Slashdot Mirror

Or buy shares in Snapster.

Although this is in the context of a discussion on the estate/inheritance taxes, I think it's relevant to this discussion as well. This is Bill Moyers interviewing Bill Gates, Sr. (You know who's Father).

Entire transcript here: http://www.pbs.org/now/transcript/transcript_inher itance.html

MOYERS: Why shouldn't you be able to direct your money to where you want it to go in your will or however you want to do it? I mean, you earned it.

GATES: "You earned it" is really a matter of "you earned it with the indispensable help of your government."

You earned it in this wonderful place. If you'd been born in West Africa, you would not have earned it. It would not have occurred. Your wealth is a function of being an American.

GATES: The huge disparity in wealth that's happening, is something that is, I think, really dangerous.

MOYERS: Why?

GATES: Wealth is power, Bill. And it just is not a good situation. And the examples of the aristocracies of Europe are so clear. We don't want to have a country like that. Who was it that said, it was Louis Brandeis who said...

MOYERS: Justice of the Supreme Court...

GATES: Yes, indeed. And he said, you know, we can either have a situation where we have a small number of people with a huge amount of wealth or we can have a democracy. But we can't have both. That's clear wisdom.

Anyway, hope you don't think I'm attacking you. Just how I see the situation! 8)
-l

The FCC has already decided that it will allow companies to own much more than they can now. The FCC director stated that this oh so important decision does not need any debate. He tried to shut down the debate by refusing to fund town meetings around the country debating this and informing the general public. He has definitely been bought by the likes of Clear Channel. This will further erode democracy in this country, and if you now hate DMCA and its ilk, wait until the next pass. Laws like DMCA and PATRIOT 2 get passed because there is a lack of healthy debate. It has been shown time and time again that Clear Channel refuses to report on such items. If you don't believe me, when was this particular debate even mentioned on any of Clear Channel's stations? The only time that I saw this reported was on a PBS program called "NOW with Bill Moyers". This was an excellent program that tried to look at the issue from all sides. You can find an in-depth discussion here Little by little our rights are being taken away from us. Just look at all of the recent laws implemented, DMCA, copyrights, PATRIOT act etc.

We need to act now, before the decision has been rendered. Once it has, there is very little chance of getting it changed. What's at stake is the very nature of democracy in this country. There is no way to rectify this if a bad decision is made. How do we rectify this in 10 years from now, once Clear Channel has bought up the few remaining independent stations? Do we really expect that at that point, a healthy debate about breaking up Clear Channel will be allowed by Clear Channel?

Clear Channel says it needs to be allowed to buy the remaining independent stations in order to become profitable. If they haven't become profitable at this size, what makes us believe that will become profitable when they have taken over the rest? Lets face it folks, these guys are lying to us saying that they are not profitable. They are quite profitable now, and what's really driving this is pure greed at the expense of this country's core values. They are destroying this country at the expense of a few bucks. Enough is enough.

I think the key question is one of control.

The biggest environmental problmes comes from the problems nobody saw, or accidents. So yes.. there is no study with the problem that WILL happen.

American Killer Bee's are a classic accident of biology.

There are many cases in the past where one organism was introduced to fight another, and nobody foresaw that they would become the pest organism as well.

Don't mistake me for somebody who is completely against GM food's. I just have a heealthy skepticisim.

There are good reasons for them, especially given population growth: More food per acre, More nutrients in regional foods (golden rice), Easier to take Medicines (vaccine in a banana).

I just think there is alot of economic insentive to move forward. So I bias against to try and stay balanced. Let's not rush in.

And THEN there is the patent issue. I am 100% with you there.

Federal investigators now believe that some of the suspected hijackers entered the United States using stolen Saudi Arabian passports that had doctored photos. A Saudi Arabian man has surfaced with the same name as one of the hijackers, and he claims his passport was stolen while he was attending university in Denver, Colo.

...Hijackers were able to purchase documents saying they were residents of Virginia...

Nabil al-Marabh is believed to be one of Osama bin Laden's key operatives in North America... He had driver's licenses from several states, including a recently acquired license to transport hazardous materials... al-Marabh had been detained at the U.S.-Canada border on June 27, 2001, with a fake Canadian passport.

Three Arab men were arrested at the apartment of Nabil al-Marabh shortly after the Sept. 11 attacks. In the apartment, investigators found false immigration documents, a stolen passport and Social Security card, and licenses to transport hazardous materials, along with sketches of aircraft and airport security badges.

But rather than waffle about it further, I'll provide a few links. Cringely spoke about micropayments some time ago ("Let's Get Small", "Paying the Piper"), and I wrote to him about the former, gaining a mention in the latter -- he thought that my observation about voluntary payments was particularly insightful. I document that correspondence in an article on my own website ("Fame and Money"), and I also wrote an essay critiquing a non-deterministic micropayment system by Ron Rivest ("Micropayments: Are Lotteries the Answer?") which ties in with the aforementioned bits.

But rather than waffle about it further, I'll provide a few links. Cringely spoke about micropayments some time ago ("Let's Get Small", "Paying the Piper"), and I wrote to him about the former, gaining a mention in the latter -- he thought that my observation about voluntary payments was particularly insightful. I document that correspondence in an article on my own website ("Fame and Money"), and I also wrote an essay critiquing a non-deterministic micropayment system by Ron Rivest ("Micropayments: Are Lotteries the Answer?") which ties in with the aforementioned bits.

http://www.pbs.org/cringely/pulpit/pulpit20010823. html

Lately, kind sir, I have been quite perturbed by certain events that have been proliferating in our society. Was it not so long ago, that in more civilized times, children respected and obeyed their parents, under the threat of a firm thrashing if their impudence and audacity got out of hand? But oh, kind father, the trials that parents today must suffer! Not just the other day, whist I was dining upon a fresh garden salad, my daughter, of not even 6 years old, insisted upon uprooting most unrest in requesting I purchase for her a milky-way bar! I quickly remarked to the impudent creature that one of our many servants would be more than willing to carriage her to the local general store; but no! she insisted that I -personally- drive the buggy to make the purchase! Oh wise man of God, what is a poor woman to do in these hard times! Before you can open your Moses-lovin' mouth Pastor, I have proposed a final solution to the problem of "youthful indiscretion"- Prison Labor!

Before you bring up cries of protest from your liberalism-saturated mind, hear me out! Our disrespectful children will learn the true meaning of honor and sacrifice while they're hard at work pounding license plates and assembling adding machines! Honestly, what better way is there to whip our children into shape? Scare them with threats of the boogey-man? Psh-haw! Just look at the wondrous effects prison labor had on the Dell kid! Not only will prison labor harden our children into obedient automatons, it will show them the reality they will have to face if they follow their current paths and become criminals!

Thank you for your attention kind Minister, and God-Bless!

Take a look at this report then think about the alternitives.

Use DU and leave DUoxide all over the place or have an crack pot dictators armored collumn rolling down the street.

What is more likely to be hazardous to ones health?

Also the whole duck and cover thing IS A good idea. Most of the deaths and near 100% of injuries are from blast/shrapnel. The only way you are going to have to worry about radation is if you are ground zero (in which case you are dead faster than you can think it) or the weapon was a ground burst (fallout)

You see there are roughly 2 ways a nuke is used...
1. Air burst. This is used for destroying a large area/ soft target. the weapon is detonated high up... I have the numbers for 1 MT of 17,500 ft. At this altitude there is effectivly 0 fallout. You will get a flash exposure of gamma, Xray and thermal over a limited radius, about 7 mi for 1MT thermal radius, and if you can protect your self from the thermal the others are generally survivable. Duck and cover. next is blast, this is the workhorse for nukes.
25 Mt air burst follow...
12 PSI 6.5 Mi radius: Area is a glass ash tray 90% dead 10% wishing
5 PSI 10.7 Mi radius: Heavy damage to all structures 50% dead 40% injured
2 PSI 20 Mi radius: moderate damage to structures 5% dead 45% injured.
1 PSI 30.4 Mi radius: light damage 0 dead 25% injured

now if you do the math to calculate the surface area there are more people in the rings further out that in the ash tray zones on the inside, thus debris/shrapnel is the biggest killer and duck and cover is VERY good advice

2. Surface Burst. Used for taking out bunkers/silos/millitary stuff. Gererally away from population centers. This use has fallout. The blast radius is much smaller as the earth is absorbing a lot of the energy.
Info from google and here

That goes against their previous rants against space and format-shifting. RIAA/MPAA wants you to purchase the same license again and again every time a new media format comes out.

It's not as though WiFi is anything new, like it just started yesterday. Anyone who regularly visits Slashdot has seen WiFi in use for over a year, as well as being talked about on other sites. Obviously, this is nothing new, especially to those of us on top of technology; then again, we are probably the same people who first used Napster and saw its potential. Once again, the RIAA is behind the times, retroactively playing catch-up.

This makes me think about earlier predictions of Bluetooth and the goals of MS (among others) to have every home device Internet capable (with the help of IPv6). This means (potentially) every device will act as a mini-router for other devices around it, interconnecting everything in the world. Let's suppose, for a minute, that this is valid and MAY actually happen -- perhaps even in the near future -- where do ISPs fall in the scheme of things? Ideally, they'd be defunct; realistically, they'd probably provide more of a continental and WAN service between cities, countries, and across oceans. However, with devices talking to one another using <insert favorite wireless technology here> within the immediate vicinity, there would be no traffic regulation in a city/densely populated environment. This means illegal file sharing and copyright infringement will still be around (as always), but now be ultimately impossible for the RIAA to track because there would be no central repository trafficking data (i.e. ISPs).

Ever since the attack on Napster, I saw the RIAA's tactics as those of greed and ignorance. Instead of fostering technology, most companies see it as a threat and look to control it. Of course, this is a case of cause and effect and so people find better ways against being tracked and, ultimately, caught. I applaud the RIAA for what they are doing because 1) it is their right to defend what they own (although I may not agree with their tactics) and 2) technology and software have made extreme advances since 1999 to combat the oppressive techniques of copyright holders.

Just a pet peeve of mine: Marconi did not invent radio. Nikola Tesla did.

Cheers,

http://www.pbs.org/cringely/pulpit/pulpit20030626. html

http://www.pbs.org/cringely/pulpit/pulpit20030703. html

http://www.pbs.org/cringely/pulpit/pulpit20030626. html

http://www.pbs.org/cringely/pulpit/pulpit20030703. html

Face it. You will not get a solution to a technical problem like spam from these jokers on Capitol Hill. And for those of you who think spam is a social problem, you will not get a solution to a social problem from these people either.

Wow. Why did I ever believe Congress was a place that American business, be it commercial, social, or cultural, got done? Did Congress always stand opposed to the individual as it does today?

Here's my take on why it's only the private sector. I apologize if it is misinformed, this is how I believe "the system" to work:

Lawmakers are painfully unaware of how the digital world works. To quote the article:

"Frankly, I'm finding a lack of attention and a lack of understanding by the Congress and the (Bush) administration as to the serious nature of the threat"

How do lawmakers then legislate over such issues? They create special investigative subcommittees, comprised of individuals of the same body, to research the issue through study and hearings. The subcomittees' hearings involve individuals and groups pertaining to the issue, most often lobbyists working for... you guessed it, the private sector. Obviously, the few months, maybe a year that that legislators have for their individual study leaves their knowledge of the workings of the digital world laughably small in comparision to the professional lobbyists for the large private sector organizations. The lawmakers, pressed for time, must rely upon their newly-found knowledge and the possibly (probably?) slanted "testimony" from said private sector organizations to make their decisions. Of course, by this time, developments over the past six months to a year may render the investigation, hearings and study obsolete.

Even if the digital rights issue were to become general relevance, could there be enough of a "grassroots" effort to have a noticeable effect? I defer to a recent interview on "Now with Bill Moyers" for my answer, spoken by one of my favorite political commentators, the Daily Show's Jon Stewart:

The country is, look,the general dialogue is being swayed by-- the people who are ideologically driven.

The five percent on each side that are so ideological driven that they-- will dictate the terms of the discussion. The other 90 percent of the country have lawns to mow, and kids to pick up from schools, and money to make, and-- things to do. Their lives are, they have entrusted-- we live in a representative democracy.

And so, we elect representatives to go do our bidding, so that we can-- get the leaves out of the gutter, and-- -- do the things around the house that-- need to be done. What the representatives have done over 200 years is set up a periphery, I think they call it the Beltway--

that is a-- obtuse enough that we can't penetrate it anymore, unless we spend all of our time. This is the way that it's been set up purposefully by both sides. And-- the financial industry, as well. They don't want average people to easily penetrate the workings. Because then we call them on it.

"Frankly, I'm finding a lack of attention and a lack of understanding by the Congress and the (Bush) administration as to the serious nature of the threat," he said. "It's not nearly as sexy, or as engaging, or as interesting as the threats that are posed by terrorists boarding aircraft, or terrorists threats to the Brooklyn Bridge

Issues that affect us all, but... Forthcoming cybersecurity legislation will be "meaningful regulatory approach to securing private-sector critical infrastructure" says Representative Adam Putnam

Shame it's only for the private sector. Ordinary decent home users would benefit greatly from a similary committee. Currently there is little or no useful media attention, which is a problem
Put it this way: if you were to hold a random sampling of U.S. citizens on cybersecurity, you would likely get a lot of semi- or un-informed views on it. The reason is simple: it's not considered important enough by society at large to have anything more than a knee-jerk reaction to it. If/when the details of cybersecurity (not just the fallout from high-profile cases) becomes a big thing in the media and in government, only then will the population at large (who are being spoonfed by popular media, remember) feel that it is important enough to become an issue.

Congress shouldn't take a "knee-jerk, let's legislate" approach to cybersecurity, Putnam answered. He noted that many people in Congress and in the public don't realize how many pieces of the U.S. critical infrastructure are controlled through networked technology. He used the example of flood-control gates on the Mississippi River or the power grids that serve stock markets.

No mention of the myriad other effects of problematic cybersecurity, such as that mentioned here, and presumably many similar more highly controlled privacy issues wrapped around the TIA and other institutional privacy violations.
Until then, it remains an issue for the interested parties and the various lobby groups, and now for the "private sector" affected by this committee. The average internet user doesn't understand the implementations, the "downsides" discussed ad nauseam on Slashdot, or the current infringements on privacy laws by the Bush administration and their agents, so there will be no popular upswing, no attempt to popularise privacy and security for Mr. Average Midwestern Suburbian, who currently doesn't spend as much time as we do reading up on "niche" issues such as this.
Ultimately, the population is only as interested in an issue such as cybersecurity as they are directly affected by it. Otherwise, it depends how the media portrays it. Think DMCA, think The Geneva Convention, think The Universal Convention on Human Rights. The US media targetted the DMCA issue at the public by suggesting that "hackers" would benefit if it wasn't in place. The Patriot Act was introduced to wide public acclaim because the media suggested "Terrorists" would benefit if it wasn't in place. The Geneva convention is flaunted in Guantanamo Bay, and the US public lets it past because the media doesn't highlight it.
If the general public - the majority of voters - are not negatively affected by the multivarious issues in cybersecurity - including things currently covered by wiretapping laws, TIA etc., and erosion of personal privacy - then it takes too much effort for them to take interest, and too much effort on the media's part to educate them.
Until it becomes an issue of general relevance, the voting public won't care, input will be limited to private sector industries, and their liberties will be further eroded until they have a mode of thought equivalent to "newspeak", with only the single state department/media line to go along with.

Iran Hostage crisis ---> Started under Carter. Ended under Reagan.

Actually it started in 1953 when Eisenhower ordered the CIA to overthrow the popularly elected (as in a real democratic election) prime minister of Iran, Mossadegh, by pushing Reza Pahlava, the Shah, to expel him. Riots ensued, the Shah fled, the CIA put the riots down, brought the Shaw back, and trained SAVAK; who went on to earn Amnesty International's award for "worst human rights record on the planet" in 1976. That's the year Carter was elected, he didn't take office 'till 77. I'm not sure how you can imply he was responsible for the revolt in 79 to overthrow a brutal and repressive regime.

As for Reagan's illustrious involvement in the hostage crisis: He traded weapons to the Ayatollah Khomeini, the forces of darkness, to secure their release. Even Reagan admitted it. A very clever move, now known as the October Surprise, which was significant in defeating Carter.

Star Wars ---> Dreamed up in the 70's continues today. Even Clinton continued to fund it.

"When President Reagan first issued his challenge to America's scientific community to find a defense against ballistic missiles..." Clinton did continue funding, but then Clinton governed as a moderate republican, unfortunately.

Grenada ---> Warehouses full of Soviet weapons seized just before the 'rebellion' was to start. Talk to 82nd airborne vets about what they found and saw before you think it was a joke.

Greneda was no joke for the Grenadines. They had made the mistake of electing Maurice Bishop who, alas, was mildly socialist. CIA destabilization began shortly thereafter under Carter in '79, actually, but given the animosity and outright betrayal of Carter by the UberRight in the defense organization (Ollie et al, see above), it's not clear he knew anything about it. Given that Grenada was a managed news event, you should be careful of any "news" you read about it, and the dangerous weapons they had. Remember pfc Lynch's "Rescue."

War on drugs ---> Bush Sr., Nancy was "Just say No to drugs." Not to mention drug use DID decline through the end of the 80's and early 90's. The war is 'lost' because we (people and government) lost focus not because it could not be won.

US prohibition has quite a long history, all of it embarrassing. Reagan did declare the "War on Drugs," but what that really meant, and continues to mean is difficult to ascertain. One thing is for sure, it is not about helping people. Mentioning Gary Webb's careful and exceptionally well documented journalism runs contrary to the charade, but the evidence is strong that under Reagan the CIA was supporting the sale of cocaine in the US to fund the Contras after congress confronted the CIA's arms sales underwritten funding.

Central America ---> What part? And no fair bringing up Nicaragua. You already have Iran-Contra on the list. And if you thing the Sandinistas were better than the Contras you're frikin' nuts.

The difference is the Sandinistas were the popularly elected government and the Contras were the private army of Samoza, evacuated, rearmed, retrained, and reinserted

Wright was a terrible father:

I never had the father feeling for my children. I only had it for my building.

It says that Einstein was married in 1903. Then in 1905, he published three papers, including his most famous one on the theory of relativity. So, the authors of the article used a quote from a man whose life contradicts the theory!

I just don't cosmic ray variation would account for more than half of the 20th century's climatic change. The variation just wouldn't be that great given the fact that the solar system simply hasn't moved very far in 100 years.

I'm just waiting for the antiscience republicans to jump on this. "See? Here's a study that says that cosmic rays cause climate change. Not greenhouse gases! See we were right to censor the EPA's report that global warming was primarly caused through human activity. Now let's continue with our report on how nicotine is not addictive, and creation science in our schools".

But you DONT buy music. You buy a license to use it.

Oppenheim kinda covered this when he and Lessig were taking questions. Here's the basic idea:
Q: When I buy music, am I buying a physical object which stores music, or am I buying a license to enjoy the music on that object?
A: No.

This is why I no longer buy products of the entertainment industry. (well, almost never).

Drugs Vs Music in the U.S.
Annual Sales

~$60 billion p.a.
$13.7 billion [2001]

For a group of people with 'no organization', they certainly make a lot of money.

Training aids, such as video, have been mentioned and can be invaluable. Certainly not common in my parent's athletic careers. More recent developments, such as tools to measure efficiency are helping us to figure out how, exactly, we do swim. Hard to believe, but it's something we simply don't yet know. In addition to training aids, scholarship and the parent's note of nutrition, recovery & kinesiology there's also been developments in pool construction. Water chemistry, temperature, lane rope & gutter design, floor & wall shapes, starting block design - there's a lot that goes into a world class pool. It could be argued that, with the pool, swimmers may have the largest equipment of all ;).

In the end, though, well the technical developments are significant, the sport still comes down to getting to the wall first. I think I'd find it difficult to be, say, a cyclist or to spend much of my life with a javelin knowing that owning the right equipment is half the battle...

Some gratuitous linkage

A quick google for '+iraqi +"super cannon" +hoax' returns zero hits. If it was a hoax it is not well documented. William Safire's article on the other hand seems quite credible.

As for the Brits: being an ally today doesn't change history. Since I am half-British I am glad to see they stepped up and took some responsibility here.

Ah yes, Switzerland! Home of stolen goods from all over the globe. Amoral bankers who don't care who you tortured, killed, and robbed to get your money, they only care that you hide it in their vaults. Seen any Jewish gold there recently?

3.14159

Wrong. PBS doesn't even get a quarter of its funding from your paycheck. Most of its funding comes from private sources. In short, if you don't like PBS, you just stop contributing to it.

I'd wager far more of your paycheck goes to farm subsidies than PBS. Maybe a search of old Frontline and NOW! episodes would illuminate the issue for you.

Alright, half a mile. link is here

British?

While not defending the record of the US military, maybe you should take your own advice.

On March 3, 1873, Congress passed the new law, later known as the Comstock Act. The statute defined contraceptives as obscene and illicit, making it a federal offense to disseminate birth control through the mail or across state lines.

So, there was at one time a very good reason for providers of birth control to wish to remain anonymous. And I am sure there are people in very high levels of government in the US who would like to make it that way again. That is probably impossible given current public attitudes, but you know, I heard that people who sell condoms are often terrorists....

You forgot PBS, but I'm guessing you probably meant "commercial broadcast network."

I guess I'll be switching to NewsHour with Jim Lehrer.

Right, and that is teh sux0r.

> How do you think America go to be where it is today? where do you suppose all of the things that allow for our quality of life comes from? that's right they come from other countries, so while you enjoy the availability (not that you necessarily have the means to buy them) of everything from cheap clothes to cheap food to cheap toys remember that almost all of that comes from countries where the people who make them are living well below your standard...
>
> everything costs something at the expense of others,

With the exception of Chinese prison labor, those things do not come at the "expense" of others.

The people who make your Nikes for $5/d do not have guns to their heads. They line up outside of the factory, because working in the fields and villages pays $0.50/d. They work in the factories instead of the farms for the same reason you work in a cubicle instead of a factory - because in their economy, that's where the money is.

(All the more ironic, then, that Russia has a flat tax, a lower tax, and a simpler tax system than the US of A - and gee, whose economy is growing by leaps and bounds these days? We showed them that capitalism was a better system than central planning, so they adopted capitalism at precisely the time when we've finally rejected it. To answer another Slashdot thread, now that's irony! :-)

I'd strongly encourage you to watch the fantastic PBS documentary Commanding Heights: The Battle for the World Economy. It's probably airing on your local PBS affiliate this week.

(Worth seeing, if for no other reason than that it makes macroeconomics seem fascinating, at least for the six hours the series lasts :)

If you do nothing else, at least glance over this Washington Post review of the series.

The episode on the reform of India (Episode 3, I believe) should also prove useful. But I don't want to give any spoilers ;)

Oh, I see you're immune to behavior modification. Not going to get into your head, no siree!

Science has known what makes you twitch for a hundred years.

And has been working on it ever since.

Human behavior is predicatable, modifiable, and plastic. You're a fool if you let them have their way with your mind under the flimsy assumption you're somehow superior and are unneffected.

Because it makes it easier for people to get along and not kill each other so much if they aren't always bickering over "my god can kick your god's ass!" type stuff.

So you would think. But it's not so. Man is just evil, regardless.

For all the "religion is the cause of all wars" tripe you hear, most wars supposedly caused by religion are really clashes of culture, or more genuinely over resources and land. Religion is usually just the patina dressed up to justify it for the proles.

"[Palladium/Trustworthy Computing] can make our country more secure and prevent the nightmare vision of George Orwell at the same time," Gates said.

Wow. He said that with a straight face? I'd HATE to have played poker with this guy in college. No wonder he cleaned up the table.

Referring to the disparate radio systems scattered among first responders at the World Trade Center on Sept. 11, 2001, Gates said effective command and control cannot arise from cracked communications.

His words served as a segue into his description of a new Microsoft Corp. application, called Regional Automated Information Network, which allows three local law enforcement agencies in Washington state to share records.

The new pilot, which Microsoft officials said started last November, combines Microsoft Windows Server 2003, Microsoft Visual Studio .NET and Microsoft SQL Server 2000 in a desktop portal and Extensible Markup Language-based query engine that lets 17 jurisdictions electronically search each other's records management systems.

Hmmm...shouldn't have any problems with cracked communication there. :)

Let's see: usage rights - according to SCO they can't use it for anything except AIX.
resale - can't sell it for anything except AIX.
ownership - only own distribution rights in the context of AIX

If that's not trying to claim control than I don't know what it.

Go read Cringely's article about the development of RCU. here.

Sequent developed the concept and the initial code before they looked at ANY OS. They happened to implement it first in DYNIX but that was merely the final step of testing the theory through implementation.

So, Sequent didn't copy code from AIX/DYNIX into Linux, they used the same base code when working on both.

Hilary Rosen and Me

or

Bowling for Cartels

I can hear his ironicaly booed Academy speech already... "Shame on you music thieves and samplers! Shame on you consumers! Shame on you America for thinking that the end of radio station diversity, the exposure of price fixing schemes, the innovations of well intentioned computer programers, the closed door campaign contribution lobbist politics, the antiquated concepts of "fair use" and culture minded ideals of a public domain, the post 9/11 isolationism and protectionism, the misinterpreted doctrines of privacy, competition marketplace economics, and a culture more and more dominated by greed of every kind, shame on you for thinking these things gave you the right to listen to mass marketed music! Shame on you!"

The recording industry has never been intersted in musical diversity but with profit. The "golden years" of radio were only golden because no one knew how easy it was to homogenize markets. Take a look at the horrible tactics other industries use to target teenagers.

(Check the Frontline program Merchants of Coolfor a fantastic look behind the increasing generational marketeering - sorry, I'm not sure if I made the link work)

I would suggest that the recording industry / radio conglomerates are by far the best at this.

I know that as I grow older, it seems clear that that I am less and less a part of a targeted demographic for the recording industry. Why should they bother when their catelogs are already full of music that I still like and is still produced on relatively volitile media? Marketing (and not just for the recording industry) is a moveable feast; they go where the disposable income is.

That means the incomes and allowances of those most likely to spend it. While I might have grown cynical and hesitant to spend $20 on a CD that may or may not be crap, my teenagers have not.

What the recording industry is really doing here is a little cultural engineering. They don't want millions of technologically minded teens downloading music for free instead of paying for it. It seems very logical to assume that a majority of any legal cases arising from this new tactic will be levied at the unsuspecting parents of teens who spent their allowance on cool anime mouse pads instead of CD's. The lesson being reinforced here is of course for those middle class mom's and dad's to raise law abiding citizens.

The future of the RIAA and the music industry is not as rocky as many would like or love to believe. They DO know what they are doing. They don't need the $12,000 life savings of college kids who shared a few thousand files. What they do need is quite simple. The recording industry needs the perpetualy new members of a marketing demographic to see and believe that the music which marks their generation was chosen by that generation, not marketers. Teens who have free access to thousands of artists and millions of songs or just a little musical maturity are not buying into the Brittney Spears / Justin Timberlake marketing. The assimilation and homogenization is incomplete.

Thus the timely rise of conglomerates in radio, with the earnest support of the recording industry. The fight against P2P is about limiting choice. Please remember that while the RIAA members represent about 90% of all recorded music in this country, that other 10% is nonetheless very valuable. And menwhile, decreasing the number of alternatives in that 90% increases profit just as well.

What needs to happen is that all those adults who use file sharing to pinch the occassional Flock of Seagulls' or Bryan Adams' song, need to explain to our children and one another how we have all been duped by the recording industry into paying for something we all have the power to CREATE for free.

Most importantly we need to supp

in reference to a pervious post of this you also get:

CRUDS OF MS

He has an new and interesting take on the SCO cr@p too. It's here.

Is it illegal to download the MP3 version of a song that I have already purchased?

"As a technical matter, it is illegal to download a recording from another that is not yours. As a practical matter, there is no reason to do it. It is easier these days to rip a recording from a CD than to download it."

Was the programme you watched this one?

Leeches are still medicine. So is coke.

Don't you think the FBI has already proved that they are the last organization you want policing sharing? Lest we forget, it was not too long ago that they their own problems with sharing their files as it is...

"After an internal FBI probe also released today sharply criticized the manner in which the Clinton White House obtained more than 400 such files from the FBI. The internal inquiry by the FBI's general counsel found that the White House's request between December of 1993 and February of 1994 were without justification and amounted to "egregious violations of privacy." "

First of all, these people aren't 'swapping' anything. That implies a trade where one item (or file) is exchanged for another one, with an implied transfer of ownership. They are COPYING music from one another, not trading it (and trading CDs is NOT illegal, contrary to what some seem to believe).

And that brings me to rant #2. It's easy to regard the RIAA as an Evil(tm) organization when you read (and believe) some of the things people claim the RIAA believes/practices. People here have claimed that the RIAA wants such things as making individual backups of personal CDs, and playing said backups on their computer illegal, and that is simply not true! People make these claims without providing a shred of evidence to back up their assertions. They might as well be accusing Hillary Rosen of violating young children, with as much proof they base their statements on.

Please read this article which clarifies many of the misconceptions about the RIAA's position on fair usage. I think some of you will be very surprised (I know I was).

Is the RIAA perfect? Not even close. But putting words into their mouth for the sake of tricking people into thinking you know something they don't is no way to conduct an honest and meaningful discussion.

though i'm more interested in seeing who is going to be first to utilize the progate technology talked about in this article (which is geared more for licensed developers), i'm also interested in seeing how the homebrew community plans on getting any meaningful code on the cube. from what i can tell, you can't upload that much to it (it's gotta fit in 48M of RAM and has no HD for now) and using this hack, i'm not so sure you are going to get much on there. add to that the fact that you can't burn your own cube disc, i think there are are a lot more hurdles ahead. oh and for those interested or worried about cube warezing, i don't think you are going to find copies of cube games around, and if it were to happen, there is still no such thing as a powerpc emulator yet. the only way you could possibly play any pirated game would be on a mac, if it is even possible... like i said, there are a lot of hurdles left to go. which is afterall, the whole point. make it too expensive and time consuming for folks to pirate...

I don't think that RIAA propaganda will be a problem... PBS newshour had an online debate about copyright issues, and (in my humble opinion) the RIAA came off as just repeating the same line over and over even though the questions presented were nuanced. Now repeat this over thousands of bloggers versus a small legal department screening the official stance, and the RIAA will seem even more detached from reality.

Instead of writing one big long post I'll sum up the questions from the post and give a few suggestions based on my own Experiences with ADHD.

Have you tried natural alternatives such as DPA/EPA (Omega3), 5-HTP (natural precursor to serotonin), and what were your results?

First off, I would suggest looking at this PBS Frontline show about ADD/ADHD. Not only will this show give some insight into ADHD but there is a specific segment about how someone who doesn't have ADHD (or in their family too) convinced the Parents of an ADHD teen to try alternative methods. The results are pretty amazing. This is one of the reasons why I laugh when people who don't have ADHD try to push their views down people's throats. They will never know what it's like.

Here's the link. It's a pretty good show (Real Player is needed to watch):

I have tried just about every ADHD medicine on the market and have found that Metadate and Ritalin work for me. Metadate is a time released version of Ritalin as Ritalin only lasts about 4 hours or so (for me anyways).

How have you coped with ADHD, and how have you found it affect your work performance?

Anyways, my diagnosis for ADHD didn't come until College. I would study, and know the given course material forwards and backwards. However, I would consistently get low marks on my tests/quizzes. After a year of frustration, I took some time off school and eventually tested for ADHD.

One of the main characteristics of someone with ADHD is that they think 'out side the box' and not in the most typical logical sense as you non-ADHD'ers do. The best way to put it is if two people, one with ADHD and one without, were asked to create code for a simple solution of moving files on a server. Any method of coding could be used but you could only use Perl. The person without ADHD would create a few lines of code and would be similar, if not exact, to all other non-ADHD'ers. The person with ADHD would come up with one or more completely different ways to move the files that non-ADDers would have never thought of.

Keep this fact in mind, in regards to learning and education in the non-add world.

Schools, tests and whatnot are only designed to test one specific logical pattern of thinking. If you donâ(TM)t do well on a test, itâ(TM)s not a reflection of how smart you are or are not. In college, you almost always will not get tested to see if you know the material. You get tested on whether or not you can understand the professorâ(TM)s pattern of logic. These test results provide an answer of how well your non-add logical thinking is.

ADHD types, in non-ADHD schooling, need to take the extra time to decrypt (for lack of a better term) non-add logic, apply what ever concept youâ(TM)re learning to the decrypted non-add logic, and then translate it all to ADHD logic. This is the main reason I do not have an MCSE (or any other certification for that matter). These tests only apply to non-ADHD logic. ADHD people need to have extra time to take these tests and work through each question with the âdecryptionâ(TM) pattern noted above. Better yet, ADHD focused tests need to be created to be able to show non-ADHDers that they are just as smart, if not smarter than the rest.

Iâ(TM)ve tried many of the sample MCSE/Red Hat tests in the past and have never been able to finish half of the tests. Itâ(TM)s a bit frustrating. However, itâ(TM)s not as frustrating as the stories of people who take and pass certifications with out ever reading a book or touching any MS technologies. They just know how to take the sort of tests for the MCSE in their sleep. It makes me sick when I learn about MCSE certified people who never opened a book but knew how to ace the logic in these tests.

Iâ(TM)m going to be teaching myself C# and VBScript and itâ(TM)s going to take me some time to learn th

Fred Baughman is a medical expert for the Citizens Commission on Human Rights (CCHR), a front group for Scientology. The site www.adhdfraud.com can most likely be considered a front for the front group CCHR.

The ridiculous sound-bites on the front page ("ADHD--total, 100% Fraud"?) immediately rang a bell with me, and the "commentary" page reeked of the irrational garbage typically spewed forth by the Co$/CCHR.

A quick google of "Fred Baughman" revealed a page at the CCHR's site by Dr. Fred, and a PBS interview from May 4, 2000. Nothing wrong with any of that, but why doesn't he disclose his affiliations on the front page?

The connection is made clearly edvient from this page, where Dr Baughman recommends the CCHR.

The poster is most likely either a Scientology shill (hello OSA!), or a common troll.

For more information on Scientology, see Operation Clambake, or for it's constant (and irrational and paranoid) war on the mental health profession, see for instance here.

Now, I won't say you shouldn't trust Dr. Fred as your doctor, but please, just be aware of his connection to a dangerous mind-control cult. And remember to always take all input with a huge glacier of salt, this post included.

oSlash

This Cringely quote (from this article) always struck me as strange:

Even Linus Torvalds is paid by Transmeta to be the God of Linux.

Transmeta has always been very good at letting me spend even an inordinate amount of time on Linux, but as a result I've been feeling a little guilty at just how little "real work" I got done lately. [emphasis mine]