Slashdot Mirror
Slashback: DRM, Eldred, Aridity
Looking sharp in their suits. Declan McCullagh writes: "Here are some photos from after the arguments, including activists who slept on the courthouse steps, an exhausted but optimistic Larry Lessig, and the Internet Archive bookmobile, which visited Washington DC for the event."
A new meaning for 'decimation.' Martin writes "Here is a good write-up on what happened with the whole sendmail hack a week or so back. Apparently every 10th copy of the source that was downloaded from sendmail.org received the trojan'd version. Nice to see a linux hack getting some attention for a change, instead of the usual MS bashing. Here is the write-up."
I won't be charging entrance fees to Shangri La, either. After a report posted the other day indicating that Microsoft was considering charging customers more for certain security features, Software writes "According to a little snippet from Yahoo News (look towards the bottom), Microsoft won't be charging for security updates after all. As Yahoo puts it, 'Microsoft, however, said Mundie was referring to an internal proposal to begin offering stand-alone security software in the future.' No confirmation of this on Microsoft's site for the press"
As denials go, that seems like a weak one.
Where is Deep Fritz's deep game? screenbert writes "In an exciting best-of-eight chess match-up, the human is leading the computer 2 1/2 to 1/2. I find the fractions of winning amusing, almost as amusing as seeing that the best-of-eight series will take at least nine games since one of those games was a draw. For a general overview there is a good review here(1) or here(2) or here(3). And to save the 38 mandatory karma whoring comments I'll say it: Imagine if Deep Fritz ran on a beowolf cluster."
So it's back to BYOB. gnarly writes "An earlier report of detection of water masers on extrasolar planets has been debunked."
Workaround: Get your congresspuppet hooked on Free software. Several readers wondered why (complained that) the post offering a link to the place where you can submit your comments on DRM technology to the Senate Judiciary Committee was posted section-only. So here's a reminder; if you live near D.C. (or get a chance to stop by a local office), perhaps you'll be able to stop to chat a bit about how you determine who gets your vote. (Maybe you should check out the sections, too.)
I like those odds!
From what I've read about the hearing, it seems that Lessig's approach to go back to the copyright clause and not focus on the first amendment issues was not the right approach. However, IANAL, especially a scholarly constitutional one, so my opinion means squat.
This was an interesting analysis that summed this up.
Official 4th game result annoucement (However the final position graphic is currently wrong).
P.S. To our troll wannabe: Beowulf is spelled BeowUlf.
so you're saying microsoft is going to start paying attention to security now? seriously though, there may be some good in paying for something you *know* is secure. after all, you pay more for a good safe to put your money in than under the mattress... of course, do you trust microsoft when it proclaims something as "secure"?
"Nice to see a linux hack getting some attention for a change, instead of the usual MS bashing."
Is it not true that whenever there's a *nix vulnerability it gets posted on CERT? Is this really a "change?" Recall that there was a trojaned version of SSH going around that got plenty of attention. Maybe these "hacks" don't get as much press because there aren't so many of them. Just remember that many of the high-profile vulnerabilities have affected M$ products. If one affected a *nix product, I'm sure it'd get just as much attention, as such vulnerabilities cannot be ignored, especially by administrators.
Nice to see a linux hack getting some attention for a change, instead of the usual MS bashing.
sendmail != GNU/Linux.
...and i hope the GNU/Linux bash -- subtle as it wanted to be -- wasnt missed by the slashdotters... Isnt a little strange do some bashing while complaining about the "usual bashing"?
Pot this is kettle; Kettle, Pot.
not in pursuit of a "larger good"
tool? puppet? troll? some combination?
I bet you'll start caring once the Thought Police (spelled h-m-l-nd s-c-r-t-, previous example also includes DRM Gov't Approved removal of vowels as per the Free Thought Prevention Act of 2005 -- move along citizen) have your balls in a vice.
happy halloween
I'm very glad you believe each and every one of us is a thief. The fact is DRM will curtail a lot of fair-use applications for technology. In the 80s we were allowed to make copies of media for personal use, so why not now? Because the technology has improved and the Industries are losing their ability to peddle their overrated drivel to the masses at a bloated price. If anything DRM will oppress innovation as each new technological advancement that interferes with the profits of the Industries is proclaimed illegal. Instead of spending their money on lobbying for laws against piracy why not make a better, more reasonably priced product that people will buy to save the inconvenience of piracy. I know I'm more likely to buy many $10 CDs that any $20 CD.
"If liberty means anything at all, it means the right to tell people what they do not want to hear." --George Orwell
Since they published his comment as is, I'll assume that this isn't as commonly understood as it should be. The match will end after eight games, period. If the remaining 5 games are drawn (which they won't) then the human wins, 5-3. There are no additional games to make up for draws. If it were to be 4-4 after eight games, the match would just end in a draw.
"You're never ready, just less unprepared."
Newton should have copyrighted those laws!
-pyrrho
Olson gained ground when he invoked another clause of the Constitution, the "necessary and proper" clause, as a justification for the legislation as a matter of equity.
I am appalled that this guy invoked the necessary and proper clause on an issue that the Constitution already addresses. That is NOT what the clause was intended to do. I don't know why we even bother paying lip service to the Constitution anymore.It's 1 point for a win
0.5 points for a draw
0 points for a loss.
Some people think that a stalemate should count for something other than 0.5-0.5 (say, 0.75-0.25 favoring the player with the advantage when the stalemate happens), but I won't go into that.
IIRC, jupiter and saturn both have trace water in their atmosphere. If these extrasolar planets (with masses similar to our gas giants) have no water, they must have something different going on. Is their star too young? not enough impacts from the right comets? Or is it just that if we were that far from jupiter the water content would be too small to detect?
And to save the 38 mandatory karma whoring comments I'll say it: Imagine if Deep Fritz ran on a beowolf cluster."
What will the karma whores do now that the submitter beat them to it?
Chicago2600.net more than a lifestyle, its a survival trait.
Nice to see a linux hack getting some attention for a change, instead of the usual MS bashing.
It's nice to see that now, since Linux has gone mainstream, all the cool kids have turned from criticising the straw man of mindless Linux promotion to the straw man of mindless Microsoft bashing in order to be the outsider rebels.
Say what you will about the Microsoft anathema, no Linux vendor has promoted the forced inclusion of DRM technology, or, before finding that religion, poo-pooed the importance of security. Through its entire history, Microsoft has given us plenty of justification for criticism. If you don't understand that, then you're as dim as the 'slashbots' to which you feel superior.
So I guess I'll have to buy 3 copies of an artist's work to satisfy the RIAA if I would like to have a copy on CD, one on MD, and one on my computer, hmmm... That doesn't seem right. I'd like to see a copying ring that would bite into the RIAA profits. The decline of profits for the RIAA is IMHO because the new acts suck.
"If liberty means anything at all, it means the right to tell people what they do not want to hear." --George Orwell
I've already told my rep what I think of DRM, though I don't suppose it would hurt to tell him again. I believe DRM is 21st century solution to a 21st century problem. We need to have some way of protecting innovation from those, like the inhabitants of Slashdot, that choose to steal rather than create. If this means that I lose a little convience in the pursuit of a larger good, well then so be it.
I whole heartedly agree. I will gladly give up a little convenience in order to help out artists - or Physicists that write important papers.
I will not, however, give up my personal freedoms in order to help out artists. This is a "larger good" than making sure artists get paid. There is a subtle but important difference, Mr. PhysicsGenius. DRM must accomodate what I want to do within the confines of the Law as well, or it is worthless.
I'm a computer guy, so my future is in (for lack of a better term) cyberspace. DRM must not package up the keys to the digital future solely for the use of those already in power. To just stand idly by and let my personal freedoms be trampled on just to ensure the status quo in a market segment would be an insult to all those who have fought for my freedom in the past will have done so for naught. If you feel that your right to money exceeds my right to freedom, so be it - we will have to agree to be at odds then.
Soko
P.S. - No, I'm not a hypocrite. I own the CD to every MP3 on my computers, paid for the licenses of the software that requires doing so and P2P networking is nowhere to be seen on my systems.
"Depression is merely anger without enthusiasm." - Anonymous
I think it's more like charging more for seatbelts and crumplezones myself.
And with this model sir, for only a little more, you and your family will enjoy a full 30% increase in their chances of survival in the event of a head on crash...
On the other hand you could look at it like brakes: they keep you alive and need regular fluids and servicing that doesn't come free...
It's not that I'm Anti-American - I'm Pro-Freedom
DRM is wrong. Given the fact that it's a law that the person who buys the software has the right to make a backup copy, it's a perfect example of corporate America pushing the envelope on what they can get away with - as in, keep making it more difficult to make a backup. What DRM SHOULD be is a technology that allows the purchaser to make a backup, but not distribute that backup - something along the lines of authentication that the person installing the software from backup is who he says he is (using smart cards comes to mind here). In it's current form, we need to fight DRM as it is nothing but another monopoly tool.
On a different note, Fritz is going to get a thorough beating. Why? Because Kramnik is known for his defensive play and he even bested Karparov using the Berlin Defense. Now, what is needed is either a LOT more processing power to search for the right moves, or a little unpredictability (which I think would be better). GMs and IMs use programs like Fritz everyday for practice and hence know it's playing style. Though you can train Fritz depending on what game databases you feed it, it still plays like a computer. Contrast this with the fact that a program called Arasan beat Vishwanathan Anand (currently no. 2) in a best of three Blitz tournament, because it had trained on Anand's games, AND, the programming team drastically changed it's playing style before the match. It is easy for a computer to change it's playing style and still play well - not so for a human. I feel this is what they should be concentrating on - unpredictability.
Find a job you like and you will never work a day in your life.
If the evidence confirms the theory, the hack would definitely be a strange way to compromise a downloadable file, said Marc Maiffret, chief hacking officer for security software firm eEye Digital Security.
"I'm not sure why they would want to do that," he said.
Come on guys, it's not rocket-science. It's all just to prevent alarms going off.
Scenario 1: I just downloaded an infected version of sendmail and verify the checksum: failed. Hmm... let's try again. Aha, it's okay this time.
Scenario 2: I just downloaded an infected version of sendmail, verified the checksum and informed the people at sendmail.org about it. They say: nothing wrong here, try again. I try again and it's okay this time.
Scenario 3: As 2, but the people at sendmail.org get too many complaints and start to get suspicious.
Scenario 4: I just downloaded an infected version of sendmail, verified the checksum and informed the people at sendmail.org about it. They say: nothing wrong here, try again. I try again and it's okay this time. I kept the broken version and find out what the difference is.
How often do the scenarios happen?
Scenario 1: 99% of the time.
Scenario 2: 0% of the time.
Scenario 3: 0% of the time (less than 2).
Scenario 4: 0% of the time (less than 2).
With the OpenSSH hack I tried to re-download the broken version twice too before I started to get suspicious. I wouldn't have been suspicious at all if it worked fine the second time.
Edwin.
bash$
well, the predecessor to Deep Blue was called Deep Thought. "Deep Thought" is the name of the computer in the Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy series who concluded after many years of processing that the answer to life, the universe, and everything was 42.
I have seen the future, and it is inconvenient.
Except that Ford does not have a virtual monopoly.
Micorsoft's controls the desktop OS market and hence, if they decided to charge for security features the majority of people would have no choice but to spend the money.
Of course people could always switch to Linux (like I did) but the associated frustrations with initial configuration would prevent most users from sucessfully making the switch.
Technology is most abused by the very people it was created to help
And "Planet Fritz" sounds suspiciously like Palladium.
This space intentionally left blank.
True that ... BUT IE == Windows. Just ask Microsoft.
utter rubbish
"... a reminder about your chance (well, if you're an American) to tell your elected representatives what you think about mandated DRM technology"
Yes, it's coming up this November 5th. Here's how to get involved.
If you're going to write your Congresscritter about DRM, be sure to also write his/her/its opponents in the upcoming election.
Microsoft won't charge for security updates or patches, that just seems a bit too audacious even for Mr. Gates.
However, there is a new niche for Microsoft.
Earlier today I was helping a buddy update and clean his Win2k box - And no, he wouldn't let me clean it with Gentoo... He thought he was infected by a virus (he wasn't) so he bought a 'subscription' to McAfee virus scanner. After we ran that, I downloaded AdAlert (free), to remove the spyware... Found lots of that. Then I downloaded ZoneAlarm (free) and set him up a personal firewall.
We've seen MS, in the past, include options like then in the OS... WinXP already includes a personal firewall but there are lots of 'extra' services that MS could add... And why bother including them for free in the OS - expecially when they get sued for it?
I'll bet we see a MS virus scanner/privacy guard/whatever utility sometime soon. With MS's advantage of having OS and Apps in house it could, at least in theory, be faster and better integrated than the competition... And the MS name would go a long way to having the masses buy it over Norton or McAfee... A product like that has to be what Mundie was referring to.
That's the equivalent of keeping your apps up to date. The fact the brakes are there free of addition charge to the car's initial cost is the point. Maintenance of safety features != existance of safety features.
Looks can be deceiving. Or CAN they?
Did you read the article? The only secure machine is a machine that is properly configured and continuously updated with the latest patches. They were originally arguing that they should charge for providing security as a service, in lieu of on-site technicians. In fact, they mentioned that the alternative to guarantee security would be to force customers to sign restrictive license agreements which would prevent anyone except a qualified tech from ever adjusting the machine's settings. An interesting compromise, if you ask me. And an altogether predictable knee-jerk response from Slashdot.
Toronto-area transit rider? Rate your ride.
Let me ask you this: are you more likely to vote a politician into office because of his position on DRM or his position on military action in Iraq?
The problem is that, in a time when there are really serious concerns, something relatively obscure like DRM is going to get pushed to the bottom of the priority list. The state of the economy is a whole lot more important than the state of DRM. Both issues concern me, but one has to weigh them very differently. Hard to seriously vote against somebody who's in the RIAA's pocket but is willing to make a stand against military action in Iraq (if you tend to lean that political direction).
This sig has been temporarily disconnected or is no longer in service
Except saftey features are extra. Air bags were once an addon, then passenger airbags. Now side airbags are. ABS are not on all cars, and usally cost more. A sturdy safe car costs more then a cheap econo car. Run flat tires are an add on.
On autos lots of saftey features cost more. So your analogy doesn't work.
Wow, sent an e-mail as suggested when clicking on "use classic" banner, and got a fast response that addressed my msg
I don't know if this is entirely related to DRM. But I was wondering if anyone had info on the legalities of buying used CD's, records, books, etc... (I'm interested in Canadian law in specific, but I would assume that it is the same as the States law)
I recall a few years back that some artists and the big record companies were upset at the idea of reselling their music without recieving the royalties (I remember that the dude with the Kentucky Waterfall that did 'Aceky Breaky Heart' was whining about royalties). I was wondering if there is still a push for this, or if it has been implimented. If it has then the companies and artists that fall under the Mickey Mouse law would still be able to recieve payments on used items sold until the products fall apart...
All Linux distributution makers think of is profit margins. Making the product hard to use and then charging extra for support is similar to MS charging for security when the product isn't secure to begin with. Hey look, it swings both ways, ain't that sumfin.
Wax-Museum Fire Results In Hundreds Of New Danny DeVito Statues
Why does this crap bother everyone so much? For anyone who cares, try the following science experiment:
:) is not Tommy Hilfigger versus Ralph Lauren. If you want to argue fashion go read Cosmo or Vogue. I care about nothing less or more than solving problems with computers in an open, useful, honest, secure way that doesn't make me a corporate whore.
Hypothesis: Microsoft software is buggier and less secure than Linux software.
Experiment: Debian 3.0 and Internet Explorer 6 SP1 are recent releases (i.e. good examples of respective software packages). Test each one's security needs by updating each from their respective security archives. The one with the most fixes is the most buggy (this assumes bugs are the norm and fixes indicate their prevalence in the code, history bears this out).
Results: Debian has about 8 updates. IE6 SP1 has about 15 critical updates. The IE updates are five times the size of the Debian ones.
Analysis: IE should have the advantage here. It is only a web browser against an entire distribution. It also was released noticibly later, giving less time to discover bugs.
Conclusion: Hypothesis is supported.
Any other experiments?
How about a histogram of bugtraq notices? How about one weighted by severity?
Software is software. It all has bugs. The only way to combat it is good development practices--things like rigor, testing, attention to detail, lots of review, and careful design.
MS has shown (and still shows) that it puts these goals second to political maneuvering, time to market, and (sometimes underhanded) competition.
I damn well will bash a business that is only after my pocketbook (MS) every time they screw up. I also will vehemently defend people developing code for all to use (OSS). Even if they were equally buggy, I'll pick goodwill over greedy corporation any day.
Sorry, but Open Source and Microsoft (a.k.a. good versus evil
I just wish that "Visual Basic" and the like hadn't convinced a bunch of second rate graphic artists that they were "programmers". There's nothing more disheartening than being surrounded and outnumbered by loud idiots desparate to cling to the greedy corporate teat that enabled them do something other than flip burgers.
I think Mauve has the most RAM. --PHB (Dilbert Comic)
Any rebroadcasts of the pro-DRM statements of the establishment are prohibited without the express written consent of the establishment.
So, make copyright extend for the lifetime of the human (not corporate) creator; but once it passes from the control of the creator, then they copyright period is N years, period.
With this, if N = 20, then Melville's works would be (C) H. Melville until his death. At that point, they copyright would be inherited by his heirs, and they would hold it for a maximum of 20 years. If at some point in his life Neville decided to sell the copyright for one of his works to some other individual or corporation, then the copyright on the work would last 20 years from the date of the sale.
All in all, far too sensible for a legislator to even think about.
Come to think of it, this could lead to some weird legal loopholes... for example, in many states, a husband and wife are considered to be a single person in some senses; someone doesn't "inherit" from their spouse when s/he dies, because they are considered to own property jointly. So you could see some bizzare marriages of convenience, for example, where an aging Walt Disney marries a much younger woman who coincidentally just happens to be a Disney corporation executive, with a prenuptial agreement that states if she ever remarries, it will be at age 60 to yet another young Disney executive... and so on, and so on, and...
"Great men are not always wise: neither do the aged understand judgement." Job 32:9
...is still better than Micro$oft odds.
Especially if all you have to do is verify a checksum. Shrink-wrapped, over-priced software comes out of the box "as is."
What's the checksum for IE + all 15 updates?
Comment removed based on user account deletion
I've been waiting on this one for awhile. It has to drive them nuts to have a firewall like the zone alarm reporting all the behind the scenes discussions the print spooler subsystem etc are. having with someone on the net. They'll probably include some lite version of their zone alarm for free and a pro version for money... think defrag... Of course neither version will tell us anything about any of their covert communications with our computers.
And think of all the money they're losing out on to McAfee and Norton for antivirus software. If I were a conspiracy theorist...oh wait... I am, I might think they've purposely not cleaned up outlook just to create a market that they can swoop in and take over like they're known to do. bastards
Sendmail was roulette with a 10-shooter revolver with one round loaded.
MS is roulette with a semi-automatic pistol with one round loaded.
That being said, I think a well-developed argument against the insanely long extended copyrights based exclusively on the idea that they are detrimental to the free and open exchange of ideas (read: free speech), and that the costs outweigh whatever benefits are derived from the latest extension to copyrights would have at least as much of a chance in court as does the current arguement.
The problem with that kind of argument is that it's not very objective. It's about weighing the available evidence/research/etc and deciding what the rights of various groups (with different interests) should be. That seems to be about identical to the job description of congress members. I don't see how the supreme court could make such a decision instead.
Lessig's argument makes a lot more sense IMHO. First of all, it's much more difficult to argue that retrospectively extended copyright will have even a mildly reasonable influence on promoting arts. In fact, if one sees the public domain as promoting arts, it's highly questionable whether congress should be allowed to destroy all kinds of interests and business models that are based on the public domain (see the publisher that wanted to publish an out of print, about to expire book). Those people had reasonable expectations that the works they were after wouldn't suddenly be locked up for another x years. An artist/publisher sh/wouldn't expect the copyright term to be extended for works that were created in the past (especially since the constitution uses the words 'limited term' which conflicts (in theory) with a gratuitous extension).
Furthermore, a copyrighted work is never guaranteed to be added to the public domain if its copyright term can be extended again and again. I don't think it's far-fetched to say that this breaks the 'limited duration' as specified by the constitution. If only prospective extensions are allowed, you will at least have a guarantee that the copyrighted work will expire into the public domain at a known date. It might take 1 billion years, but I'm afraid that the only way Americans can prevent that is by voting differently (in theory*).
*See [Two party system] & [bribes]
The Drowned and the Saved - Primo Levi
Comment removed based on user account deletion
Thanks.
...yet.
Copyrights are supposed to ENCOURAGE development of works by giving the authors an ability to exclusive use/profit from them. So of course retroactive application of the exentions is silly.
In theory I could benefit from that extension and use that as a justification for creating more works. Of course, it's quite unlikely that the original artists has any benefit after 50 years, so an extension to 70 won't promote anything. However, if the copyright term were fairly short, a retroactive extension could actually encourage new creations. I wonder if that's what Lessig meant when he confused the courts by saying that he would support retrospective extensions that do promote the arts.
There are a LOT of works out there that the copyrights are still legally in force, but no one is around who wants them... but the off chance that there COULD be a massive penalty for infringement, no one will risk republishing that long out-of-date stuff. For example, some short stories, articles, illustrations from long defunct magazines from the 50's.
And so the promotion of arts is hampered. An effect of copyright extensions that congress does not seem to understand.
Requiring copyright holders to renew the copyrights every 20 years will allow authors who are actively still publishing and profiting from a work, or who still want to control its publication, to do so.
I don't think a company should be allowed to lock up a once published book/film/etc for a lifetime. Controlling the publication of a work should not be possible for 70 years. You might require copyrighted works to be available before you can renew, but publishers already lie about books that supposedly are still in their inventory (although they won't sell them to you), so I don't see how renewal can change that. No, I think we should reduce the copyright term to much more reasonable terms (different for some items, like software). Those terms should optimally be the time in which most publishers expect to make the majority of their profits. For instance, hardly any software is still sold in it's original form after 20 years, so software should be copyrighted for less than 20 years.
A way in which renewal might work would be a renewal fee that keeps rising. Once the publisher stops paying the work automatically moves into the public domain. That way you still can lock up a certain work or keep it in print for a very long time, but you will have to pay for the privilege.
The Drowned and the Saved - Primo Levi