, it is not always possible to do this type of testing and match the samples back to the originating source. So yes... You are correct in that while there is no documentation that transmission has occurred from a partner who is undetectable, this does not necessarily mean that it has not. Based on the findings of these studies however, it is highly unlikely that (although not impossible) that transmission has occrred from a partner who is undetectable. This of course brings me back to the original point that there is no documented evidence that says that it isn't possible to contract HIV from a partner with an undetectable viral load. By the same token, there is no evidence that suggests that it is possible either, as there has never been a documented case where infection has occurred, and thus proving conclusively that it is possible either.
I guess what it boils down to here is that while there is no conclusive evidence either way, from the evidence that has been presented from the studies, it certainly would suggest that it's realistically possible that if you have an undetectable viral load, you cannot pass the virus onto another individual through sexual activity. Again, the key word that I'm stressing here is possible as there is no scientific documentation that concretely proves that it is impossible to contract HIV from an undetectable partner. Attempts at acquiring evidence that it is possible to contract HIV from an undetectable partner however have all turned up empty handed, as each attempt has failed to provide a causal link that traces back to the undetectable partner. Based on the evidence that does exist however, statistically speaking, it's actually safer to bareback with someone who maintains a undetectable viral load than it is to have sex with a condom with a partner with a high viral load. While on that topic, let's not mislead that statistic either… When used properly, condoms are an effective method in which to prevent the transmission of HIV, even with a high viral load. Speaking solely on the statistics from the scientific documentation that does exist, it's safe to say that at the very least, it's more unlikely to contract HIV from a partner with an undetectable viral load than to contract HIV from a partner with a high viral load when a condom is properly used. By the same token, it's also not very likely to contract HIV from a partner with a high viral load when a condom is used properly as well.
@MeatHook: I actually want to thank you for bringing up that point of technicality. It's always nice to see when someone can debate with facts, as to provoke an intellectually stimulating conversation.
I guess I'm a bit of a piggy that way as I have a tendency to check them out and let my mind start running wild. I guess you could call my approach a "cruising" approach, only slightly more subtle just on the off chance that they're not interested in men whatsoever. From there, I kind of play it by ear to see where (if anywhere) that things may progress.
I'm not sure that I entirely follow your point there. What I was getting at is that there is no scientific evidence that concretely proves whether or not it is actually possible to contract HIV from a partner who has an undetectable viral load. This isn't to say that it's not possible to contract it, however it certainly does suggest that it's not very likely. Could you clarify a little more what exactly you're getting at?
I like the way that you think there Frederick… The only question that comes into play here would be how many SBP to award for voting on a rating, and how it should be applied to the user's account. Perhaps this may be something to bring up in the features and/or programming requests section? I think you're quite right that encouraging people to vote for a rating may help to make it a more popular and widely used feature of the site.
Yes… As a general rule, there are certain categories that take presidence over others.... Such categories include the following:
These 5 categories as a general rule take presidence over other categories. Aside from these however, the category under which you will find a torrent is dependent entirely on which category is the better fit for the video. That being said however, for some torrents, there is more than one possible category in which to find the torrent. The above mentioned categories however as a general rule should take presidence over other categories, even if the other category is also a good fit for the video.
Just to be more clear about the rules, there is no such rule that forbids asking for a better quality upload than what is currently on the tracker. In a case where all we have is a very low quality version of whatever it is that you're looking for, either asking for or otherwise uploading a much superior quality version of the same video is not only allowed, but it is also encouraged.
Feel free to use our request section for this very purpose…. It's what it's there for.
Everything looks like it's good to go on this end…. It appears that there are now multiple seeders for this torrent.
This is just a hunch based on what I know about the legal processes for your area. You appear to be using your internet connection directly without the use of a VPN. It may be possible that a copyright troll has alleged your IP address to be suspected of copyright infringement, without actually providing specific details on what material that they feel to be infringed. This is most common when your ISP sees P2P traffic. I may be inclined to recommend the use of a VPN to skirt around this problem.
I personally use Pure VPN for this very purpose. While most VPN services are a paid service, I can say with confidence that the added privacy is definitely worth paying for the service. This will help to avoid any such issue between you and your ISP. From what I can see from the torrents that you have downloaded, I see no reason as to why your connections may be slow, which is why I am inclined to think that the DMCA may be the "problem" in your case, under one of the more obscure clauses that permits your provider to throttle your internet connection solely on the allegation of a suspicion of copyright infringement.
@cannonmc: Yes… I absolutely tell all of my sexual partners prior to sex as I am a large believer in both a person's right to choose what is right for them, as well as their right to make such a decision fully informed with all the relevant facts. This is largely because this right was taken from me when I was infected, and I was not given the chance to choose for myself what was right for me.
@MeatHook: You are correct. I have followed up with each and every last person that I have been with, and I'm quite pleased to say that not one person that I have ever been with has tested HIV+. You are also correct with respect to the risk. While it is statistically safer to bareback with a person with an undetectable viral load than it is to have sex with a condom with a partner with a high viral load, this certainly does NOT mean that it's completely impossible to contract HIV, even from a partner with an undetectable viral load. That being said however, there is not currently any scientific finding that proves that it is possible to contract HIV from an undetectable partner either, as there has not been so much as one case where infection has occurred from a partner who is undetectable. So again I will reinforce that while it is not impossible to contract it from an undetectable partner, if you were to contract it from an undetectable partner, you would be the first case where transmission has occurred, including through several more recent studies that have been conducted, trying to determine an exact risk factor of transmission with bareback sex...... So.... All that being said, make of it what you will, but in all honesty, if the person you're having unprotected sex with has an undetectable viral load, I really wouldn't be worried. If anything, I'd be more concerned with another STI such as syphilis, gonorrhea, chlamydia, crabs, etc than I would about the risk of getting HIV from unprotected sex.