Remixing News Video On The Fly

slashdotbs writes "The New York Times writes that 'A handful of Web users are programming their own virtual TV newscasts and eclectic collections of video clips using a free media-sharing tool called Webjay. The site makes it easy to build, share and watch playlists of audio and video links culled from around the Internet.' Although the site was originally intended to be used for audio playlist creation, it turns out that it can also be used effectively for video. In addition, you can create "video mashups", where you blend audio and video together to present a new message. By using simple smil commands in a URL, a CBS news report can become a short clip of George Bush saying "I can't do my job" (the third track on this playlist)."

Comments

I don't believe the news anymore these days

[Real Troll Talk]

How can we TRUST the big bully corporations to tell us the truth?

After F9/11, I just don't trust anyone with $ any more.

Re:I don't believe the news anymore these days

[Anonymous Coward]

After F9/11, I just don't trust anyone with $ any more.

Do you trust Michael Moore?

Re:I don't believe the news anymore these days

[Anonymous Coward]

And by the same logic, if anybody can 'fabricate' a news program, why would you necessarily believe a small local shop?

At least the big news companies can be sued for libel/slander if caught outright lying. Small indy shops can get away with fabricating things outright.

Note I mean lying, not just major bias, like foxnews.

Re:I don't believe the news anymore these days

[Holi]

No, I agree with the parent. No one in a position of power tells the entire truth. They use the facts that support their position and ignore the rest.

Re:I don't believe the news anymore these days

[Anonymous Coward]

Shove your conservative, want-to-run-everyone's-life, America- hating, freedom-hating, Sean Hannity-and-Rush Limbaugh- worshipping, need-others-to-think-for-you bullshit straight up your ass.

Re:I don't believe the news anymore these days

[Anonymous Coward]

Well, I am a fan of Michael Moore personally, but he, too, is in a position of power. Think about it. He makes shitloads of $$$ for each new documentary to come out. So how can you trust his integrity knowing that he can manipulate things his own way to capitalize off the anti-Bush feelings right now?

He has as much to gain by slanting left as foxnews does by slanting right.

Re:I don't believe the news anymore these days

[schmaltz]

big news companies can be sued...Small indy shops can get away with fabricating

What? When you're Fox-owned-by-billionaire-media-mogul-Rupert-Murdoc -News, you've got much greater latitude, because you've got the bux to throw at lawyers. When you're the little guy, you gotta watch your step, coz you don't got the big bux to mount a defense.

Re:I don't believe the news anymore these days

[Anonymous Coward]

Slanting? Heh.

Re:I don't believe the news anymore these days

[mikestro]

Nothing to see here. Move along boys.

Re:I don't believe the news anymore these days

[Anonymous Coward]

I'm voting Bush soley in the hopes that if he wins, Michael Moore will leave the US and shut the fuck up once and for all.

You provide an excellent example of the level of intelligence of most Bush supporters.

You do realize that he'd have very little to talk about, and thus far more likely to shut up, if Bush were not elected for a second term?

Re:I don't believe the news anymore these days

[Glidedon2]

Uh, Yeah, how many time have you heard "anybody but Bush"

Re:I don't believe the news anymore these days

[cfuse]

How can we TRUST the big bully corporations to tell us the truth?

You can't, but you CAN trust them to lie.

Re:I don't believe the news anymore these days

[Anonymous Coward]

Ad hominem attack on the intelligence of anyone who might disagree with you: check.

Ploy to get parent to do as you say, and get what he wants: check.

I hope Bush wins just to irritate you, clown.

Re:I don't believe the news anymore these days

[atheken]

that's a "documentary"? if you can call it that. Holy War! I call "not it." Oh, and shame on slashdot for putting a link to a video site IN the article, experiencing meltdown in 5..4..3..2..1.....

Re:I don't believe the news anymore these days

[atheken]

this is NOT insightful, at the most it's flamebait, try to be unbiased when moderating.

Re:I don't believe the news anymore these days

[Anonymous Coward]

And this post demonstrates exactly why I vote conservative: a) unsupported, trolling comment b) moderators who mod it (currently) as "Insightful".

Next post will be about the parent being a conspiracy post by some conservative trying to get a false grass root reaction.

Re:I don't believe the news anymore these days

[Anonymous Coward]

*laugh* Michael Moore has benefited monetarily a huge amount, not only with the profits from this film, but for his future works as well.

Not to mention the amount of money the film generated for any anti-Bush group as well as those voting *because of* the film, as they will be voting that which benefits them the most--a good part of that equation will include money.

Fact of the matter is, the US is a rich country and a lot of people have money, even people you do not suspect. Pointedly selecting a few idiots and then making a sweeping comment that all with money are untrustworthy is as idiotic as saying all black men will mug you if they have the chance. If there are viable alternatives, the US *people* will likly find them; maybe not as fast as you like, but we tend to right the ship. Frankly, if people will money wanted power, they wouldn't be still in the US.

Learn to judge your own prejudices.

Re:I don't believe the news anymore these days

[demachina]

"What ever happened to the good old tech talk? I want the old Slashdot back, Liberal free"

I imagine you can thank people like George W., Rush and Bill O'Reilly for this. They've done something truly amazing. They took a nation that hasn't really cared about politics in 30 years and ignited passion about it in nearly every dusty corner including the geek denizens of Slashdot. Any place there is the remotest angle for political sparring people are taking it, lighting incendiary devices and running with them.

If George W. had lived up to his campaign rhetoric as a "Uniter, not a divider" and a "Compassionate Conservative" America's new right wing, if they'd played it cool, could have led a sleep walking America in to an eternity dominated by their twisted new conservativism, underpinned by the intolerance of America's ultra religious right. George, Rush and Bill were crafty successful in initially igniting the passions of only the new conservative extremists. If they'd managed to keep it that way the would have won a lasting victory with their little brown shirted army. But no they went just a little to far and one day the rest of the world woke up and realized what was happening.

George W. did his nation a great service. He woke up every radical leftist, weak kneed liberal, indifferent independent and true conservative in to forming an increasingly unified front who are waiting with unprecedented anxiety to seem if he will go down in flames in November. It warms my heart to see true conservatives hating him as much as liberals, thanks to the damage he's done to the reputation of conservatism, remember when it used to be about balanced budgets, no foreign adventuring, small government and civil liberties?

So today you have people more energized against an American President than even Richard Nixon. The end result, even here on Slashdot you can't escape massive outbreaks of vicious, polarized mud slinging.

Some may bemoan it as you just did, others like me think its fascinating and not something anyone would have imagined possible after seeing America head down a road of political indifference for 30 years as they were mesmerized by the tube.

The Democrats could have made November a slam dunk against Little George but no, just to make it a nail biting cliff hanger all the way through they nominated a candidate so bad no one wants to vote for him even when he's up against the most dangerous president the U.S. has probably had in its history. Throw in electronic voting machines, terrorist threats (real, imagined and fabricated), the Patriot act, and Jeb Bush aiming for a sequel in Florida and you have a political spectacle better than any novelist could have imagined.

Re:I don't believe the news anymore these days

[Anonymous Coward]

Who needs George, Rush, and O'Reily when you've got Neil Boortz? Maybe It would be nice and all if perhaps Slashdot were a place to escape any sort of political polarizing. After all, this is news for nerds and all. Mac vs. PC arguements were much more stomachable to say the least, but now add in the fact that Slashdot is posting articles that look deliberatly aimed to start flame wars, just imagine the fun, especially when moderation takes a turn towards the biased more than any news outlet (Including Fox News) could ever be? It makes me sick to my stomache. I honestly thought slashdot would be a place for those wanting a cease fire to go. I thought wrong.

Re:I don't believe the news anymore these days

[Anonymous Coward]

Insightful? Great... I hate slashdot, goodbye

Re:I don't believe the news anymore these days

[letxa2000]

By using simple smil commands in a URL, a CBS news report can become a short clip of George Bush saying "I can't do my job"

Wow, if everyone can take George Bush out of context, Michael Moore will be out of a job!

Re:I don't believe the news anymore these days

[Anonymous Coward]

I generally think it stupid to insult the parent when he/she is obviously on your side.

Re:I don't believe the news anymore these days

[ticklemeozmo]

Until lions have their own historians tales of the hunt will always glorify the hunter.

Re:I don't believe the news anymore these days

[Anonymous Coward]

Ah, but, just because you don't side with the liberals, don't automatically assume the critics of the liberals are any better, either.

The major two political parties are simply each other's critics and are not even as interesting as the independent candidates out there...

Re:I don't believe the news anymore these days

[Jeremi]

The Democrats could have made November a slam dunk against Little George but no, just to make it a nail biting cliff hanger all the way through they nominated a candidate so bad no one wants to vote for him even when he's up against the most dangerous president the U.S. has probably had in its history.

Actually, any candidate the Democrats nominated would quickly become considered "so bad no one wants to vote for him even blah blah blah".... simply because that is what the Republican Party's advertising is designed to do. John Kerry is a fine, upstanding politician and as good a choice as any other contender you could name -- if he's looking a bit muddy, it's because of the $80 million in mud that has been thrown at him by the spin machine.

Winning an election against that much entrenched money and power is simply not an easy task. Given the situation, I'd say Kerry is doing a great job and (barring any unforseen disasters, knock on wood), will very likely be elected in November.

Re:I don't believe the news anymore these days

[Holi]

Exactly, He twists the truth to his own needs as much as the next man, but at least he admits to it.

Re:I don't believe the news anymore these days

[SlashDread]

Well at least Mister Moore does not own a MegaCorp set out to profit from his warmongering.

"/Dread"

Re:I don't believe the news anymore these days

[demachina]

"Actually, any candidate the Democrats nominated would quickly become considered "so bad no one wants to vote for him even blah blah blah".... simply because that is what the Republican Party's advertising is designed to do. John Kerry is a fine, upstanding politician and as good a choice as any other contender you could name..."

I imagine the first part is probably true, but I'm afraid, at least to me, the second part isn't. I disliked Kerry before the Republican attack dogs started working him over. He is a wealthy, prep school elitist, Yale, Skull and Bones, born to privilege, spent his whole life angling to be President. In fact, in this he is a carbon copy of George W. The big difference is George W. didn't belong in the prep school, ivy league elitist world, hated it, wasn't angling to be President until he sobered up one day, found Jesus and decided to be President though he didn't have the resume, just the family name. Kerry thrived on it which doesn't play well with most Americans who aren't ivy league, prep school elitists. JFK pulled it off because he was likable and exciting, Kerry isn't likable and he is a bore.

Kerry has spent his whole life trying to be JFK, the next generation. He flaunted his initials around Yale to this end, he no doubt went to Vietnam to rack up the same war hero record to further his political career. Only problem was Vietnam wasn't WWII. He did manage to run to the medic everytime he got scratched to rack up the purple hearts and the medals, but then he realized being a Vietnam war hero was more of a political liability than a plus so turned on it too and threw away the medals, but not really, because that was popular at the time.

Kerry has dedicated his whole life to being, doing and saying whatever he thinks he needs to, to get elected President. When he needed to be a liberal Mass. democrat to follow in Kennedy's footsteps in the Senate thats what he was. When he needed to rail against the Patriot act and the war in Iraq to snatch the Democratic nomination thats what he did. Now that he need to win over the undecided centrist voters to win the election he is a centrist and doesn't complain much about the Patriot Act or the war in Iraq. Of course thats what all good upstanding politician's do, they say and do what they think they need to to get elected. Kerry has just taken it to the point that he truly is a phony, the two faced flip flopper the Republicans say he is. I wager he doesn't even know what he really stands for, I sure can't figure it out nor can most voters, and I don't think you could have any clue what he will really do in the White House. If he was really against the Patriot Act and would work to repeal it maybe I would vote for him, but I wager he really likes the Patriot Act and he will probably work to expand it instead. If he really understood why Iraq was a mistake and wouldn't repeat the same mistakes maybe I'd vote for him but I think his judgment on it was just as bad as the rest of the herd and I can't count on him to do something just as stupid. I really get ill when I hear him sawing on squandering billions on first responders, and trying to make the ports and the homeland safe against terrorism. Wasting billions giving every fire department in the country new radios and biochem suits isn't going to make the U.S. safe from terrorism.

No, Kerry really is about as bad a choice as the Dems could have made. Of course, I'm not sure there is anyone left in that party that could have won the nomination that would have made a good President. Thats a key reason they Republicans are in power, the Democrats really are a bad party and fewer and fewer people want to vote for them, of course they've realized in the last couple of years the Republicans really are dangerous and can't be trusted with power either. It really is a pisser all around.

Re:I don't believe the news anymore these days

[PowerBook2k]

There is a difference.
Moore admits that his films are based almost completely upon his opinion.
These "news" agencies, however, present their wares as 100% Pure Fact(TM)

Re:I don't believe the news anymore these days

[Anonymous Coward]

"If this were a dictatorship, it'd be a heck of a lot easier, just so long as I'm the dictator."

That quote doesn't have be shown out of context to see how wrong it is. And there are many others.

Re:I don't believe the news anymore these days

[RobotRunAmok]

After F9/11, I just don't trust anyone with $ any more.

Especially Hollywood.

Re:I don't believe the news anymore these days

[Anonymous Coward]

Sure. You'll be back in less than 24 hours.

Re:I don't believe the news anymore these days

[sirshannon]

Admits to it? Only in principle. He will defend his slants, "lies by ommission" and mistakes tooth-and-nail. I have yet to see him admit to a specific lie, lie by omission, or severe slant when challenged on a point.

Re:I don't believe the news anymore these days

[Zigg]

That quote doesn't have be shown out of context to see how wrong it is.

But you did it anyway.

Re:I don't believe the news anymore these days

[Deliveranc3]

Of course they do. Any position has arguments that can be used against it.

It is a complete waste of time to try and debate both sides, If you think that there is only one side to any argument then you are either increadibly dense or megalomaniacly inclined.

Re:I don't believe the news anymore these days

[schmaltz]

I'm not sure there is anyone left in that party that could have won the nomination that would have made a good President. Thats a key reason they Republicans are in power, the Democrats really are a bad party

Yeesh. The republicans are in power because they stole the last election.

Rush Limbaugh has really taken hold of and infected your brain. Turn off the AM talk radio. Go back on your meds. Drop out of the "other people are to blame for blah-blah" bullsh!t. Go talk to people who work for a living and find out that trickle-on economics aren't helping them so much as it helps their bosses get wealthier quicker without having to pay them cost of living increases.

Re:I don't believe the news anymore these days

[Anonymous Coward]

You mean unlesss there is a Clinton speaking...

Re:I don't believe the news anymore these days

[Holi]

insightful my ass that's just common sense

Already Common in Music

[dancingmad]

This has already been done a lot in music. A lot of /.'ers might remember the DJ Dangermouse "Grey Album", which mashed Jay-Z's Black Album with The Beatles White Album.

I remember getting the impression that after the press the Grey Album got mashups would become more popular in the music biz or either they are harder to make than it seems (Dangermouse is a talented guy - check out his Ghetto Pop Life CD for proof) or people are scared of getting sued.

What's the legality of A/V mashups? Could people get in the same hot water Dangermouse did?

Re:Already Common in Music

[schmaltz]

This has already been done a lot in music.

This isn't exactly that... going into the studio and remixing rappahs over Beatles or what-have-you.

Webjay seems to be about creating playlists from mp3s and video on the internet... some of them generally interesting. I've found a ton of free (e.g. given away by the bands/labels on their site) music via Webjay.

Re:Already Common in Music

[slashdotbs]

Webjay is much more about music than it is video - video, news-remixing, etc., are one small part of the site. Webjay is now what I use at work (and sometimes at home) for music; it has taken the place of my own mp3 collection and Internet radio.

Read my Rhapsodiary, where I'm blogging my experiences with RealOne's Rhapsody service. So far, Webjay is winning.

Playlist

[stevemm81]

I don't know how indicative that playlist is of the kinds of things produced in general, but I can't say it left me feeling overly impressed. A 5 second clip of Bush saying "I Can't Do My Job" doesn't seem very revolutionary...

Re:Playlist

[Takara]

A 5 second clip of Bush saying "I Can't Do My Job" doesn't seem very revolutionary... It was actually 1.5 seconds worth of bush. Enough for anyone surely.

Re:Playlist

[Anonymous Coward]

Uhm... Yeah, well... Rather than post something newsworthy and show off new technology... Isn't it so much more entertaining to make fun of the president?!

Re:Playlist

[Anonymous Coward]

Repeat the steps after me!

1. Make fun of President
2. ???
3. Profit!!!!

Re:Playlist

[DruidBob]

The revolutionary thing about it is this time he didn't actaully say it.

Re:Playlist

[Anonymous Coward]

Well, the written quote, like *most* of his others (which don't involve killing people. Odd how that is the only time he can speak coherently), has been cleaned up and made less painful. The actual transcript might be along the lines of "Iuuuuh canuuh naaa n't doooo maaaauuuh j-j-job." Try to picture you great-uncle (or whatever) who your dad said 'fried his brains out in the feels-good-do-it-era-after-the-peace-love-era-beca use-he-couldn't-figure-out-the-later-but-the-forme r-was-right-up-his-alley" 'cause that would be pretty much the same guy.

Re:Playlist

[Saeed al-Sahaf]

A 5 second clip of Bush saying "I Can't Do My Job" doesn't seem very revolutionary... It was actually 1.5 seconds worth of bush.

What's funny is the /. editors essentially ASK for posts like this by posting a story that says "By using simple smil commands in a URL, a CBS news report can become a short clip of George Bush saying "I can't do my job" (the third track on this playlist)".

Then they mod everyone who points out the (obvious) funny "flamebait". More or less a trap that allows The Mods to feel superior.

Re:Playlist

[Anonymous Coward]

Nah man, you got it wrong 1. Make fun of President 2. ??? 3. Karma Whore!!!!ONE

Re:Playlist

[internic]

First, if it's "a trap", it's not one that is set intentionally, since the vast majority of mods have no influence whatsoever over what goes in the post for the story. Second, I don't think it's about mods wanting to be superior as much as it is that "this is dumb" (and equivalent) is not a meaningful or useful contribution. You don't have to say something nice, but you should try to say something useful.

It seems many people on here whose useless comments are modded down are convinced that mods are out to get them. Having been a sometimes mod I can say, there is no conspiracy. If you make any even semi-reasonable comment it will not be modded down on average.

Re:Playlist

[slashdotbs]

Evolutionary, not revolutionary. The clip itself is just an example. As for I don't know how indicative that playlist is of the kinds of things produced in general, check out some other playlists!

Better watch out

[nfras]

The article says that Gonze thinks his site is legal because it transmits urls rather than files. A news feed is copyright, audio and visual and altering a copyrighted work is grounds for legal action (and TV companies tend to be litigious). IANAL but this seems like very shaky ground.

Re:Better watch out

[Saeed al-Sahaf]

But you know, "fair use" blaw blaw blaw... Being generally anti IP rights here, there will be all sorts of "justifications" and when Super-Mega News decides to sue, we'll see that story here, too.

Re:Better watch out

[enigma48]

IANAL but copyright doesn't mean you have no right to use a work - you just have limits. For example, photocopying a page in a textbook is legal while photocopying the entire thing isn't.

There are larger issues once you start redistributing any work though.

Re:Better watch out

[Anonymous Coward]

FYI

Re:Better watch out

[schmaltz]

altering a copyrighted work

RTFA. They aren't "altering" the work, to do that they'd have to be changing it, right?

At worst, using five seconds from a copyrighted work easily falls under fair use, especially as there is a parody / criticism edge to some of what he appears to be doing.

Re:Better watch out

[Zebbers]

whats altered dumbass?
its like
having a tv monitor on, muted, with the radio on

i do that often.....tv images are good...commentary sucks

Re:Better watch out

[Anonymous Coward]

Why? Here's my "text version":

2004-07-16 CBS news broadcast from 16:34:55.925UTC TO 16:34:58.342UTC

2004-07-11 CNN news broadcast from 11:40:12.133UTC TO 11:40:13.342UTC (crossfade last 0.234 seconds)

2002-01-03 Fox news broadcast from ..

you get the point...it's just a playlist. don't tell me this kind of stuff is illegal now too, or I'll go hang myself.

"But, when you say the times, you're indicating what the content is, and you're redistributing it, and THAT'S KOPYRIGHT INFRINGEMENT! Feel the teeth of the DMCA, bizatch!"

Re:Better watch out

[nfras]

Whoa Tiger. Using just the images or just the sound may be a breach of copyright. Yes, there are exceptions, notably parody, but it is a big grey area. You may like to have the tv on with the sound down, but broadcasting like that is a different matter. At the moment this flies under the radar but if it takes off they may need to watch out for law suits. Not that I agree with that, just pointing out that it may happen.

Re:Better watch out

[Saeed al-Sahaf]

FYI

Yeh, I'm always missing the boat.

Re:Better watch out

[Jeremi]

A news feed is copyright, audio and visual and altering a copyrighted work is grounds for legal action (and TV companies tend to be litigious). IANAL but this seems like very shaky ground.

Ah, but they aren't altering any news feeds. They are just downloading and presenting only the portions of the newsfeed that the webjay-user specifies. Sort of like a TV set with a smart remote that automatically changes the channel every few seconds to string together content from different stations.

Re:Better watch out

[slashdotbs]

Ah, but they aren't altering any news feeds. They are just downloading and presenting only the portions of the newsfeed that the webjay-user specifies.

one thing: there's no actual downloading of the clips (unless the media player client caches the file). the content (video, audio) is still streamed from its original location.

otherwise, yes - exactly.

Comment removed

[account_deleted]

Comment removed based on user account deletion

Buffering issue

[toetagger1]

I'm trying to watch some of those video playlists. Unfortunately, there is always this buffer time between videos. It would be a lot more enjoyable if it started buffering the next video while it showes the current one. Also, every time the clip changes, the player popos into the forgound, which is also annoying. Nontheless, a very neat way to epxress some ideas!

Re:Buffering issue

[lucas_gonze]

The bad buffering is because clients all suck so bad. Within the community of hackers working on this stuff nobody has taken on the really crucial job of making a client that doesn't suck. (VLC obviously doesn't suck, and all the components you'd need are there, but there's no SMIL support.)

cnn/realone won't me happy

[tisme]

I think I can smell a new DRM version from Real coming out. The last time people started ripping "protected" content (the cnn footage is supposed to be subscription only) Real started suing and came out with new software. With Microsoft's Digital Rights Management quickly becoming popular amongst content publishers, I have a feeling Real corporate will want some heads to roll if this gets out of control.

Re:cnn/realone won't me happy

[LostCluster]

CNN footage is protected, however CBS News video clips are in non-subscription streams that are left available for many months after being posted.

One just has to post the meta-info referancing the clips without ripping them, and any user can have their computer recreate the actual content by downloading the same blocks out of the still-available streams. No need to actually rip anything...

RTFA

[SuperBanana]

This has already been done a lot in music. A lot of /.'ers might remember the DJ Dangermouse "Grey Album", which mashed Jay-Z's Black Album with The Beatles White Album.

RTFA. The site doesn't have the clips, it has metainfo files which contain references to audio and video segments.

If Dangermouse had simply provided a script for an audio mixing program, he wouldn't have gotten in the least bit of trouble. Furthermore, Dangermouse's Grey album became the online equivalent of a best-seller, skyrocketing in popularity when people found out the music companies were dead against it and trying to remove it.

Re:RTFA

[billcopc]

The music companies were against it because it was a clandestine hit that didn't need the "Record Industry" to flourish. I'm no fan of rap "music", but there is something tangibly sexy about the Grey Album's fusion of sound and speech, something that is sadly missing from modern music because the latter is made with a cookie-cutter approach: "Hire an icon, make him look 'street', steal 20-year-old loop, add boobies and ADVERTISE!". The Grey Album, on the other hand, was produced by someone who knows and appreciates music very intimately.

I'm a music freak too, and I find myself questioning the producer's work on recent pop singles. Today's music sounds like they didn't give a fark about the released product. It's unfinished, unpolished, but it sells like hotcakes thanks to the media and these ever-more-retarded teens.

Rating of the message clip...

[Maljin Jolt]

George Bush saying "I can't do my job"

+-0 Redundant

Waste of power.

[Anonymous Coward]

[...] can become a short clip of George Bush saying "I can't do my job"

What a waste.

If I had those powers, I'd try to fake news.

mod parent down to hell

[Bold Marauder]

apparently google news no longer provides courtesy links.

Off to -1 land for me again. :(

Been done before

[LeahofRivendell]

By using simple smil commands in a URL, a CBS news report can become a short clip of George Bush saying "I can't do my job" (the third track on this playlist)
There's a funnier version of this at http://www.ebaumsworld.com/presaddress2.shtml
Unfair editing is a concept as old as speaking.

Re:Been done before

[Anonymous Coward]

Traitor!

By all rights, you should be hanged for linking to that UNPATRIOTIC video of our Glorious Commander in Chief. In these post-9/11 times, the proletariat had better watch what they say!

Sincerely,
Neo-Conservative Bastard

Re:Been done before

[Anonymous Coward]

ain't no law against linking to files you dumbfuck Republican.

Re:Been done before

[Anonymous Coward]

you do realize he's being sarcastic, right?

Call "The Onions" lawyers...

[ranger5]

How long until some small news agency in some small country reports one of these as an actual video clip or news snippet? I guess it could even be just a down on his luck, non-scoop having newspaper writer who doesn't do his research...

Re:Call "The Onions" lawyers...

[Anonymous Coward]

>non-scoop having newspaper writer who doesn't do his research...

And this differs from any of the others, how?

Re:Call "The Onions" lawyers...

[Anonymous Coward]

Hey, I subscribe to the New York Times not because I want to but because it's all I can afford, you insensitive clod!

Finally, Douglas Engelbart's vision

[michaelmalak]

Douglas Engelbart, who prototyped the web hardware (including mouse) in 1966, started bootstrap.org in 1988 to pursue his vision of deep contextual hyperlinks:

The [Open Hyperdocument System]'s initial design specifications are a result of 50 years of innovation and experimentation by Doug Engelbart and his team of researchers among a variety of user communities, including aerospace and software development. These requirements include fine-grained addressability of all types of documents and support for multiple ways of viewing and manipulating them. Some of these features have found their way into existing tools, such as the World Wide Web, while others are currently being explored. The purpose of the OHS is to serve as a standard framework for these features, so that different applications may interoperate with the DKR and with each other.

As with the mouse, it seems someone else is going to popularize fine-grained hyperlinks.

what happens in a world where...

[brandannnnnn]

politicians may unknowingly tell the truth?!

Can we rate articles?

[Anonymous Coward]

By using simple smil commands in a URL, a CBS news report can become a short clip of George Bush saying "I can't do my job"

I'd like to rate this one -1, Flamebait.

Re:Can we rate articles?

[Anonymous Coward]

Come on... Do you really expect anything better from timothy? timothy is to Slashdot as Cousin Oliver was to the Brady Bunch.

Re:Can we rate articles?

[Karma Star]

And I'd like to mod you -1, Flamebait, but I don't because some of us believe in freedom of expression sans the persecution. *Sorry* if the author of the clip has a different opinion of GW than you...

Re:Can we rate articles?

[Anonymous Coward]

Can we rate articles?

No.

Re:Can we rate articles?

[Anonymous Coward]

Why do you come here? This is /. you goddamn hippie, go listen to NPR.

Re:Can we rate articles?

[cheese_wallet]

I'd like to rate this one -1, Flamebait.

"And I'd like to mod you -1, Flamebait, but I don't because some of us believe in freedom of expression sans the persecution."

And that makes you different from the parent somehow? Sounds like you want to do the same thing to his comment that he wanted to do to the post.

Re:Can we rate articles?

[Anonymous Coward]

More likely redundant, because we already know W can't do his job. :)

Future Pirate Broadcasts: Terrorism?

[TheTXLibra]

Well, you can pirate broadcast frequencies over radio stations with IPods, you can now easily mash video streams together, remixing audio is already old-hat. Voice modulation software is now becoming available on the net. Give it another five-to-ten years, there will be an easy way to pirate broadcast into TV networks.

Imagine the havoc one could create by doing a real professional looking and sounding Audio-Video mix to, say the 5 O'Clock News in your local area, then pirate the station it broadcasts on right at the time the program normally begins. So what happens if they decide it would be a real funny joke to have a video-hack of the President announcing nuclear war, followed by the newscastors reacting in turn? What kind of damage from panic would result? Something tells me this isn't too far off, and frankly, I'm a bit concerned.

Re:Future Pirate Broadcasts: Terrorism?

[Anonymous Coward]

i modded it funny because ... I think it would be funny

Re:Future Pirate Broadcasts: Terrorism?

[LostCluster]

The same part of the "Part 15 flea power" rules that allows transmitter that attaches to iPods to exist could be used to transmit TV as well. However, you're neglecting the fact that those only travel for a few feet.

Somebody trying to jam a broadcast TV station's OTA tower would not create a watchable signal. They'd have to be transmitting at much, much, higher power than the original signal... otherwise the result would be the two signals interfering rendering neither watchable. On digital TV, the two signals would wipe each other out completely leaving no way recievers could make sense of either.

Also, it should be noted that even if signal hackers took over the studio-to-transmitter link of a TV broadcast, for stations in most major cities only a fraction of the audience would be affected. Cable and DBS companies perfer not to pluck stations out of the air, but get a direct digital feed of the station's program stream over fiber straight from the station's studio control room.

Re:Future Pirate Broadcasts: Terrorism?

[OpenGLFan]

Voice modulation software? As in, not to make you sound like Vader, but to make you sound like Walter Cronkite? A quick googling shows a few programs to allow singers to tweak their vocals but nothing quite so nifty -- got a link?

Re:Future Pirate Broadcasts: Terrorism?

[Anonymous Coward]

You mean you don't just assume it's all made up to begin with, even today?

Wow.

Re:Future Pirate Broadcasts: Terrorism?

[(C)0N0(R)]

This was pulled off (not on broadcast TV) by Orson Welles, in a radio broadcast of H.G. Wells War of the Worlds" in 1938.

I don't listen to any commercial radio, nor watch TV. Hence, I don't really know any regular schedule. So, if a radio program, such as Joe Frank's, were to do a science-fact-docu-drama, I could just adjust the dial to see if it's for real.

Also, Reagan once announced
that "My fellow Americans, I am pleased to tell you Ijust signed legislation which outlaws Russia forever. The bombing begins in five minutes."

Re:pr0n

[Anonymous Coward]

I can just see oh so many uses for this service... Ten thousand different pr0n playlists :)

Porn is the engine of technology after all*. Cable TV, the VCR, the Camcorder, and the World Wide Web would be about as popular as Barney if adult content wasn't available.

/ *Well, computer games deserve some credit. Doom 3 is going to sell more CPU's for Intel and AMD than all the word processing programs sold since WordStar.

Audio Snip Remixing: Limbaugh being an example.

[Anonymous Coward]

Posted anonymously to avoid karma whoring.

The clip of video over near-single-frame video was pretty underwhelming... there's another form of remixing that has been done, and done well, before.

Some of the folks over at the pop radio station in Atlanta managed to reassamble clips of words and phonetically created phrases of Rush Limbaugh singing "I'm a Nazi". It's pretty damn funny and well done.

I only have a 64k mp3 of the song. Anyone actually have a higher quality copy of the track? Many 128k or 112k versions I've found online don't sound any better at all.

http://66.113.208.149/misc/rushnazi.mp3

The lyrics for those who don't want to download the mp3. (Keep in mind that every word Rush "sings" really is his voice.)

(Lameness filter screwed up the formatting. Sorry.)

Announcer: Ladies and gentleman... Rush Limbaugh!

They say that I'm sleaze, An elitist, if you please
Everybody disagrees with my rap (with his rap)
I'm horrendous, I'm appalling, My ratings now are falling
'Cause I'm so full of bull, so full of crap (full of crap)
With condescending cries, Making money selling lies,
You might say everybody hates my guts (hates his guts)
I'm offensive, I'm a bigot, I'm a fraud - Can you dig it?
I'm a sexist, racist, homophobic, fat, pathetic putz

I'm a nazi (he's a nazi), That's right, I really am,
'Cause I'm a nazi (he's a nazi), That's right, you're being scammed
I'm a nazi (he's a nazi). I don't care about the middle class
'Cause I'm a fat conservative butthead, With the face of a horse's ass
(He's a fat conservative butthead) Hey!, (With the face of a horse's ass)

I have a sub-human figure, a huge rear end, My brain? That's another story (it's quite another story)
I have a face the size of a wash tub, And my ass is as big as Missouri - Yes!
(This bastard is sick, he's a fat, pompous pig, and his ass is as big as Missouri) Yessiree, Bob!

Manipulating statements, exaggerate the truth, I can't believe the hate my show inspires (the hate his show inspires)
It's not just because I'm stupid (oh no), It's not just because I'm scum (uh huh)
It's just because Republicans are liars (those dirty, filthy liars)
I am heartless, I am vain, insensitive, insane, They say that I'm a national disgrace (disgrace)
I am nasty (yes!), insulting (no!), basically revolting (uh huh), I'm a concentrated pile of human waste (he's human waste)

I'm a nazi (he's a nazi), (Sieg heil!) I really am
'Cause I'm a nazi (he's a nazi), That's right, you're being scammed
I'm a nazi (he's a nazi), I don't care about the middle class
'Cause I'm a sick Republican sleaze ball, With the face of a horse's ass
(He's a sick Republican sleaze ball) Ho!, (With the face of a horse's ass)

They say that this is not about my vanity, They doubt my sanity
They think I'm nuts (so nuts), I am a cyst on the ass of humanity (eww!)
New Republican slogan: "Read My Putz", (read his putz)
From the bowels of Adolf Hitler, Comes the voice of Rush Limbaugh, heh heh

In closing, let me say: that each and every day
I'm an evil, rotten, egotistical snob (evil, rotten)
I'm the cop of the cop of Joe McCarthy-like gestapo
The right wing, foam-at-the-mouth, jackbooted slob
The Democratic-trashing, years of liberal bashing
With the equivalent compassion of a grommet (a grommet)
With the I.Q. of a fig; I'm a fat, obnoxious pig
And the truth of the matter is... I'm vomit (he's vomit)

'Cause I'm a nazi (he's a nazi)
(Sieg heil!) I really am
'Cause I'm a nazi (he's a nazi)
(Sieg heil!) You're being scammed
I'm a nazi (he's a nazi)
I don't care about the middle class
'Cause I'm a fear mongering scum bag
With the face of a horse's ass
(He's a fat conservative butthead) Hey!
(Sick Republican sleaze ball) Ha ha!
(Fear mongering scum bag) Ho!
(Egotistical ass wipe) Yes!
(Mean-spirited, hog wallowing, fat, conservative putz)
(With the face... of a horse's ass)

Mega-dildos, Rush!

Re:Audio Snip Remixing: Limbaugh being an example.

[Anonymous Coward]

Did you ever realize the irony in the lyrics, calling Rush a Nazi and saying he has "a sub-human figure"? No? Thought so. You're a leftie, after all.

Re:Audio Snip Remixing: Limbaugh being an example.

[sacmog]

Thank you Mr. Coward. That may be one of the funniest things ever. I know just who to send it to.

Re:Audio Snip Remixing: Limbaugh being an example.

[cosmol]

I thought it was funny, If you are pointing out logical errors in a joke song, you need to find better things to do with your time. Maybe you could make an anti-Clinton or Kerry mix? I'd love to hear more of these mixes from "the other side", bring them on!

Re:Audio Snip Remixing: Limbaugh being an example.

[Anonymous Coward]

On a similar note, a while back, The Evolution Control Committee did a remix of a speech by George Bush Sr. (during the Gulf War of the early 90's). At that same link, they have a spoof of the moon landing recording, and a mix of Dan Rather quotes over a sample from ACDC's Back in Black. Check them out. They're pretty funny.

Re:Audio Snip Remixing: Limbaugh being an example.

[jez9999]

Heard it.

Eric Blumbrich has done a wonderful Flash animation to go with it here.

Re:Audio Snip Remixing: Limbaugh being an example.

[Anonymous Coward]

I'd love to hear more of these mixes from "the other side", bring them on!
ummm , we're usually busy working and paying taxes

Re:Audio Snip Remixing: Limbaugh being an example.

[Anonymous Coward]

You have no free time? Sucks to be you.

Re:Audio Snip Remixing: Limbaugh being an example.

[TamMan2000]

we're usually busy working and paying taxes

you mean playing golf while your capital works, right?

Just because I am a liberal, doesn't mean that I am not a well paid hard worker. I make more than most families in this country live on, and I pay taxes accordingly. The difference is, I see that this is the way it should be. Not all of people are self centered greedy ass holes, once you understand that, maybe you can then understand liberals.

I don't believe the news anymore these days

[Anonymous Coward]

I don't believe slashdot anymore, especially with a cheapshot being thrown in every chance possible, or liberal bias flowing out of the ears. What ever happened to the good old tech talk? I want the old Slashdot back, Liberal free

That's hillarious!

[Anonymous Coward]

Wait, no it's not.

Godwin's Law... yadayadayada... Do not pass go... Do not collect 200 dollars...

Re:That's hillarious!

[Anonymous Coward]

Yes, yes, Godwin's law, the copout of the internet era. It's amazing how people will latch onto Godwin and conveniently have an excuse to avoid actual debate just because someone uttered the word 'Nazi' or referred to Hitler.

It may have had a point at one time, but I submit a corrollary(sp?); invoking Godwin's law is generally chickenshit, because you get to attempt to end an argument without answering it.

Re:That's hillarious!

[Anonymous Coward]

You cannot "invoke" Godwin's law you fucking retard. It's an observation. Try invoking the law of gravitation, dipshit.

Bush Needs No Editing

[etLux]

Mr. Bush doesn't need editorial aid to sound like a moron. This is a skill he has mastered all on his own.

RTSP? new to me

[real_smiff]

lots of discussion of George Bush and politics, but can someone tell me what an RTSP is and how i can get it to play. i use Opera and when i click on the one suggested ('Dubya Sez: I can't do my job!') it says 'address type is unknown or unsupported'. i did a search for RTSP and found this http://www.rtsp.org/2001/implementations.html but don't know where to go from there. sorry if i'm being stupid, i read the player troubleshooting on WebJay but that only covered M3U and SMIL. am i alone in not knowing what this is? any advice please?

Re:RTSP? new to me

[dosius]

MPlayer groks rtsp, for you Linux geeks out there...

Moll.

Re:RTSP? new to me

[Anonymous Coward]

Who cares about RTSP? This is slashdot, we're making fun of Dubya! Stupid... Get with it!

Re: RTSP? new to me

[Anonymous Coward]

Tools > Preferences > Programs and paths

"Add" a protocol called "rtsp" and point it towards a program that can play this stuff (probably WMP or RealPlayer in most cases, but Media Player Classic if you're 1337 like me).

You should be all set. Long live Opera!

Re: RTSP? new to me

[Anonymous Coward]

Okay, now how about Mozilla? I can view the registered protocols under preferences, but theres no way to add more. I'm not going to hack my registry just to get WebJay to work, either.

But let me get this straight: If I install Opera, and do what you said, then Windows Player will play realmedia? You'd think the WebJay authors would have hashed this stuff out before posting it to slashdot (and yes, if you read their blogs, they were looking to get this posted).

Re:Movies

[Anonymous Coward]

You might enjoy Napoleon Dynamite. See it TONIGHT!

Political Speech on a Technical Site

[cosmicpossum]

It's getting very tiring reading the overtly partisan comments on shashdot. I would like to remind the everyone that there is an approximate even split in American public opinion on politics.

Being an election year means a long slog though the BS on both sides. Please let this be a retreat from it instead of an amplification of it.

Off of my soapbox now...

Re:Political Speech on a Technical Site

[mikestro]

I agree. I just wish the posters would keep the "news", and not this Michael Moore vs. Rush Limbaugh lard.

BTW: Who IS fatter? Limbaugh or Moore?

Re:Political Speech on a Technical Site

[grcumb]

"It's getting very tiring reading the overtly partisan comments on shashdot."

So, you'd rather see implicitly partisan comments? 8^)

"I would like to remind [...] everyone that there is an approximate even split in American public opinion on politics."

And I would like to remind you that, while slashdot is a site based in the US, its membership is comprised of people from all across the world, many of whom - rightly - have opinions about US politics, because it affects their lives, too, via foreign and market policies. The weight of opinion is far more one-sided outside your borders.

So please, remember that this is 'News for nerds, stuff that matters.' I believe that the outcome of the upcoming election will have repercussions that fall squarely into this definition.

I'll grant you that making GWB say something stupid is pretty sophomoric, but as Voltaire once said, I may not agree with what you say, but I will defend your right to say it to the death.

Democracy - online and off - does involve the right to say stupid things. That's why we have moderators. 8^)

Re:Political Speech on a Technical Site

[Anonymous Coward]

Moore.

Re:Political Speech on a Technical Site

[Ari_Haviv]

I agree but think you vastly overestimate the intelligence and maturity of most slashdot posters.

Re:Political Speech on a Technical Site

[actiondan]

I would like to remind the everyone that there is an approximate even split in American public opinion on politics.

Could you please tell that to Fox News?

Dan.

Re:Political Speech on a Technical Site

[BCW2]

Only if you tell it to ABC, CBS, NBC, and CNN. Since they only want to show thing that reflect badly on anyone who is not liberal.

Re:Political Speech on a Technical Site

[demachina]

That simply hasn't been true since 9/11 at least. Every one of the major networks was cheering the Bush administration on as they rode across the sands of Iraq sitting in U.S. armor. None of them engaged in the mildest scrutiny of why it was happening or said anything that reflected badly on the White House until very recently when it started to go bad, and it became obvious there was a disconnect in truthfullness somewhere. None of the networks had anything bad to say about the Patriot Act or its addendum snuck through Congress in the middle of the night, and they still really don't give it and Ashcroft the scrutiny and criticism they deserve.

There may have been a liberal bias in the media before 9/11 but it was erased under the massive force of flag waiving and patriotism in its wake. They simply had to follow the trend or lose ratings, for example CNN losing number 1 to Fox. So, they all swung to center or right of center but the right wingers still keep harping they are still to the left to see if they can keep pushing them even further to the right.

The one person I can think of you might still brand as left of center is Christian Amanpour but its important to note she works most of the time for CNN international and she is a lot more in tune with Europe on the left/right scale. Europeans and the rest of the world must be aghast at how far to the right American politics and media have swung, even more so when someone like you tries to claim they still have a liberal bias.

Re:Political Speech on a Technical Site

[BCW2]

Peter Jennings, and Dan Rather are very left and have not changed. They are all pushing for Bush to lose, just like they mever understood how Reagon won twice and Bush 41 won once. They also tried to portray Clinton's lies under oath as no big deal. It was.
The reason everyone says Fox is so right is that they come closest to the middle, which seems right compared to the others. Journalists are supposed to report the facts so we can draw our own conclusions. They don't.

Re:Political Speech on a Technical Site

[demachina]

"Dan Rather...very left and have not changed"

That wasn't what I saw for Dan at least. He appeared to move dramatically to the right after 9/11. I don't watch his new much but have seen him on Larry King a number of times and he doesn't sound left at all any more. Jennings is Canadian, America is so far to the right most Canadians are going to be left by comparison.

"portray Clinton's lies under oath as no big deal. It was."

After eight years of never ending Clinton hounding at great expense to the tax payers, lying about sex really wasn't a big deal. The insanity was the vast sums spent and trying to impeach him over it. It didn't get any one killed, it didn't hurt anyone besides Monica and Clinton's family. The disconnects in the truth on the war in Iraq were far more grave than any lie Clinton told, they are getting a lot of brave Americans killed for no particularly good reason.

Europeans were baffled by why the Republican's were so obsessed about a sexual liason between consenting adults. The only reason it turned in to a national embarrassment was thanks to Starr and the Republican's publishing every gory detail so everyone, including children, had to read about sexual intimacies that should have never been made public. It was assassination with words instead of a weapon. If they did it today the FCC would have to fine every network that ran the story because it was as tawdry as anything Howard Stern does.

Contrast it with the Bush administration who outed a CIA agent to extract revenge on Joe Wilson. George W.'s dad said it was one of the most reprehensible of crimes years ago. To date no one has been charged and the White House is obviously in no hurry to find the culprit and punish them.

You have a very double standard on what constitutes a big deal.

"The reason everyone says Fox is so right is that they come closest to the middle, which seems right compared to the others. Journalists are supposed to report the facts so we can draw our own conclusions. They don't."

No, you are just so far to the right Fox seems like the middle to you. We may as well call it a draw, the middle depends on how each individuals scale is calibrated.

Re:Political Speech on a Technical Site

[BCW2]

Clinton lied under oath. That is an impeachable offense and he was. The Senators that voted against conviction said it wasn't important enough. Thet are no longer qualified to serve since they don't know the difference between right and wrong. How can they make laws?

Vote out all incumbents, our forfathers wanted a legislature that did it's job and went home to real jobs. Not a ruling class. If you make less than $135,000 per year you have NO representation in Washington. They just care about their own tax bracket.

The Ultimate Cumshot Collection

[Anonymous Coward]

I can see it now: 945 continueous hours of non-stop cumshots from thousands of pornos.

Oh god. I'm going to cream myself just thinking about the possibilities!

Re:The Ultimate Cumshot Collection

[Anonymous Coward]

FYI, you can already download compilation cumshot videos put together by amateur video editors. They're actually very funny. Moneyshot after moneyshot you get to see a different reaction out the chick everytime. I hate it when they laugh though.

Catch her in the eye! :-)
(Catcher in the Rye)

Re:The Ultimate Cumshot Collection

[Anonymous Coward]

i have mods now, and too bad there isn't a "-1, scary" option. oh wait, i responded, so i guess i lost my mods anyway.

Re:The Ultimate Cumshot Collection

[Anonymous Coward]

Geez. I thought everyone had heard about Edit Decision Lists. BFD

Re:pr0n

[Anonymous Coward]

true true true. I wish they would incorporate that into Civ III.

Fire, of course, is great because without it you couldn't spy on your neighbors having sex at nighttime.

The wheel helps you load slate after slate of cave paintings home to your cave.

Iron working promoted better BSDM stuff, where those simple bronze chains just couldn't hold.

And, of course, 'literacy', so people could put comments with their porn pictures to annotate them. let's face it, some of the best literature is the comments that go w/ porn photos.

reagan mix

[Anonymous Coward]

reminds me of these pro-drug reagan mixes. What is amazing about these kinds of mixes is how realistic they sound. These were done years ago and aren't quite as polished as the rush ones.
short version:http://www.erowid.org/psychoactives/humor/ humor_reagans_prodrug.mp3
long version:http://compass-rose.satanosphere.com/~bhus ton/reagan_drug_promo.mp3

RON: Nancy's joining me because the message this evening is not my message, but ours. Despite our best efforts, shortages of marijuana are now being reported. From the early days of our administration, Nancy has been abusing marijuana on a daily basis, and her personal observations and efforts have given her such dramatic insights that I wanted her to share them with you this evening.
NANCY: I yearn to find a way to help share the message that drugs open your eyes to life, to see it in the vivid colors that God gave as a precious gift to His children.
RON: And drug abuse is NOT a crime. Drugs and excessive alcohol are used by former Attorney General Meese.
NANCY: Drugs help us create love, and hope and trust and confidence.
RON: Being friends to others is the best way of being friends to ourselves.
NANCY: It's up to us to change attitudes, and simply enjoy life to the fullest.
RON: And in the most important area, individual use, we see progress. The US military has more than tripled the use of drugs among it's personnel since 1980. Tonight, I can report to you the Vice President Bush smokes marijuana regularly. And there's one more thing; Nancy and I are hooked on heroin.
NANCY: Each of us was once strung out on several drugs.
RON: Here in the White House, drugs are a constant temptation. But we still have much to do. Our goal is to expand drug trafficking at all levels of government and in the private sector. Help us.

rights make right

[Doc Ruby]

The media data is served by someone else. If they are serving it without the copyright, they are violating the copyright. The pointer (URL) is not. It's debatable whether the requestor, who used the pointer to receive the copy, is violating the copyright. However, if the requestor does not know the copyright is violated, and the server does, then it seems the server is at least more responsible than the requestor. If the server has the copyright, then none has been violated.

threats

[Doc Ruby]

Karma Star's post is different from the Anonymous Coward's parent post because even though KS would like to supress the AC's post, KS will not. That's a crucial difference. I'd like to commit various crimes, but I will not, and do not. Therefore, I am not a criminal. The AC's omission of any disclaimer that they "will not", given the rhetorical meaning of "I'd like to", is a strong implication that they would, in this case, for example, if they had mod points. Such a statement in person, with physical potential for supression, is a threat, sometimes punishable as an act of assault.

Re:threats

[Donny Smith]

The point here is, like one of the posts above says, that freedom of expression (even without responsibility) is allowed for articles but the same freedom of expression isn't allowed for comments which often get "flaimbait" or "troll" although they aren't any more or less such than the article they pertain to.

Articles should be rated and moderated the same as comments.
The more so considering the declining quality of articles (if you've noticed there's almost one redundant article per week and so many others are of poor quality).

We already have quick polls so I don't think it'd be hard to implement.

Re:threats

[Doc Ruby]

I would like to see stories moderated by the readership. But there are many flaws in the Slashdot moderation system. So many that I believe that the quality of articles presented to everyone would go down, according to my criteria. And I'm way too busy to moderate them all myself ;). So until there's a tested-better moderation system, I'm willing to accept the "official" posting. In spite of the very low percentage of my own story submissions that have been accepted :).

Re:threats

[cheese_wallet]

You're right. I missed that.

nerds talk

[Doc Ruby]

If you think "News for Nerds" is only technical, then you're just a geek who doesn't grok the Web. I'd like to remind you that there is not an approximately even split in the made-up characteristic of "American public opinion on politics". And that if there were such a thing, with the outrageous acts committed in our name, behind our backs, and directly to us, all lubricated in media lies, we would need *more* comments, not fewer, to help us each decide what to think about it.

Criticism of the President is not "partisan". Defense of him is. And lingo from the Secretary of Defense's leaked memo about the ongoing Iraq war as a "long hard slog", rather than a parade of grateful Iraqis bestowing flowers, are appropriate when criticizing them. Or for the deluded to drown in irony.

Re:nerds talk

[delus10n0]

If you think "News for Nerds" is only technical, then you're just a geek who doesn't grok the Web.

The problem is, we're basically taking something technical (a way to splice together audio/video client side) and turning it into a slam on the president at the end. That's not really "news for nerds," and is pretty unnecessary.

Anyhow, looking at the site, it looks like quite a few of those people contributing streams don't like Bush, or the U.S. for that matter. That alone is enough to keep this nerd away from that site.

I'll get rated flamebait for this anyway; liberal posts are in this year, while conservative ones are not.

Re:nerds talk

[Doc Ruby]

You've got a point that the nerdier people wouldn't even realize that their news had any content worth discussing - just the technology for "remixing" it. But this country is so politicized, internally and externally, in an unpopular war with a weak economy, that even nerds want to talk about it. I think that's to the nerds' credit. And the extreme minority (at a glance) of nontech threads in this discussion also awards their nerd cred.

a link to a thing doesn't alter it

[lucas_gonze]

Webjay doesn't alter the original. All it does is pass along a URL with some metadata about where to start and stop. That's about as much of a modification as the height attribute on an img tag.

(Speaking as the author of Webjay)

Old News - Babylon 5 "Illusion of Truth"

[rm3friskerFTN]

By using simple smil commands in a URL, a CBS news report can become a short clip of George Bush saying "I can't do my job"

The concept of "selective editing" (a la Mike Moore ;-) was demonstrated very well in the Babylon 5 episode "Illusion of Truth".

The B5 ISN news reporter Dan Randall edited the footage in an unethically truthful way just like Mike Moore

From "Illusion of Truth" plot summary (spoiler warning)

From a second "Illusion of Truth" plot summary (spoiler warning)

From a third "Illusion of Truth" plot summary (spoiler warning)

And finally a fourth "Illusion of Truth" plot summary (minor spoiler warning)

BTW, this Babylon 5 espisode is available on DVD

Re:Old News - Babylon 5 "Illusion of Truth"

[rm3friskerFTN]

Crazy thought - is there such a thing as "sweeps" for websites whereby the webmaster would try to generate a positive blip in web traffic so as to be able to justify higher advertizing rates?

If so then are the recent 'non-technical' political stories a sign/symptom of this website sweeps phenomena?

Re:Old News - Babylon 5 "Illusion of Truth"

[slashdotbs]

If so then are the recent 'non-technical' political stories a sign/symptom of this website sweeps phenomena?

Interesting idea, but I think it's more that people (at least in the U.S., and probably in other parts of the world as well) have suddenly become more vehement in their political beliefs. What GW and those who are now in power are doing is frightening.

A movie like this one (OutFoxed) would barely have registered four years ago. See also the review in today's NY Times.

And whatever you think of Michael Moore and F9/11, it's not the most financially successful documentary of all time because of all of the Bush supporters rushing out to see it.

Comment removed

[account_deleted]

Comment removed based on user account deletion

a better example of news remixing

[lucas_gonze]

Speaking as the author of webjay here:

On a technical level, what's original is that the remixing all happens on the client side. It's a *client side remix*, which is a new thing.

Check out this playlist for a fancier set of techniques, including clipping, multiple audio and video sources at the same time, and a good playlist in general. When you watch that the thing to realize is that the soundtrack is coming from one place, the picture from another, the video from another, and all of that is getting mashed together on *your* machine.

Re:pr0n

[Cruciform]

How long until goatse.cx is replaced by the Ron Jeremy Greatest Hits collection.

*shudder*

corporate venture?

[mshurpik]

So I *do* need to use Real? Because you offer 4 formats, two of which I support, and neither of them seem to work at first glance.

After looking around, I realized why - the playlists are simply lists of mp3s, mpgs, rm's, etc. If your machine can play an mp3, then great. If it can't, it can't. That's all that seems to be going on here.

I had to hunt to find video. I eventually found some, in the WebTV section, and it turned out to be a couple mpgs of Fiddler on the Roof. No editing, no mashups, nothing.

Finally I noticed that the few mashups (also known as "remixes" btw) on your site appear to be rstp: protocol-specific. So the Real format now supports a start and end command. The more I look at your site, the more I wonder if it is a corporate venture by Real, because there's precious little here, other than the expectation that I will install Real software so I can laugh at Bush. Trade one virus for the other? How ironic.

Re:corporate venture?

[lucas_gonze]

It's not affiliated with Real in any way. Real playlists do have a bunch of functionality that Winamp and WMP playlists don't, because Real is the only major vendor with half decent (buggy but still usable) SMIL support. As a result playlist authors who depend on SMIL features also tend to have a preference for Real URLs. ...the alternative is proprietary MS video, which is no better.

There's a fair amount more video there, but I agree that it's too hard to find. Keep in mind that this video playlisting thing is user-driven and took me by surprise.

About your other comments on e.g. "it's just a list of mp3s", that's exactly wrong. The client side remix of multiple overlapping media objects is where the fun stuff happens. That depends on SMIL, which depends on Real, so you haven't seen what people are talking about.

(Not exactly true that you have to have Real for SMIL. You could use QuickTime, except that QT's SMIL support is painfully buggy and crash-prone. You could also use proprietary IE extensions.)

you can sue, but you won't win

[iriles]

At least the big news companies can be sued for libel/slander if caught outright lying.

Technically you wouldn't be able to sue over libel/slander unless they "fabricated" a news story about you. But regardless you're going to have a really hard time beating any major corporation in a law suit.

These two reporters (http://www.foxbghsuit.com ) tried to sue Fox News over a falsified news story. They had a good case too, but Fox won in the end. How? The appeals court decided that "lying" in a news story, technically isn't against the law.

an emerging trend?

[mediatrips]

in one of the older posts someone mentioned they believed the Grey album would encourage others. I am one of those others and I host the San Francisco Mediatrips Competition to encourage more mashing. check it out ... www.mediatrips.com david goldschmidt

George Bush saying "I can't do my job"

[nusratt]

This was the result of digital alteration?
How can you tell the difference? ;-)

128k version here

[bani]

http://www.phildo.org/media/audio/rushnazi.mp3

it may "sound" worse because of aliasing in rush's voice clips which is effectively filtered out by the 64k version. but the background singers and the rest of the music is audibly clearer in the 128k version.

software availability

[Anonymous Coward]

Ah, alrite I see the problem. SMIL is a WC3 standard but it has only been implemented by Real. Personally I have stopped using Real's products because they are the Founding Fathers of spyware.

I have mixed feelings about end-user editorial freedom (SMIL) coming from a spyware and corporate-control vendor. To make an analogy, there is something dangerous about getting people hooked on clean, bottled water only to find out later that the bottle is cancerous.

To put it bluntly, I don't think the industry supports this or similar projects. Personally, I use hardware mixers, but I see the convenience of SMIL drawing from online streams. My best advice is: Lobby Winamp for smil support.

Video mixing software seems conceptually not too difficult. Assuming you have access to bitmap streams, compositing them is really just the process of blending the pixel colors, one by one. In fact...

for i=1 to 100
for j=1 to 100
red_output[i,j]:=streamone[i,j] + streamtwo[i,j]
green_output....etc.

plus the relevant masking (off, or on), and timing (again either off, or on) for each stream. Once you cut through the codecs to get raw bitmap data, smil support is like a 100-line program.

You can also tell Andrew that Site59 says hi :) Small internet, to be sure.

Re:pr0n

[Anonymous Coward]

BSDM? Bondage Sadism Domination Masochism? Is this some sexual version of idiots who call the Digital Millenium Copyright Act the DCMA?

WAS Common in Music

[Anonymous Coward]

so 2003 my man ;)

Internet TV may make America Leftist like Sweden

[Cryofan]

Mass media (TV and radio) are what made America move to the right over the last few decades. Mass media in America has been a vehicle for top-down political memes. These are memes that favor the top of socoety (e.g., ideas that the rich are just like us, that the rich should not pay more tax percentagewise than us, that the rich worked hard to get their money, that commies are dirty pinkos, etc). While NW Europe has moved steadily to the left, America continues to the right, thanks to a neverending stream of top-down memes.

However, when Internet TV starts to take over, when the costs of broadband comes down to $20 or so, then there will be thousands of TV stations to watch, and you will start to see a lot more bottom-up memes (e.g., the rich should pay a much higher percent of taxes, the working poor should not pay any taxes at all, healthcare is a basic right and should be funded totally from taxation, from each according to his abilities, to each acccording to his need, etc.).

I am really looking forward to Internet TV! How about you?

you are a BLINKING noodle

[Anonymous Coward]

You are sitting in your house BLINKING YOUR EYES while changing the channel.

You are not at the TV station broadcasting this shit.

This is webjay

Has he ?

[AftanGustur]

Exactly, He twists the truth to his own needs as much as the next man, but at least he admits to it.

"Twists the truth" ??

That's a new one. Moore has been accused of selectively presenting the truth, but nobody has accused him of actually twisting or distorting it.

He can easily be accused of manufacturing "propaganda". But if you know of any truths he has been mishandling then please speak up.

"Fahrenheit 9/11" wasn't a revelation to me, I had seen it most before (with the exception of what the Afghan Prime Minister used to work with before) but I only wish I had seen this in the mainstream media instead.

Re:Has he ?

[Ieshan]

Oh, come on. Presentation of selective evidence certainly is *distorting* the truth, *twisting* the truth, or whatever it is you want to call it.

If I were to tell you, "Most people are seven feet tall", and then presented you with Example #1, "Shaquille O'Neal", and Example #2, "Yao Ming", etc, you wouldn't say, "Ah. That Ieshan. He's so clever, presenting me perfectly good truth that isn't at all distorted." You'd say, "Jackass. He's taken a few examples out of 7 billion people and expects me to believe that somehow represents something statistically meaningful."

Want the truth? Michael Moore could compile a tape of you, me, or anyone else on Slashdot saying stupid things from the last four years. George Bush just happens to have cameras following him around. Now, I'm no George Bush supporter - in fact, I *loved* Fahrenheit 9/11 - but the people the Democratic party needs aren't those who buy into Leftwing propaganda, they're the folks who are willing to intelligently think about the issues and come to the decision that Democratic Candidate #1 is better than Republican Candidate #1 because of issues A, B and C.

It's not "lies", it's "propagandist reconstruction of the possible facts concerning Michael Moore's primary Hypothesis!" That just sounds lame. Quack Quack. It's a duck.

Re:Has he ?

[Memophage]

the people the Democratic party needs aren't those who buy into Leftwing propaganda...

Actually, I disagree with you here. The Democratic party needs people who buy into leftwing propaganda. Lots of them. In fact, they need all the people who buy into rightwing propoganda to buy into leftwing propaganda instead. That's what propaganda is for.

To a certain extent it is impossible to *not* distort the truth. Every time you take a photograph, you're presenting selective evidence. You're telling the truth about whatever is shown in that 3x4" rectangle, but who knows what's outside the borders. But that's the point of the picture.. to focus the viewer's attention on the subject. It's the nature of the medium.

In the same way, F9/11 is a "photograph" of current issues, foreign policy, and our president. While care is taken to have accurate facts, the purpose of the movie is to focus attention on the subject(s) in an unattractive fashion.

Michael Moore *could have* made a movie about fairly analyzing the facts, including a two-hour debate between right and left-wing propagandists in an attempt to get a balanced look at GWB, but then *nobody* would go see it. Boring as hell, and you can get that on TV. In order to make a successful movie, you have to grab people by their emotions and shake them around a bit.

In the same way, Moore could have made a two-hour movie about stupid things I've said and done over the last four years, but nobody would go see that either. Then again, I'm not the "leader of the free world", and try as I might, I haven't been able to cause the deaths of tens of thousands of people.

Moore is a filmmaker. He obviously has a message, and has done an exceptional job at creating a movie that people will go see, which gets that message across.

Whether you agree with that message is a totally different issue.

better a flipflopper than a neoliberal ideologue

[Cryofan]

I would rather have a slave master who only whips me half the time than one who whips me fulltime.

good use

[XO]

One thing this is excellent for is testing your media players and plugins and such for Linux. I spent about 4 hours playing with my settings in Opera and Mplayer/Xine/Realplayer after hanging out on this site..

of course, I still can't get more than 50% or so of the media to play without the associated program crashing and burning on it, but that's sort of what I expected from the crappy state of Linux media players...

People's bullshit detectors will grow and adapt

[FreeUser]

So what happens if they decide it would be a real funny joke to have a video-hack of the President announcing nuclear war, followed by the newscastors reacting in turn? What kind of damage from panic would result? Something tells me this isn't too far off, and frankly, I'm a bit concerned.

Humanity either grows up (people start acting more intelligently, and our "leaders" and industry stop perpetually dumming us down), or we experience havoc.

Probably a little of both. There was a time when people were incredibly susceptible to advertising, and would believe virtually anything they saw on TV. We as a people adjusted. There was a time when people believed everything on the 6 o'clock news. That too has changed, and we are adjusting.

People will initially believe nonsense like this. However, as a whole we will adjust and such hoaxes will lose their potency. Many believed Orson Well's invasion from mars drama ... no one would believe such a hoax today.

In short, people's bullshit detectors grow and adapt with these sorts of changes, and the scenerio you paint will be no exception.

Technology moves forward, and the collective psyche (and ability to filter out much of the nonsense) moves forward as well. This is hardly an armageddon scenerio ... though I'm sure the Bush administration will paint it as such in order to silence additional speech.

Re:Internet TV may make America Leftist like Swede

[Anonymous Coward]

I am really looking forward to some valid examples of these "top-down political memes!" How about you?

bowling...

[TamMan2000]

There was a re-edit of bowling for columbine due to a small factual error, the DVD is different from the theatrical release. Moore admits this.

I am not a fan of all of his tactics, but he does strive for accurate persuasive arguments, and when he finds that he is mistaken, he corrects himself.

Re:bowling...

[sirshannon]

he kinda sorta admits to some of the accusation and only corrected part of the problem with the scene in question (the added text and mistaken narration over the "Willie Horton Ad"). I don't know that I would call it a "small factual error" and I certainly wouldn't call it the only small factual error in the film.

This is a typical problem I have with Mooore: I refuse to differentiate between him lying to me and him trying to trick me.

While reading the F9/11 facts page on his site, I found this example:

"FAHRENHEIT 9/11: The security briefing that was given to him on August 6, 2001, said that Osama bin Laden was planning to attack America by hijacking airplanes."

The problem here is that he misquotes the movie and the assertion in the movie. In the actual quote from the movie, Moore says: "Or perhaps he just should have read the security briefing that was given to him on August 6, 2001 that said that Osama bin Laden was planning to attack America by hijacking airplanes." Emphasis mine.

Moores leaves out the important part of that sentence because He forgot the important first part of that sentence when he put it on his site. That is probably because, on the same page on his site (up a few "facts"), he says

"NOTE: It should be emphasized that at the time Bush was notified of the first plane attack, he (unlike the rest of America) was already aware that Osama bin Laden was planning to attack America by hijacking airplanes, per the August 6, 2001 Presidential Daily Brief (PDB)."

So in the movie he says that the report was there and he didn't read it, on his site he says the report was there and that he had read it. He is easily able to hide the contradiction on his site by editing the quote to leave out the real implication of his statement in the movie. He can't say both, at least not on the same page.

Of course, he would combat this by saying "no, it doesn't say that he read it, it says that he was aware of it." But like I said, I don't see any meaningful difference between trying to trick me and lying to me.

Re:bowling...

[TamMan2000]

The problem here is that he misquotes the movie and the assertion in the movie. In the actual quote from the movie, Moore says: "Or perhaps he just should have read the security briefing that was given to him on August 6, 2001 that said that Osama bin Laden was planning to attack America by hijacking airplanes." Emphasis mine.

I believe you are over analysing the portion you empasised. That was said in a joking/sarcastic manner in the film, he was just trying to point out that the information was available to him on that date.

Besides, we all know that bush doesn't actually read breifings. He has members of his cabinate, and other advisors read the breifings and report back to him (he has said so himself on multiple occasions), so if we want to go down the literal road, perhaps bush shouldn't have relied on those around him to filter the information like that, and read it himself.

Re:bowling...

[sirshannon]

Almost everything is said in a joking/sarcastic manner in F9/11. If you want to say that true jokes are facts but untrue jokes are just jokes, that's fine. I choose not to.

Slashdot modding is interesting

[demachina]

It seems to be trend that if you post something on Slashdot that slams George W. late in the evening it shoots up to 4 or 5 overnight like this did and then craters to overrated and flamebait in the morning.

My conjecture is the rest of the Slashdot world is modding overnight, and the world outside the U.S. is nearly universal in its hatred of George so the post rises while America sleeps. Then the brown shirts wake up in the morning and there is a reactionary recoil.

A key point about the right wing complaining about liberalism on Slashdot is they choose to ignore the fact there is just as much a reactionary right wing on Slashdot who are Bush/Cheney fanboys, they are just as annoying, just as off topic, and just as venomous or probably on average way more venomous, and a lot more dangerous.

one more problem..

[real_smiff]

thanks, that gets MPC to open it, now i just need to work out how to get it to render (have real alternative installed but apparently doesn't work). streaming stuff never works for me :/ probably because i refuse to use IE/WMP/whatever you're supposed to use.

Re:Already Common in Music (See Negativland)

[jackrd]

What's the legality of A/V mashups? Could people get in the same hot water Dangermouse did?

Yes. Negativland is a great example of this. They had a run-in with the RIAA over not clearing some samples in their 1998 release "OVER THE EDGE Volume 3 - The Weatherman's Dumb Stupid Come-Out Line". They only do mash-ups/collage as far as I know. They've also recently released (on BT as well as others) "The Mashin' of the Christ" which I don't think they've gotten in trouble for yet. They're a really cool band and do lots of activism with IP issues. Not only are they absolutely hilarious, they're really informative as well.

Re:Internet TV may make America Leftist like Swede

[Anonymous Coward]

Gosh, and I was thinking that it was all leftist FUD on the ol' tube. That's what the Republicans are telling me every time they're getting picked on. And they're the party of truth - just ask them yourself and they'll tell you.

You need to listen to your president with a little less cynicism. He's president, so he must be a smart guy. I know I believe him 100%, because he tells me I should.

Watching TV while listening to the radio illegal?

[rustman]

`` A news feed is copyright, audio and visual and altering a copyrighted work is grounds for legal action``

Yes but distributing instructions on how to modify a copyrighted work is not. Altering and distributing a copyright work is illegal. Altering a copyrighted work for your personal use is legal.

If what you're saying was true, we could only view copyrighted works in their original complete format. We couldn't read part of a book. We couldn't listen to music with the TV on. You couldn't even color in a coloring book!