torsoraphy-500x257
Link

Bing Copying Google results!

Google has run a sting operation that it says proves Bing has been watching what people search for on Google, the sites they select from Google’s results, then uses that information to improve Bing’s own search listings. Bing doesn’t deny this.
As a result of the apparent monitoring, Bing’s relevancy is potentially improving (or getting worse) on the back of Google’s own work. Google likens it to the digital equivalent of Bing leaning over during an exam and copying off of Google’s test.
“I’ve spent my career in pursuit of a good search engine,” says Amit Singhal, a Google Fellow who oversees the search engine’s ranking algorithm. “I’ve got no problem with a competitor developing an innovative algorithm. But copying is not innovation, in my book.”
Bing doesn’t deny Google’s claim. Indeed, the statement that Stefan Weitz, director of Microsoft’s Bing search engine, emailed me yesterday as I worked on this article seems to confirm the allegation:

As you might imagine, we use multiple signals and approaches when we think about ranking, but like the rest of the players in this industry, we’re not going to go deep and detailed in how we do it. Clearly, the overarching goal is to do a better job determining the intent of the search, so we can guess at the best and most relevant answer to a given query.

Opt-in programs like the [Bing] toolbar help us with clickstream data, one of many input signals we and other search engines use to help rank sites. This “Google experiment” seems like a hack to confuse and manipulate some of these signals.

Later today, I’ll likely have a more detailed response from Bing. Microsoft wanted to talk further after a search event it is hosting today. More about that event, and how I came to be reporting on Google’s findings just before it began, comes at the end of this story. But first, here’s how Google’s investigation unfolded.

Postscript: Bing: Why Google’s Wrong In Its Accusations is the follow-up story from talking with Bing. Please be sure to read it after this. You’ll also find another link to it at the end of this article.

Hey, Does This Seem Odd To You?

Around late May of last year, Google told me it began noticing that Bing seemed to be doing exceptionally well at returning the same sites that Google would list, when someone would enter unusual misspellings.
For example, consider a search for torsoraphy, which causes Google to return this:
In the example above, Google’s searched for the correct spelling — tarsorrhaphy — even though torsoraphy was entered. Notice the top listing for the corrected spelling is a page about the medical procedure at Wikipedia.
Over at Bing, the misspelling is NOT corrected — but somehow, Bing manages to list the same Wikipedia page at the top of its results as Google does for its corrected spelling results:
Got it? Despite the word being misspelled — and the misspelling not being corrected — Bing still manages to get the right page from Wikipedia at the top of its results, one of four total pages it finds from across the web. How did it do that?
It’s a point of pride to Google that it believes it has the best spelling correction system of any search engine. Google even claims that it can even correct misspellings that have never been searched on before. Engineers on the spelling correction team closely watch to see if they’re besting competitors on unusual terms.
So when misspellings on Bing for unusual words — such as above — started generating the same results as with Google, red flags went up among the engineers.

Google: Is Bing Copying Us?

More red flags went up in October 2010, when Google told me it noticed a marked rise in two key competitive metrics. Across a wide range of searches, Bing was showing a much greater overlap with Google’s top 10 results than in preceding months. In addition, there was an increase in the percentage of times both Google and Bing listed exactly the same page in the number one spot.
By no means did Bing have exactly the same search results as Google. There were plenty of queries where the listings had major differences. However, the increases were indicative that Bing had made some change to its search algorithm which was causing its results to be more Google-like.
Now Google began to strongly suspect that Bing might be somehow copying its results, in particular by watching what people were searching for at Google. There didn’t seem to be any other way it could be coming up with such similar matches to Google, especially in cases where spelling corrections were happening.
Google thought Microsoft’s Internet Explorer browser was part of the equation. Somehow, IE users might have been sending back data of what they were doing on Google to Bing. In particular, Google told me it suspected either the Suggested Sites feature in IE or the Bing toolbar might be doing this.

To Sting A Bing

To verify its suspicions, Google set up a sting operation. For the first time in its history, Google crafted one-time code that would allow it to manually rank a page for a certain term (code that will soon be removed, as described further below). It then created about 100 of what it calls “synthetic” searches, queries that few people, if anyone, would ever enter into Google.
These searches returned no matches on Google or Bing — or a tiny number of poor quality matches, in a few cases — before the experiment went live. With the code enabled, Google placed a honeypot page to show up at the top of each synthetic search.
The only reason these pages appeared on Google was because Google forced them to be there. There was nothing that made them naturally relevant for these searches. If they started to appeared at Bing after Google, that would mean that Bing took Google’s bait and copied its results.
This all happened in December. When the experiment was ready, about 20 Google engineers were told to run the test queries from laptops at home, using Internet Explorer, with Suggested Sites and the Bing Toolbar both enabled. They were also told to click on the top results. They started on December 17. By December 31, some of the results started appearing on Bing.
Here’s an example, which is still working as I write this, hiybbprqag at Google:
and the same exact match at Bing:
Here’s another, for mbzrxpgjys at Google:
and the same match at Bing:
Here’s one more, this time for indoswiftjobinproduction, at Google:
And at Bing:
To be clear, before the test began, these queries found either nothing or a few poor quality results on Google or Bing. Then Google made a manual change, so that a specific page would appear at the top of these searches, even though the site had nothing to do with the search. Two weeks after that, some of these pages began to appear on Bing for these searches.
It strongly suggests that Bing was copying Google’s results, by watching what some people do at Google via Internet Explorer.

The Google Ranking Signal

Only a small number of the test searches produced this result, about 7 to 9 (depending on when exactly Google checked) out of the 100. Google says it doesn’t know why they didn’t all work, but even having a few appear was enough to convince the company that Bing was copying its results.
As I wrote earlier, Bing is far from identical to Google for many queries. This suggests that even if Bing is using search activity at Google to improve its results, that’s only one of many signals being considered.
Search engines all have ranking algorithms that use various signals to determine which pages should come first. What words are used on the page? How many links point at that page? How important are those links estimated to be? What words appear in the links pointing at the page? How important is the web site estimated to be? These are just some of the signals that both Bing and Google use.
Google’s test suggests that when Bing has many of the traditional signals, as is likely for popular search topics, it relies mostly on those. But in cases where Bing has fewer trustworthy signals, such as “long tail” searches that bring up fewer matches, then Bing might lean more on how Google ranks pages for those searches.
In cases where there are no signals other than how Google ranks things, such as with the synthetic queries that Google tested, then the Google “signal” may come through much more.

Do Users Know (Or Care)?

Do Internet Explorer users know that they might be helping Bing in the way Google alleges? Technically, yes — as best I can tell. Explicitly, absolutely not.
Internet Explorer makes clear (to those who bother to read its privacy policy) that by default, it’s going to capture some of your browsing data, unless you switch certain features off. It may also gather more data if you enable some features.

Suggested Sites

Suggested Sites is one of likely ways that Bing may have been gathering information about what’s happening on Google. This is a feature (shown to the right) that suggests other sites to visit, based on the site you’re viewing.
Microsoft does disclose that Suggested Sites collects information about sites you visit. From the privacy policy:

When Suggested Sites is turned on, theaddresses of websites you visit are sent to Microsoft, together with standard computer information.

To help protect your privacy, the information is encrypted when sent to Microsoft. Information associated with the web address, such as search terms or data you entered in forms might be included.

For example, if you visited the Microsoft.com search website at http://search.microsoft.com and entered “Seattle” as the search term, the full address http://search.microsoft.com/results.aspx?q=Seattle&qsc0=0&FORM=QBMH1&mkt=en-US will be sent.

I’ve bolded the key parts. What you’re searching on gets sent to Microsoft. Even though the example provided involves a search on Microsoft.com, the policy doesn’t prevent any search — including those at Google — from being sent back.
It makes sense that the Suggested Sites feature needs to report the URL you’re viewing back to Microsoft. Otherwise, it doesn’t know what page to show you suggestions for. The Google Toolbar does the same thing, tells Google what page you’re viewing, if you have the PageRank feature enabled.
But to monitor what you’re clicking on in search results? There’s no reason I can see for Suggested Sites to do that — if it indeed does. But even if it does log clicks, Microsoft may feel that this is “standard computer information” that the policy allows to be collected.

The Bing Bar

There’s also the Bing Bar — a Bing toolbar — that Microsoft encourages people to install separately from Internet Explorer (IE may come with it pre-installed through some partner deals. When you install the toolbar, by default it is set to collect information to “improve” your experience, as you can see:
The install page highlights some of what will be collected and how it will be used:

“improve your online experience with personalized content by allowing us to collectadditional information about your system configuration, the searches you do, websites you visit, and how you use our software. We will also use this information to help improve our products and services.”

Again, I’ve bolded the key parts. The Learn More page about the data the Bing Bar collects ironically says less than what’s directly on the install page.
It’s hard to argue that gathering information about what people search for at Google isn’t covered. Technically, there’s nothing misleading — even if Bing, for obvious reasons, isn’t making it explicit that to improve its search results, it might look at what Bing Bar users search for at Google and click on there.

What About The Google Toolbar & Chrome?

Google has its own Google Toolbar, as well as its Chrome browser. So I asked Google. Does it do the same type of monitoring that it believes Bing does, to improve Google’s search results?
“Absolutely not. The PageRank feature sends back URLs, but we’ve never used those URLs or data to put any results on Google’s results page. We do not do that, and we will not do that,” said Singhal.
Actually, Google has previously said that the toolbar does play a role in ranking. Google uses toolbar data in part to measure site speed — and site speed was a ranking signal that Google began using last year.
Instead, Singhal seems to be saying that the URLs that the toolbar sees are not used for finding pages to index (something Google’s long denied) or to somehow find new results to add to the search results.
As for Chrome, Google says the same thing — there’s no information flowing back that’s used to improve search rankings. In fact, Google stressed that the only information that flows back at all from Chrome is what people are searching for from within the browser, if they are using Google as their search engine.

Postscript: See Google On Toolbar: We Don’t Use Bing’s Searches

Is It Illegal?

Suffice to say, Google’s pretty unhappy with the whole situation, which does raise a number of issues. For one, is what Bing seems to be doing illegal? Singhal was “hesitant” to say that since Google technically hasn’t lost anything. It still has its own results, even if it feels Bing is mimicking them.

Is it Cheating?

If it’s not illegal, is what Bing may be doing unfair, somehow cheating at the search game?
On the one hand, you could say it’s incredibly clever. Why not mine what people are selecting as the top results on Google as a signal? It’s kind of smart. Indeed, I’m pretty sure we’ve had various small services in the past that have offered for people to bookmark their top choices from various search engines.
Google doesn’t see it as clever.
“It’s cheating to me because we work incredibly hard and have done so for years but they just get there based on our hard work,” said Singhal. “I don’t know how else to call it but plain and simple cheating. Another analogy is that it’s like running a marathon and carrying someone else on your back, who jumps off just before the finish line.”
In particular, Google seems most concerned that the impact of mining user data on its site potentially pays off the most for Bing on long-tail searches, unique searches where Google feels it works especially hard to distinguish itself.

Ending The Experiment

Now that Google’s test is done, it will be removing the one-time code it added to allow for the honeypot pages to be planted. Google has proudly claimed over the years that it had no such ability, as proof of letting its ranking algorithm make decisions. It has no plans to keep this new ability and wants to kill it, so things are back to “normal.”
Google also stressed to me that the code only worked for this limited set of synthetic queries — and that it had an additional failsafe. Should any of the test queries suddenly become even mildly popular for some reason, the honeypot page for that query would no longer show.
This means if you test the queries above, you may no longer see the same results at Google. However, I did see all these results myself before writing this, along with some additional ones that I’ve not done screenshots for. So did several of my other editors yesterday.

Why Open Up Now?

What prompted Google to step forward now and talk with me about its experiment? A grand plan to spoil Bing’s big search event today? A clever way to distract from current discussions about its search quality? Just a coincidence of timing? In the end, whatever you believe about why Google is talking now doesn’t really matter. The bigger issue is whether you believe what Bing is doing is fair play or not. But here’s the strange backstory.
Recall that Google got its experiment confirmed on December 31. The next day — New Year’s Day — TechCrunch ran an article called Why We Desperately Need a New (and Better) Googlefrom guest author Vivek Wadhwa, praising Blekko for having better date search than Google and painting a generally dismal picture of Google’s relevancy overall.
I doubt Google had any idea that Wadhwa’s article was coming, and I’m virtually certain Wadhwa had no idea about Google’s testing of Bing. But his article kicked off a wave of “Google’s results suck” posts.
Trouble In the House of Google from Jeff Atwood of Coding Horror appeared on January 3;Google’s decreasingly useful, spam-filled web search from Marco Arment of Instapaper came out on January 5. Multiple people mistakenly reported Paul Kedrosky’s December 2009 article about struggling to research a dishwasher as also being part of the current wave. It wasn’t, but on January 11, Kedrosky weighed in with fresh thoughts in Curation is the New Search is the New Curation.
The wave kept going. It’s still going. Along the way, Search Engine Land itself had several pieces, with Conrad Saam’s column on January 12, Google vs. Bing: The Fallacy Of The Superior Search Engine, gaining a lot of attention. In it, he did a short survey of 20 searches and concluded that Google and Bing weren’t that different.

Time To Talk? Come To Our Event?

The day after that column appeared, I got a call from Google. Would I have time to come talk in person about something they wanted to show me, relating to relevancy? Sure. Checking my calendar, I said January 27 — a Thursday — would be a good time for me to fly up from where I work in Southern California to Google’s Mountain View campus.
The day after that, Bing contacted me. They were hosting an event on February 1 to talk about the state of search and wanted to make sure I had the date saved, in case I wanted to come up for it. I said I’d make it. I later learned that the event was being organized by Wadhwa, author of that TechCrunch article.
A change on Google’s end shifted my meeting to January 28, last Friday. As is typical when I visit Google, I had a number of different meetings to talk about various products and issues. My last meeting of the day was with Singhal and Cutts — where they shared everything I’ve described above, explaining this is one reason why Google and Bing might be looking so similar, as our columnist found.
Yes, they wanted the news to be out before the Bing event happened — an event that Google is participating in. They felt it was important for the overall discussion about search quality. But the timing of the news is being so close to the event is down to when I could make the trip to Google. If I’d have been able to go in earlier, then I might have been writing this a week ago.
Meanwhile, you have this odd timing of Wadhwa’s TechCrunch article and the Bing event he’s organizing. I have no idea if Wadhwa was booked to do the Bing event before his article went out or if he was contracted to do this after, perhaps because Bing saw the debate over Google’s quality kick off and decided it was good to ride it. I’ll try to find out.
In the end, for whatever reasons, the findings of Google’s experiment and Bing’s event are colliding, right in the middle of a renewed focus of attention on search quality. Was this all planned to happen? Gamesmanship by both Google and Bing? Just odd coincidences? I go with the coincidences, myself.
Video

Windows 8 Consumer Preview, Build 8250

Yeah its lengthy again! Because I had to cover most of it. And it indeed covers almost all of the basic features in the Windows 8 Consumer Preview, Build 8250 – Evaluation copy.Pros::
-Very fast Startup, U must have noticed, it hardly took 5 secs!
-Fast
-Great look
-More informative system apps like copy, taskManager
-And many more

Cons::
-No driver support presently
-It doesn’t come with .Net activated. Many apps need it and if your behind some Proxy, Its really a pain in the ass. I had spent a lot of time to get it working!
-Photos, Reader and other windows apps are not smooth
-Windows apps eats up a lot of resources.

Any queries please post. Will try to get back with an answer asap.

 

Video

MIUI ICS-4.0.4 AdyScorpius MIUI-v4 v2.3.31 Video review

MIUI v4 ICS latest
Pros::
– Awesome Look
– In-built firewall for,
-Data usage control of each app
-Call spamming control
-SMS spamming control
-Customisable Notifications
-In-built Torch
-Awesome In-built Music player with lyrics support
-In-built Full screen caller Id support
-Highly customization in themes
-In built Proxy support -(to certain extent)
-Updates every Friday!!
-And many more

Cons::
-Worse battery life
-Discharges as u see when in use

-Deep sleep works great! So can last longer, may be a day, If used only to answer and make calls

Hope you guys like this effort. Thumbs up if you do.
Any clarifications please comment, I will get asap.

 

motorola-atrix-laptop-dock-straight
Gallery

Android into desktop OS!

Motorola is turning Android into a desktop OS with Webtop 3.0
motorola-atrix-laptop-dock-straight
Can Android 4.0 replace a desktop PC? We have already examined that question, and now it appears Motorola believes the answer is yes. Their Droid RAZR is expected to see a software update to Android 4.0 as early as next week, which delivers a totally new Webtop experience.
Previously, Motorola’s Webtop software allowed a phone to plugin into a smart dock that launched a custom Linux desktop that featured Firefox for as the browser. We thought it was an innovative feature when it debuted at CES 2011, but the actual experience turned out to be pretty sluggish and frustrating.
We predicted that the Motorola Atrix 4G and Webtop software were a good indicator ofwhere Android was headed, and now it appears that has come true.
A leaked copy of the Android 4.0 update for the Droid RAZR reveals a new “Webtop 3.0 beta” that does away with the limited Linux desktop and provides users with a full Android 4.0 tablet UI when a device is docked to a larger display.
I’m pretty excited to see that this different-UI-for-different-displays feature is finally coming to Android phones. Hopefully handset makers will enable it over HDMI, MHL, and eventually WiFi Display.
This is similar to the functionality of the new ASUS Padfone, but it’s interesting to see Motorola go this direction after the acquisition by Google.
We now expect that Motorola will include this feature on all their new high-end Android phones. Check out the quick video below to get a sneak peek of what it will look like.
 
project-glass-630
Gallery

Google’s augmented reality glasses get real! – No need of a smartphone if this is true!

project-glass-630
Google’s Project Glass is the team quietly working on Google’s augmented-reality glasses project, which will provide users with smartphone functionality without the smartphone. On it’s Google+ brand page, the Project Glass team has announced that the glasses are real, and have begun testing at Google HQ.
While it’ll still be months (or years) before the glasses are officially up for public consumption, Google has released a nifty video to show us what the future of augmented reality could be.

We recently conducted a poll as to whether people were actually interested in Google glasses, and a whopping 66% of you responded with a resounding YES! Obviously, people who read Android and Me are the early adopters, and we have to wonder how Android-powered glasses would perform in the general public. The glasses are rumored to go on sale sometime next year, and will likely cost about as much as today’s smartphones, so we won’t have to wait too long to see our dreams for a  Star Trek future come to life.
Who out there is as stoked as we are for Google’s glasses vision to come to reality? Sound off in the comments.

flexible-amoled_0
Gallery

Samsung’s flexible displays – Thin and unbreakable! code named ‘Youm’


Samsung has been showing its interest in making flexible displays for quite some time now. When concepts like the future of mobile video and Galaxy Skin started showing up, we saw this as something too amazing to be true. But the Korean manufacturer has proved that such technology is currently very possible, and it is coming very soon.Samsung has just named this technology, and it seems it will go by the name of “Youm.” With a name established and trademark filed in (along with WAMOLED, FAMOLED, PAMOLED, TAMOLED), this product seems to be right on track for its expected 2012 release.

Said displays are not only exciting due to their foldable nature, but they are also said to be thinner, lighter and unbreakable (which can be seen in the video below). This will allow us to make watches, foldable devices, smartphones with interesting shapes and probably even scrolls. (I know I can’t wait to wear my robe and pull out a scroll tablet.)

In summary, Samsung is able to achieve this by removing multiple layers from displays (mostly glass and other solid materials). Youm is made out of four layers: Polariser, Encap, Organic layer and TFT film.
Such technology should be arriving by the end of 2012, if all goes right. But 2013, at the latest, will be the year of fold-able smartphones and tablets. Are you guys as excited as I am? What kind of products would you like to see featuring Youm displays?

If you like the song in the video search for it “Amoled, a-a-a-amoled”
[Via: OLED-Display, Electronista]

30-Rock-FaceDOTcom-age-detection
Gallery

Age Detection!! – Face.com, also an API to implement this in your Web/Mobile App!!

Face.com Brings Facial Recognition to the Masses, Now with Age Detection: Interview With CEO –

30 Rock FaceDOTcom age detection

Face.com’s API now returns an age estimation for faces it detects in photos – seen here with some recognizable examples.

Looking at someone’s face can tell you a lot about who they are. Running a picture through Face.com‘s systems let’s you turn those instincts into cold hard data. The Israel-based company has made a name for itself over the past few years by providing some of the best facial recognition technology available on the web. To date, developers all over the world have used their API to find nearly 41 billion faces! More than just detecting and identifying faces, the Face.com API provides all sorts of great data: gender, presence of a smile, approximate mood, etc. The latest innovation? Face.com can now accurately estimate the age of the faces it sees. Singularity Hub spoke with CEO and Co-Founder Gil Hirsch about the new Age Detection feature, the success the company has enjoyed so far, and the future of facial recognition technology.
Instead of trying to understand what makes someone look a certain age, Face.com simply let their program figure it out on its own. Hirsch explained that most of what Face.com does is based on machine vision and machine learning. They give their system a large database of faces (culled from Google images, for instance), provide approximate ages for each (which comes from humans originally), and then have the computer develop its own algorithms for age detection. The eventual detection program is complex enough that Hirsch can’t give all the details involved in determining each face’s age, though he can generalize that the eyes and facial structure (bones, muscles, etc) are probably very important. He also knows that the API only uses the face itself, no input from hairstyles, ears, etc

Brad Pitt FaceDOTcom Age Detection

Face.com does a pretty good estimation for this pic of Brad Pitt. Thank goodness it

In the end, though, the only really important thing to ask about Face.com’s Age Detection, is “does it work.” Well, you can judge that for yourself with the various example cases shown below. Hirsch, however, is clearly pleased. Humans, it turns out, have a pretty hard time determining the exact ages of faces anyway. So while Face.com’s API isn’t 100% accurate, it does very well against its biological counterparts. When the confidence in each age measurement (seen as a percentage in some of the samples) is high, Hirsch says that it’s a “fairly close call” between whether the API or a human would do a better job. That’s pretty phenomenal considering that humans have a lot more contextual clues to use than the Face.com API. In the end, the Age Detection feature isn’t meant to be perfect (Hirsch says female celebrities are always going to be difficult to handle, for instance), it’s just meant to be a helpful addition to the API.
The near term applications for the update show how useful it might be. Hirsch says test cases include ad targeting (got to grab that 18-25 year old male demographic) and video verification services. The latter scenario is perhaps a little more interesting. Using Age Detection in video chat services could keep adult predators from preying on kids. Or it could even help pair up groups of people according to some of their key characteristics (age, gender, mood, etc). Looking further down the line I wouldn’t be surprised to see this as a helpful social media tool (got to put those old photos in the correct place on your timeline), or in CCTV security camera footage analysis, or in interactive video billboards.
What seems certain is that we will see much more of Face.com in the future. The accuracy of their core facial recognition feature keeps improving (up 30% with this latest update) and Hirsch says they’ve secured two very big deals in the past few months, both in Russia. Mail.ru (with 100M+ users) and Yandex.Fotki, a photo site with millions of visitors of its own, are each using Face.com’s services now. There are also a few more such collaborations “in the pipe” according to Hirsch. I tried to get the CEO to acknowledge Face.com’s involvement with Facebook, but he wouldn’t comment. Still, I don’t see how anyone else could be behind the social media giant’s recent forays into facial recognition, so speculating technophiles like myself should probably measure Face.com influence as reaching to many hundreds of millions of online users…if not billions.
That means to some extent that we already live in the era of ubiquitous facial recognition, and Face.com is one of the companies that brought us there. The future for this global innovator is going to include even more data gleaned from images of our faces. Age, gender, mood, smiling, rotation – those are all old news now. As Face.com moves forward, Hirsch says they’ll keep widening their perspective, hopefully teaching their API to identify “anything we as people can identify.” Get ready, readers, it may be only a few years before a video camera knows more about who and what you are than your own mother.

Leonardo DiCaprio FaceDOTcom Age Detection

FaceDOTcom age detection 1

FaceDOTcom age detection kids

[image credits: Face.com]
[source: Face.com, Gil Hirsch]

torr
Link

Torrents in IITB

Before we start off, take a look at the working screenshot,

Downloading torrents at 1Mbps in IITB network

Downloading torrents at 1Mbps in IITB network

The method below was last tested to be working on 9th Aug 2014, well that's my convocation date :D

 Setup Instruction:

  1. First download the following two software from the internet.
    • Vidalia bundle – network tunneler.
    • Vuze – torrent client
    If you are having troubles to access vidalia website, use iphiders. iphider.org works I think.
  2. Setup ‘Vidalia’ with your proxy settings and keep in running in background
  3. Now open ‘Vuze’ and navigate to Tools – -> Options
    The options might have been moved around a bit from the time this tutorial has been written. However, the central idea would remain the same. Just look for similar ones when you couldn't find the exact setting listed in the instructions below.
    • Under “Mode” – (The first selectable choice) make sure you have advanced checked.
    • Select the “Connections” tab. Now look towards the bottom and you will see networks. Under networks you will see some choices. Un-check all but “The Torr Onion Network” (last option).
    • Expand the “connections” tab by clicking the [+] sign by connections.
    • Select “Proxy Options” under connections. Now,
      • Make sure “Enable proxying of tracker communications” is checked.
      • Make sure “I have a SOCKS proxy” is checked.
      • Host should be your localhost, using the actual numbers is ideal. In my case 127.0.0.1
      • Port should be the Socks port Tor tells us to use for Socks services. I have mine set to the default of 9050.
      • Username should be “<none>” without quotes only!
      • Password should be blank.
    • Now under “Peer Communications”,
      • Make sure “Enable proxying of peer communications (outgoing connections only) [restart required]” is checked.
      • Make sure “Inform tracker of limitation” is unchecked. -“Socks Version” Should be set to V4a.
      • Make sure “Use same proxy settings for tracker and peer communications proxy” is checked.

Now hit “Apply” and restart “Vuze” and ensure that “Vidalia” is running.

A similar configuration can be used for any other torrent client. In the demo, as you can see, I was using utorrent.
If this didn't work for you. Just comment here and I will see if I can help. Although I'm not behind a peers blocked network anymore and can't promise. But yeah, cross your fingers, someone else might come to your rescue if I couldn't :)
Android-Partitions
Link

Android Partitions : boot, system, recovery, data, cache & misc

Android Partitions

Unless you have been using your Android phone just for calls, SMS, browsing and basic apps, you should know that Android uses several partitions to organize files and folders on the device. Each of these partitions has a distinct role in the functionality of the device, but not many Android users know the significance of each partition and its contents. In this guide, we will take you on a tour of Android partitions, what they contain and what can be the possible consequences of modifying their content.

Let’s start with a list of standard internal memory partitions on Android phones and tablets. These are:

  • /boot
  • /system
  • /recovery
  • /data
  • /cache
  • /misc

In addition, there are the SD card partitions.

  • /sdcard
  • /sd-ext

Note that only /sdcard is found in all Android devices and the rest are present only in select devices. Let’s now take a look at the purpose and contents of each of these partitions.
/boot
This is the partition that enables the phone to boot, as the name suggests. It includes the bootloader and the kernel. Without this partition, the device will simply not be able to boot. Wiping this partition from recovery should only be done if absolutely required and once done, the device must NOT be rebooted before installing a new one, which can be done by installing a ROM that includes a /boot partition.
/system
This partition basically contains the entire operating system, other than the kernel and the bootloader. This includes the Android user interface as well as all the system applications that come pre-installed on the device. Wiping this partition will remove Android from the device without rendering it unbootable, and you will still be able to put the phone into recovery or bootloader mode to install a new ROM.
/recovery
The recovery partition can be considered as an alternative boot partition that lets you boot the device into a recovery console for performing advanced recovery and maintenance operations on it. To learn more about this partition and its contents, see the ‘About Android Recovery’ section of our guide to ClockworkMod recovery.
/data
Also called userdata, the data partition contains the user’s data – this is where your contacts, messages, settings and apps that you have installed go. Wiping this partition essentially performs a factory reset on your device, restoring it to the way it was when you first booted it, or the way it was after the last official or custom ROM installation. When you perform a wipe data/factory reset from recovery, it is this partition that you are wiping.
/cache
This is the partition where Android stores frequently accessed data and app components. Wiping the cache doesn’t effect your personal data but simply gets rid of the existing data there, which gets automatically rebuilt as you continue using the device.
/misc
This partition contains miscellaneous system settings in form of on/off switches. These settings may include CID (Carrier or Region ID), USB configuration and certain hardware settings etc. This is an important partition and if it is corrupt or missing, several of the device’s features will will not function normally.
/sdcard
This is not a partition on the internal memory of the device but rather the SD card. In terms of usage, this is your storage space to use as you see fit, to store your media, documents, ROMs etc. on it. Wiping it is perfectly safe as long as you backup all the data you require from it, to your computer first. Though several user-installed apps save their data and settings on the SD card and wiping this partition will make you lose all that data.
On devices with both an internal and an external SD card – devices like the Samsung Galaxy S and several tablets – the /sdcard partition is always used to refer to the internal SD card. For the external SD card – if present – an alternative partition is used, which differs from device to device. In case of Samsung Galaxy S series devices, it is /sdcard/sd while in many other devices, it is /sdcard2. Unlike /sdcard, no system or app data whatsoever is stored automatically on this external SD card and everything present on it has been added there by the user. You can safely wipe it after backing up any data from it that you need to save.
/sd-ext
This is not a standard Android partition, but has become popular in the custom ROM scene. It is basically an additional partition on your SD card that acts as the /data partition when used with certain ROMs that have special features called APP2SD+ or data2ext enabled. It is especially useful on devices with little internal memory allotted to the /data partition. Thus, users who want to install more programs than the internal memory allows can make this partition and use it with a custom ROM that supports this feature, to get additional storage for installing their apps. Wiping this partition is essentially the same as wiping the /data partition – you lose your contacts, SMS, market apps and settings.
With this, we conclude our tour of Android partitions. Now whenever you install a ROM or mod that requires you to wipe certain partitions before the installation, you should be in a better position to know what you’re losing and what not and thus, you’ll know what to backup and what not.