Slashdot Mirror
Help wanted: CTO at Warner Music.
Gill_Bates writes "It looks like Warner music group are looking for a CTO. I'm intrigued by the sentence that reads "Builds prototypes and evaluates alternatives for on-line music delivery, P2P warfare, copy protection, etc." " How many job descriptions include the phrase "Warfare"?
It pay's money - so there will always be someone applying. - Money make people do stupid things. - As always. Money often win over ideology. - I hope they find some braindead sucker that will do a pisspoor job.
It's time for the mucichians to wake up and understand they can do their own distribution. - The time for the big record labels are numbered. Soon they will wanish in a fading cloud of historydust. And the no-talent marketingdroids that claim they know what the "market" want will be no more....
Yes, I have an utopian dream, help me get to it.
- To understand recursion, we must first understand recursion -
God this is entertaining entertainment.I have noticed at least two tv ad campaigns that feature consumers downloading and burning music. Implying it is a cool and totally normal thing to do. I think the majors are fighting a war they have already lost.
"Don't Follow Leaders." Bob Dylan
Not many companies would put 'warfare' in a job descriptions firstly because few are in a mindset that they at war (i.e. the goal is to destroy, not that the goal is to make profit by selling goods), and secondly because not many companies can get away with it. People would think Coca-Cola completely daft if they asked for a CTO to help shut down Pepsi's website. Now mind you, pretty much everyone admits that Pepsi's actions are more or less legal. That, however, doesn't make it any less excusible because vigalantism is supposidly illegal. That's my 2*10^-2*dollars.
====
Crudely Drawn Games
It surprised me that they were declaring p2p warfare OVERTLY, but then again, didn't Congress pass a bill that would give blank checks to allow p2p networks to be hacked by record companies, ie. distributing fake-hashed files to corrupt everything on the network and so forth?
/. effect the job application -- posting "p2p warfare" is a blatant display of corporate immorality and thuggery, and it threatens our freedom.
We should all mass apply and
Umm, what I read wasn't P2P warfare.. I read this:
"... evaluates alternatives for on-line music delivery, P2P warfare, copy protection, etc."
later I read:
"Analyzes all industry wide technological developments and initiatives related to music and music distribution in an effort to help company sustain its competitive advantage in the music technology marketplace."
Alternatives to P2P warfare. I think they realise its just not cost-effective to have a bunch of people sitting around trying to hack everyone who's running KaZaa.
Looks to me like they want someone to come up with realistic solutions and strategies that will work in the real world. Seems they want to 'Adapt or Die'.
"Requirements
A college degree or equivalent experience is required in engineering, computer science. Specific knowledge and experience in new media and new technologies is required."
Purely speculation: Their old CTO probably favored the old-school 'sue em all' approach, that's probably why he's lining up for food stamps, and why the particular wording of the job offer. Looks like they want a new direction, not to just bump another talking head into the post.
I don't need no instructions to know how to rock!!!!
Most slashbots are too lazy to write (as in with a pen, paper, a hand, and an informed mind, not as in forward email with a computer) their congresscritters let alone hit refresh in a browser once every minute for...how long? In any case, I think DDoSing wouldn't even be all that effective in promoting social change which is what we really need. What I find interesting is that they've already spelled out that the CTO must come up with a plan to engage in P2P warfare. I mean, I realize that job descriptions are all about...well...describing jobs, but it seems like they're saying, "You have complete freedom....to find a way to do what we've already decided is the best thing to do even though that's a decision the CTO should make." Isn't it the Chief Technology Officer's responsibility to say things like, "Hmm, maybe our company's current position with respect to technology, that is using the public's ignorance against them to push oppressive DRM into all digital devices, isn't working. Why don't we evaluate some other plans?" Again, I realize that they probably don't want someone who would make that statement as their CTO, but it still seems odd.
------------
Also:
Slightly OT, but there are actually two things going on here:
1. Media companies have legal permission to crack into your computer and delete files as long as they tell the gov't about it first. This doesn't give them the legal right to distribute fake files, but that activity wasn't illegal in the first place as cracking into someone else's computer and deleting their files was. I don't know if they've actually done this yet.
2. They distribute fake files on p2p networks with names that suggest they're not fake. The idea is that the fakes are released before real content, fakes spread all over the network, and real content gets hard to find because nobody bothers to delete their downloads that turn out to be fakes.
They can't fake the _hashes_ on files. If they have a rogue p2p client online, they can respond to searhes for a certain hash and try to get clients to download from them, but when legitimate p2p clients see that the bytes coming from the rogue client don't hash to what they're supposed to, those bytes won't be included in the file. The only way they could "fake the hash" is by finding another file that has exactly the same length and hash as the original file but contains different data. I don't know what fastrack/winmx/others use, but gnutella uses SHA1 hashes (or bitprint hashes which incorporate SHA1) which are designed to resist that kind of attack. In other words, if you have file (A), it is easy to find its hash (B), but it is near impossible to find another file (C) with the same hash (B) as the first file (A). Of course, as long as p2p users remain lazy and ignorant and p2p software developers don't develop features that prompt the user to identify and delete bad files, media companies won't have to fake the hash in order to frustrate users.
The past several years have seen the internet bubble burst and the beginnings of a global recession kick in. Despite dice.com's chirpy optimism, venture capital, promising startups, and technology jobs are scarcer than four-button mice right now. The road to a solid recovery is going to be long and gradual.
In spite of the present gloom, the Internet isn't going anywhere; it is certain to play a key role in the recovery that is sure to happen. Minor roles will be played by all of the Internet applications that have proven themselves to be useful, practical, and in many cases necessary for business, commerce, and communication. These include email, web, instant messaging, and the ability to easily move data from one individual to another.
Businesses have long been vexed by the fact that Microsoft's Instant Messenger does not interoperate with AOL's and vice-versa. Instant Messaging and P2P systems as systems that will find customers among the business set are still in a state of flux. There are opportunities to take advantage of there, and it is taking advantage of market opportunities that will fuel the recovery of the economy.
However, any startup focused on developing a P2P system that is perhaps designed to fill the current gap created by the failure of the IM apps to interoperate or to use any other business model to succeed will find itself not only facing a difficult economic environment, but also facing the very real danger of having to cope with technological attacks from the RIAA or MPAA.
Thus, we now have a situation where a company that is trying to create a legitimate and valuable P2P system is likely to come under attack by something other than marketplace competition. An entire area of business opportunity has been seeded with landmines at a time when we need it most.
P2P systems are a key part of the suite of must-have applications that will help the internet as a whole bring us out of the recession, and the RIAA has unfortunately positioned itself to fight it.
the current model has the attractive property that it allows WB and others to speculate on bands because of the subsidy offered by the successfull ones
Greedy accountants "speculating" over the next music craze has all but destroyed the industry.
50 years ago, in the early days of rock-n-roll, there was a very loose network of local radio stations operated by young people who loved music. They played what they wanted to play, for people who listened to what they wanted to listen to. Some guy in L.A. might get a phone-call from his buddy in New York, saying "hey man, check out this new Pink Floyd album called Dark Side of the Moon." Next week the DJ gets his hands on the record, listens too it, and by his own volition airs it because it's good.
Nowadays it's all push push push, marketroids and accountants tell DJs what to like, and what to distribute. That my friends, is a broken system.
The wrong people are deciding what we listen to, and only a very select few(I.e. those who don't have a lawyer around to tell them how hard they're getting fucked) manage to get into the industry today. So you tell me, would you rather have:
A) 600 bands a year shoved down your throat, regardless of what they sound like, represent, or say.
b) 100,000 bands available on a P2P network...and you decide who gets in based on music critics you trust, and word of mouth.
The government has a defect: it's potentially democratic. Corporations have no defect: they're pure tyrannies. -Chomsky
lets restate those choices:
- 600 bands a year shoved down your throat,
but each of them with some moderate chance
of being able to make a living from their
music if people like it.
- 100,000 bands available on a P2P network, with
almost no chance of making a living because
there are no effective social networks in
place to allow discovery to take place.
i'd much rather have (b), but neither you nor anyone else has made any serious suggestions how the discovery process is going to work. mp3.com already has tens of thousands of bands listed - no mechanism exists for me to decide if i like any of them. the main mechanism i use these days is to listen to echoes (echoes.org) and check out the echoes website. what mechanism exists to get stuff "released" over p2p into the "forums" or "contexts" where i'll believe its even worth me trying a listening session?i can't disagree with your characterization of the radio business, but almost nobody does! defining the radio business like this isn't the issue - finding a workable alternative to the way it currently works is. and frankly, all the alternatives i've seen (including one that i set up (Equal Area)) have the implication that the vast majority of musicians that don't draw large crowds to live performances can forget about making a living.
Music wasn't always about business. Many of the great composers were independantly wealthy, or they had a single wealthy patron. Songs and stories are even older, oftentimes they were sung by just ordinary people...in bars, at public events, etc. The lineage of music is as old as humanity itself, but only in the last 100 years or so has it transitioned into a commodity.
Up until recently the commodity way was fine because the distribution system was so costly...music was recorded onto a magnetic tape, or a record, or a CD using expensive recording equipment...then put on an airplane or a boat...and shipped overseas...those things cost money. Consumers were willing to pay because the value outwieghed the cost. But now that we have the medium to communicate music to almost anywhere in the world cheaply and quickly. We really have no reason to maintain this infrastructure any more.
If some guy vacationing in Indonesia wants to record a native island song, and then release it onto a P2P network, that's great. The whole world just benefitted from that single individual's contribution. Forever. Millions of people doing this produces an incredible amount of content. We have so much music on record now, that it would take several lifetimes to listen to it all anyway.
There are also plenty of amateur musicians(I.e. people with jobs who play during thier off time because they enjoy music) who sound better than any of todays "new" music. But nobody gets to hear them, why?
You and many others are looking for ways of salvaging the old model. But there really is no value-added benefit in the old system. Paying people's salaries costs money, and that means revenue...but why would anyone pay them? What for?
1) Anyone with a PC can create/record music quality that was unheard of as recently has 1970.
2) "Professional" musicians sound worse than many amateurs.
3) Music can be trasported anywhere instantly for almost zero cost.
4) It would take several lifetimes to listen to all the music out there now.
The government has a defect: it's potentially democratic. Corporations have no defect: they're pure tyrannies. -Chomsky
They're declaring intent to break, enter & pillage
If somebody tried this in person, they'd get shot. Its called self-defense. This is a terrorist act using Gestapo tactics by a group which produces nothing and contributes nothing to society. If YOU tried this, you'd get shot at too.
Now we're going to have to back-up all our data (we'll need to buy lots of CD & dvd burners. Bet they'll love that. And that won't disrupt P2P sites that they are alleging to go after.) Wrecking P2P hosts is not exactly neat and clean. There'll be collateral damage. Somebody's systems are going to get wrecked.
The first time that someone loses corporate data on their servers due to an xxAA attack, the lawyers will have a field day. The activity may have been caused by an employee who was using extra bandwidth in a dubious manner but a company which get its data munged by the RIAA will send the RIAA the bill and about a dozen lawyers to collect their damages.
This will DESTROY the xxAAs. Ripping MP3s might have cost some sales (and I really doubt that,) but this virtual Gestapo tactic will back fire in the worst possible way.
Attacking your clientelle is totally stupid. Beyond stupid. Its suicidal. The xxAAs clients are in for a real shock. The backlast will hit them too.
Imagine a two month stretch where NOBODY buys a CD or goes to a movie of any xxAA member. We all buy for non-members and fuck the membership.
Anf their political friends will hang them absolutely out to dry the first time a government P2P server get reamed.
The xxAAs will be legislated OUT of existence using cyber-terorist laws.
MSBPodcast.com The opinions expressed here are my own. If you don't like 'em... Think up your own stuff.