Learn languages with 200 Words a Day! Build up your vocab quickly and effectively. Unique Memory Triggers and cartoons help you learn and remember each and every word like the one above. Built-in Gender triggers help remind you of the gender of nouns. Save time by learning these at the same time as the word.Over 1,000 common words per course in presented in our innovative, interactive software.Designed for PCs (Works on Macs with pre-installed PC Emulator software).Customise the programme to suit your learning preferences.Learning schedule organises and tracks your progress.Sentences: every word is linked to a practical sentence, written and recorded by native speakers. Click on the picture to view the sentence before moving on to next word. Great for extension practice. The sentences also feature as an independent course with learning schedule and testing features.e-FlashcardzSelect this option for variety or as a learning alternative. Based on traditional flashcard methodology, only interactive. Great photographic visuals. Ideal for testing and great to consolidate your learning. Learn Italian Sentence Builder & Grammar SlammerOur first Grammar course incorporating lots of accelerated learning techniques, cartoons and memory triggers to make grammar learning so much easier. All aspects of Basic and Intermediate Italian grammar covered.
1000 First Words in German downloads torrent
Over 1000+ words per course.View each foreign word with its own memory trigger and cartoon, including animations like the one above.Hear each word pronounced by native speakers.Customize your learning to suit your style.Learn at your own pace with personalised learning and revision schedules.Databases for up to 6 students.Available on CD or by download.Combined with:e-Flashcardz - alternative Flashcards learning and testing option for every word with great photographic visuals.Sentences Course - see, hear and learn a sentence for every word, perfect for extension learning and practice.
The table below shows only the number of words in all content pages, meaning the 6,615,046 articles; it does not include words in other namespaces like Talk, User, or Wikipedia. Data for 2002 through 2010 is from the old Wikistats-1 and thus only precise to the month rather than a specific day within a month. Data for 2018 to the present is from the Special:Statistics page, as saved on that date by the Internet Archive. There is no record of the number of words from January 2010 to December 2017; Wikistats-1 no longer includes the number of words after January 2010, and the Special:Statistics page only started showing the number of words in all content pages in December 2017. Some time within that almost eight-year span, the average number of words dropped. Note that the Internet Archive does not always have an archived version of the Special:Statistics page on the first day of each year.
All files also come with a .md5 signature file. Use it to check your downloads (especially when using FTP: using RSYNC or Torrent will generally avoid download issues such as truncated files) ! You should first check for the existence of the .md5 file before trying to download actual data (which may sometimes be in a transient state while a mirror is being synchronized with a recent dump). Also make sure your browser or downloader client supports the transfer of large files over 2 GB, as well as your local OS and file system for storing such files.
The first attack is on people who configure their Bittorrent application to proxy their tracker traffic through Tor. These people are hoping to keep their IP address secret from somebody looking over the list of peers at the tracker. The problem is that several popular Bittorrent clients (the authors call out uTorrent in particular, and I think Vuze does it too) just ignore their socks proxy setting in this case. Choosing to ignore the proxy setting is understandable, since modern tracker designs use the UDP protocol for communication, and socks proxies such as Tor only support the TCP protocol -- so the developers of these applications had a choice between "make it work even when the user sets a proxy that can't be used" and "make it mysteriously fail and frustrate the user". The result is that the Bittorrent applications made a different security decision than some of their users expected, and now it's biting the users.
That was the first attack. The second attack builds on the first one to go after Bittorrent users that proxy the rest of their Bittorrent traffic over Tor also: it aims to let an attacking peer (as opposed to tracker) identify you. It turns out that the Bittorrent protocol, at least as implemented by these popular Bittorrent applications, picks a random port to listen on, and it tells that random port to the tracker as well as to each peer it interacts with. Because of the first attack above, the tracker learns both your real IP address and also the random port your client chose. So if your uTorrent client picks 50344 as its port, and then anonymously (via Tor) talks to some other peer, that other peer can go to the tracker, look for everybody who published to the tracker listing port 50344 (with high probability there's only one), and voila, the other peer learns your real IP address. As a bonus, if the Bittorrent peer communications aren't encrypted, the Tor exit relay you pick can also watch the traffic and do the attack.
So what's the fix? There are two answers here. The first answer is "don't run Bittorrent over Tor". We've been saying for years not to run Bittorrent over Tor, because the Tor network can't handle the load; perhaps these attacks will convince more people to listen. The second answer is that if you want your Bittorrent client to actually provide privacy when using a proxy, you need to get the application and protocol developers to fix their applications and protocols. Tor can't keep you safe if your applications leak your identity.
Another answer is to separate streams by destination port. Then all the streams that go to port 80 are on one circuit, and a stream for a different destination port goes on another circuit. We've had that idea lurking in the background for a long time now, but it's actually because of Bittorrent that we haven't implemented it: if a BT client asks us to make 50 streams to 50 different destination ports, I don't want the Tor client to try to make 50 different circuits. That puts too much load on the network. I guess we could special-case it by separating "80" and "not 80", but I'm not sure how effective that would be in practice, first since many other ports (IM, SSH, etc) would want to be special-cased, and second since firewalls are pressuring more and more of the Internet to go over port 80 these days.
I'm asking myself; why it's wrong to download a file through "Tor+BitTorrent", but it's ok if you download the same file via "Tor+HTTP"??????!!!!!!! I think that the application transfer protocol doesn't make any difference!!!!! Indeed, if you look into it, you'll find out that BitTorrent will improve the performance of the Tor network!!!!! If you download a file from one normal "hidden website", the max download speed you'll have is going to be the upload speed of that hidden service!!! and its upload bandwidth is shared among all the users downloading the same file and all the others files hosted at the same server!!!! With bittorrent, you'll share your upload bandwidth too!!! it's shared among all the "peers" and this will indeed improve the performances!!!!!! a single "tor hidden service" isn't able to host big files, because the Tor network isn't yet made like RAID disks are made: Tor isn't able to increase its performance exploiting the redundancy of files!!!!!!!! And, guess what BitTorrent is able to do?!!!!!! There isn't a single centralized HTTP server serving the file(s) using its upload bandwidth alone, but increasing the number of peers and seeders you'll also increase the bandwidth available to download the files!!!!!!! You won't download anymore from a single website, but from multiple sources!!!!!! bittorrent is also ok to automatically check if files were downloaded successfully (torrent clients check whenever the downloaded files hash values match against the hash keys memorized inside the `.torrent' file!!!!!!!!!!). I think that the main problem, always pointed out, about the Tor network load, is described in a very biased way!!!!!!!! What i wanted to say 1 second ago with my entry question is that if ten people will download a 600MB ISO image from one HTTP hidden service they won't cause "less network load" than the same ten people downloading the same 600MB ISO image using the "BitTORrent" system!!!!!!!!! Indeed, if you think about it, you'll find out that it's much more easy to ask to the ten people using bittorrent to share the Tor network load than asking to the ten HTTP-downloaders to do the same!!!!!! If you had a BitTORrent client made in the way i described in my first post here, you'll also have ten people running tor nodes, and downloading at a moderate speed to avoid the congestion of the network!!!!!!! Of course people could use their BitTORrent clients to leech files and bandwidth, but even in this pessimistic worst case scenario you'll have no more than the same effect of downloading files via the HTTP protocol without sharing anything!!!!!!!! so, in the same way as torrents are alive only if you `seed' them after downloading, also the network load will be balanced if people will begin to share it!!!!!! People using the HTTP .onion protocol alone (this is almost sure) won't share anything, and you'll have worse performance than in a "BitTORrent-ready network" and you'll put an heavier load on the Tor network because nobody will share neither the files (redundancy of files parts already downloaded) nor the bandwidth of the nodes!!!!!!!!! I really think that a "BitTORrent Bundle", made with a patched version of a BitTorrent-client made to work within the Tor Network, and made with the original idea to share ALSO the network load (and not just the files), to be a very good idea!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Giving to all people the general idea that Bittorrent over Tor isn't a good idea is a bit deceiving!!!!!! BitTorrent is only a protocol!!!!!!!!!!!!! BitTORrent could be a great way to solve a lot of flaws related to TOR!!, allowing the Tor network to support big files, decentralizing the storage of hidden services (because the only hidden services you'll need, are very simple "Hidden BitTORrent Open-Trackers", similar to openbittorrent.com and websites indexing small ".torrent" files), increasing the performance at sharing big files (this is the typical improvement that BitTorrent gives also on the normal Internet!!!), increasing the number of nodes and the bandwidth for the whole Tor network (average case scenario: the BitTORrent-bandwidth is balanced 1:1!!! worst case scenario:-->), and yet nothing is gonna change about denial-of-service effects, because it's possible to overload the Tor Network even downloading DVDs ISO without BitTORrent!!!!!!!!! so, if you apply the Occam's razor principle to "Tor+Download(BitTorrent) = NetworkOverload", you'll find out that "BitTorrent" isn't required in that equation!!!!!!!! What about the bulk traffic and why are big files useful for the Tor Network?!!! Well, i don't know it!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Why were you asking it to me though?!!!!!!! Somebody could say that BitTorrent and Tor are both useless!!! Indeed, that's right for all the people that don't need them!!!! but it's very wrong, for all the people using/needing them!!!!!! Also factorbee is useless for people using exclusively Windows, because it works only on Linux!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! So, it's a question i can't answer at, because it's something of personal, and i can't know what you're thinking and why you need Tor, BitTorrent or even BitTORrent!!!!!!! Finally, having a technology like BitTORrent cannot be wrong, if you don't need it, you won't use it!!! In the same way as, if you don't need Tor, you won't use it either!!!!!!!! But i'm sure that a lot of people will find it useful!!!! (mostly to laugh at the non-working copyright-justified censorship!!!!!!!!!) Ah, thinking about DVDs ISOs!!! this is funny!!! Linux systems cannot be "exported" to non-free countries (Cuba, Iran, Iraq, North Korea, Sudan, and Syria; actually the only places where LINUX+OpenSSL+Tor+... are useful for real), because the cryptographic software in Linux, which is regulated under US Export laws, cannot be redistributed there!!!!!! Anyway, there is Canada, south America, there is the Europe and good places in Asia; but if there weren't those free (for real) countries, used to share Linux ISOs, you could even had people with reasons to download LINUX!!!!!(the free and open source operating system!!!!!!) distros through TOR!!!!!!!!lol!!!!!!!!!! Now, this is off topic, but you've got to ask yourself, how such a brainless and useless restriction is possible in a so called "free country"!!!!!!!! The `US' is also the only problem i could think about BitTORrent!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Could the TorProject be liable for helping the development of file sharing technologies?!!!!!!!!!!!! Lets say communist software?????!!!! ha ha!!!!!!! this is funny too lol!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! though it's something of important to be aware of, because even websites like are now outlaw in the USA!!!!!!!(they could help copyright infringements!!!!) could it be something to be afraid of!!!!!!? In either case, i think that my BitTORrent idea is very nice, and it could work for real!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! bee!!!!!!!!!!! 2ff7e9595c
Comments