Slashdot Mirror


Slashback: SCO, COPA, AllofMP3, Navier-Stokes, and More

Slashback tonight brings some clarifications and updates to previous Slashdot stories, including: IBM speaks about the SCO suit, another angle on COPA, AllofMP3 followups, Navier-Stokes solution withdrawn, a librarian's guided tour of Wikipedia, and the iPod's 5th anniversary. Read on for details.

IBM speaks about the SCO suit.. MasterOfGoingFaster brings to our attention Groklaw's detailed analysis and complete transcript of IBM's 10-point response to SCO's claims that Unix code showed up in Linux. From the article: "We've listened to SCO for more than three years tell its side of the story, and the media printed its every word. IBM, when asked to comment, invariably said nothing. Now it tells the court in detail how truly wronged it has been by The SCO Group, and why the court should bring this wrong to an end by granting IBM's motion for summary judgment on SCO's contract claims."

Another angle on COPA. segphault writes to point out an Ars Technica article that discusses in depth the ACLU-vs.-DoD COPA case. The article includes an interview with plaintiff Aaron Peckham, a free speech advocate and the creator of the popular Urban Dictionary web site. Peckham says that if the Internet censorship law were to go into effect, Urban Dictionary might have to shut down or move overseas.

AllofMP3 followups. Two pieces of news after Visa shut off AllofMP3.com. ColinPL writes, "According to Ars Technica, the IFPI lobbied Visa to reject payments from AllofMP3.com. The plan worked, and an IFPI spokesperson said the plug was pulled in early September. AllofMP3.com has resumed its public relations blitz, claiming Visa and MasterCard's decision to discontinue its relationship has no legal justification." And bjoeg writes, "Today Tele2 (a large Danish telco and ISP) received judgment from civil court to block their customers' access to AllofMP3.com. Tele2 has appealed the verdict, and for now access to the site is still open."

Navier-Stokes solution withdrawn. nherm writes, "So I finally decided to take a look at the solution of the millennium problem on the Navier-Stokes equation (previously discussed on Slashdot) and found that the entry on arXiv.org says 'This paper is being withdrawn by the author due to a serious flaw.' So I suppose that the rest of us still have a chance on it? From the arXiv.org page I found this interesting weblog entry with some comments on the issue, pointing to another weblog entry: 'I would not be surprised to learn later that her work, even if flawed, has led the way to helping solve this long-standing problem.'"

A librarian's guided tour of Wikipedia. tiltowait writes, "With the potential rise of Citizendium and the continued media circus surrounding Wikipedia's foibles, it's a good time to review the current state of Wikimania and consider what these disruptive technologies mean for the future of 'authoritative' information sources. If you've ever wanted for a general overview of Wikipedia or needed something to point to when asked, 'Wikipedia? Isn't that just a bunch of lies?' then the 1-hour screencast titled 'Why Wiki?' is for you. The online video is my perspective on the pros and cons of Wikipedia and how it stacks up to traditional publication formats."

The iPod's 5th anniversary. This one should perhaps be filed under "SlashWAYback." buddhaunderthetree writes, "Five years ago today Slashdot was introduced to the iPod and the reviews were mixed to say the least. CmdrTaco set the tone when he opined, 'No wireless. Less space than a nomad. Lame.' Many of the 1044 comments that followed weren't much more enthusiastic. If anyone had dared to predict that in 5 years the iPod would have 70% of the mp3 player market, they would have been derided as an Apple zombie. Here's the original thread: Apple Introduces iPod."

17 of 144 comments (clear)

  1. You know what would be nice? by Control+Group · · Score: 4, Insightful

    If some of the zealots/fanbois/doomsdayists/next-big-thingers would go back and read those comments. Then think about how melodramatic, self-righteous, and - most importantly - certain so many of the posters were, and how wrong and silly they look now.

    Then (and this is the hard part), they should THINK ABOUT THAT FOR A SECOND before they proclaim how their pet tech will take over the world, their hated enemy will crash and burn, everyone will be dead in ten years, etc.

    Seriously.

    Compare that discussion with pretty much any discussion these days on this site that runs more than 50 or so comments. Reads pretty much the same, doesn't it? Now, I suppose it's possible that this time, we're all much smarter, and our opinions really do dictate the way the world outside /. works... ...but odds are against it.

    (Never mind me, I'm old, I'm drinking, and I've been building blades via a RIB interface through an RDP connection all day)

    --

    Reality has a conservative bias: it conserves mass, energy, momentum...
    1. Re:You know what would be nice? by Cederic · · Score: 2, Insightful


      Personally I think it's ugly, underspecced and overpriced. Thus its success to me must be because of its marketing, and its excellent integration with iTunes.

      There are more elegant, more capable and cheaper devices on the market. They don't have the marketing spend that the iPod does, they don't have the U2 tie-ins, they don't have the mindshare. People don't know whether they've got equivalent usability because they don't know the products exist. (The fact that Apple are transgressing against Creative patents on the usability features strongly suggests that the iPod isn't unique in being usable in this particular market.)

      I'm curious that you consider 'primarily marketing' to be an insult. What are you getting so defensive about?

      The initial post was that people were posting ill-informed opinion five years ago about the iPod. I am merely highlighting that many of the points they raised were very accurate, and that the iPod has succeeded despite those deficiencies. Forgive me for looking objectively at a product and not joining the fashionable trend of the moment.

  2. Selective memory... by CODiNE · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Many of the 1044 comments that followed weren't much more enthusiastic.

    I just browsed through that original article (link was busted, had to google it since /. search is useless), and while floating around at 5 I saw 15 posts and most were actually positive about it. Sure there were plenty that dissed it, but the mods sure seemed to think it was a decent device that day. Unless you somehow imagine the Apple fanbois outnumbered the Apple-haters that day. Doubtful 5 years ago. Perhaps certain segments of the Slashdot community wagged their heads but I wouldn't say they were representative of the whole.

    --
    Cwm, fjord-bank glyphs vext quiz
  3. AllofMP3 by NitroWolf · · Score: 5, Insightful

    The fact that AllofMP3 is so wildly popular with the masses (heck, even my father and mother use it) should be a clear indication to artists and, god forbid, the music industry that DRM free, affordable, portable music is what people want... and they will pay for it, even if they are offered it for free via P2P.

    I stopped downloading music via P2P when I found AllofMP3, and I now pay for it happily. Save me the bullshit about it still being "theft" ad nasuem. The fact is, I am willing to pay for music at a reasonable price in a format I want. I am not willing to pay for music any other way. As such, if I am not able to pay for my music in the format I want, I won't buy it. There is absolutely NO loss of sale either way. I won't buy it if I can't get it the way I want it, period. End of story. This is not a negotiable point. The sooner the RIAA and the rest of the music industry gets this through their heads, the sooner they'll be raking in cash again as people flock to "legitimate" quality online music distribution.

    1. Re:AllofMP3 by QuantumG · · Score: 2, Insightful

      How much money doest the artist make per song sold via AllOfMp3.com?

      Who gives a shit? Seriously. Stop calling them "artists", they're not, they're musicians. Singing for a crust is not work. They have no divine right to be rich and famous. Jesus, this phenomona, the so-called "recording artist" is not even 100 years old. It was good while it lasted, but now it's over.

      --
      How we know is more important than what we know.
    2. Re:AllofMP3 by quantaman · · Score: 3, Insightful

      I stopped downloading music via P2P when I found AllofMP3, and I now pay for it happily. Save me the bullshit about it still being "theft" ad nasuem. The fact is, I am willing to pay for music at a reasonable price in a format I want. I am not willing to pay for music any other way. As such, if I am not able to pay for my music in the format I want, I won't buy it. There is absolutely NO loss of sale either way. I won't buy it if I can't get it the way I want it, period. End of story. This is not a negotiable point. The sooner the RIAA and the rest of the music industry gets this through their heads, the sooner they'll be raking in cash again as people flock to "legitimate" quality online music distribution.

      Sorry, I don't have a problem with people getting music via p2p, it's clearly non-commercial and there is a strong ethical argument that permits filesharing, but AllofMP3 is creating nothing original, there are merely profiting off of these works and giving no compensation to the authors (at least those in the west). As far as I'm concerned AllofMP3 deserves everything is has comming to it.

      If you really want to buy DRM free music and support our culture via the creative commons than there are options http://magnatune.com/.

      --
      I stole this Sig
    3. Re:AllofMP3 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

      The problem is, your money isn't supporting the artists at all. It's just enriching some guys in Russia who run a server and have nothing to do with the music they distribute. It would be better if you used p2p to get your music for free and then paid about 10% of the retail price to some deserving charity.

    4. Re:AllofMP3 by snuf23 · · Score: 4, Insightful

      So if they are songwriters they aren't artists? They create creative works. Was J.S. Bach not an artist? Mozart?
      You're right they don't have a divine right to be rich and famous. Most of the artists I listen to are not rich or famous. If they are lucky they make enough to live off of selling records and touring but that's probably the minority. If I'm going to pay anything for a song I'd rather it went to feed the musician in hopes that they can continue to produce more music I like and don't end up leaving the industry.
      I certainly am not going to pay someone for just hosting a server full of mp3 files.

      --
      Sometimes my arms bend back.
    5. Re:AllofMP3 by TheRaven64 · · Score: 4, Insightful

      The thing about AllOfMP3 that the recording industry hates is that it shows the what cost of distributing digital music is. Even if they don't pay anything to the artist, they do cover their own costs. I would happily pay 2-3 times the AllOfMP3 cost for DRM-free music, and now (because of AllOfMP3) I know that if the music industry wanted to they could do so and still make a profit.

      --
      I am TheRaven on Soylent News
    6. Re:AllofMP3 by QuantumG · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Meh. Why not support local musicians? Ya know, people you can actually see and talk to. Copyright is just stupid, really really stupid. Imagine we could infinitely and cheaply copy food. We all had a kitchen in a box and we could download recipes from the Internet for it. No-one seems to mind that people copy recipes - they're not covered by copyright even. So now I'm imagining the chefs of the world getting mad that they're not getting a cut of people translating their recipes from books into Autocooker format. People used to buy their books cause they were really handy to have on a shelf in the kitchen, but now that a lot of people have got Autocookers they want digital recipes and once its digital people have a tendancy to share it more than they did when it was in dead tree format. The fact that now people with no cooking skills can sample some famous chef's food and will more than likely seek out that famous chef's restraunt and pay for a meal where before they wouldn't have, that's quietly ignored. The chefs form together into an alliance and lobby governments to extend copyright to cover recipes, just like the "recording artists" lobbied the government to extend copyright to cover audio recordings. Marketing takes over, and instead of what tastes good to you, everyone now wants to eat whatever their friends are eating. DRM protected recipes are sold by Apple. Techniques to circumvent DRM are outlawed. DRM is mandated. The price of Autocookers actually goes up when it should be going down. People all over the world continue to starve because, although Autocookers could solve world hunger they threaten the status quo.

      BTW, it's really annoying that I have to revert to science fiction to get across my point. Copyright on sound recordings is a relatively modern thing. Isn't it fair for society to be able to throw out something that we don't want anymore? It's not like you can claim that it's been this way for thousands of years. It was a nice experiment, the result is a restriction on speech, freedom and culture, let's move on!

      --
      How we know is more important than what we know.
    7. Re:AllofMP3 by snuf23 · · Score: 4, Insightful

      "Why not support local musicians? Ya know, people you can actually see and talk to."

      Why? Why, if I don't like the music they make? What do I care about seeing them and talking to them? How are they more worthy of my money versus someone who lives somewhere else in the world who's music I actually enjoy? I fail to understand why proximity should influence who I want to support.
      I'm not supporting DRM or copyright restrictions, I am supporting paying for music I enjoy in hopes that more such music will be produced. Is that hard to understand? The point is that the songwriter as the source of future music I enjoy is not generic and replaceable.
      I am in favor of direct payment, cutting out middle men and payment being optional. I have no problem with musicians needing to tour to make money (this is really how it currently works in terms of profits). I see no difference in buying music directly from the musician as I do from placing money in the hat of a street musician.

      --
      Sometimes my arms bend back.
    8. Re:AllofMP3 by QuantumG · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Calling singing/playing an instrument work is insulting to people who do real work for a living. You might as well claim that professional surfers work. Oh, it's so hard, have you ever tried it? Just because it takes effort, doesn't mean its work.

      --
      How we know is more important than what we know.
  4. Re:music piracy is WRONG. by Grishnakh · · Score: 3, Insightful

    While Mencken's quote "No one ever went broke underestimating the taste of the American public" is probably more true today than ever, your examples leave a little bit to be desired. NVidia, while their refusal to GPL their Linux drivers is annoying, is most certainly a leader in 3D graphics technology. AMD is also most certainly a leader in CPU design, as their CPUs have been outperforming Intel's for some time now until the recent release of the Core 2 series. As for the iPod, it definitely has its faults, but it gave people what they wanted: a music player that worked the way they expected it to. Not many others have managed to please so many people with their user interfaces on portable units.

  5. Re:comment on the mathematician by 1729 · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Yeah, because a mathematician without a first-rate pedigree couldn't possibly do important math. (As for Brooklyn Polytechnic, I know of at least three prominent mathematicians who earned their undergraduate degrees there.)

  6. Probably right by siwelwerd · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Even if the paper was withdrawn, I'd venture that it's likely it will still lead to a correct proof. Even Wiles' proof of Fermat was originally flawed and had to be corrected.

  7. Re:AllofMP3 - Access now closed by terminal.dk · · Score: 3, Insightful

    As the ISP said an effective block of allofmp3 would cost in excess of $15 mio, court actually listed a series of acceptable solutions to the problem.

    So Tele2 has now implemented one court suggestion, blocking www.allofmp3.com in DNS. They know, and IFPI knows, that it can easily be bypassed (hosts file, using DNS at another ISP, TOR etc).

    The judgement can have implications for all of EU, since the case has been run as en EU law case. So if the ISP loses the appeal, IFPI will use this to go to other countries to have ISPs shut down allofmp3.

    The most bad about all this is, that the content of allofmp3.com is not illegal in Russia where it is hosted, so you could say it is censorship.

  8. Re:music piracy is WRONG. by ajs318 · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Yes there is.

    When a major record label hold the rights to a band's songs to ransom, demanding a number of solo albums by each member if the band split and ever want to perform their old songs again in their new guises, I'd call that piracy. When a major record label hold their customers to ransom, demanding more money for the same song as they already paid for once but playable on a new device, I'd call that piracy. When a cartel of major record labels buy laws limiting the usefulness of recording hardware, I'd call that piracy.

    --
    Je fume. Tu fumes. Nous fûmes!