A Tech Lover's Call to Arms

PrinceofThieves writes "CNET technology columnist Don Reisinger has issued a call to arms for all journalists and tech junkies to join him in his crusade against the forces that attempt to ruin the sanctity of tech. 'Now, a new group of people has emerged to confront the tech lovers all over the world and stop them from being able to do what they want with the technology they own. And while many have tried to confront them on an individual basis, it has not worked. And it's for that reason that we must all come together and fight the ridiculous impositions brought upon us.'"

Comments

Sanctity of Tech?

[CrimsonAvenger]

What kind of idiot actually thinks there is some sort of "sanctity" to tech, or anything tech-related?

Re:Sanctity of Tech?

[ColdWetDog]

What kind of idiot actually thinks there is some sort of "sanctity" to tech, or anything tech-related?

Somebody who really needs to get a grip on what's important in life. Poor fellow: "Everyday when I wake up, I'm constantly reminded by how limited we are in our rights with technology." (Proceeds to rant about RIAA and friends).

OK, all you slashdotters who continually post the same whining about teh evils of said RIAA and the importance of being able to freely copy anything you can get your hands on: Do any of you wake up and and think about this stuff?

This guy needs to start with the front page of some news periodical. "There's more to the heavens and the Earth, Don, than are dreamt of in your philosophies."

Re:Sanctity of Tech?

[Quiet_Desperation]

Maybe he meant "sanctimonious."

I read the summary twice and still had no idea what he was talking about.

Re:Sanctity of Tech?

[StreetStealth]

You know what? "Sanctity" may be an overdramatic word for it, but if you don't get what it's ostensibly supposed to mean here, I don't think you really appreciate the spirit of the tinkerer.

Yes. Saving human life in Darfur is more important. Political expression in Tibet is more important. Economic recovery in the USA is more important.

But here we are at Slashdot, where the subject is our own lives. To probe, inspect, disassemble, analyze, and modify the technology we use is what we do. We are curious, we are inventive, and we are resourceful.

There are many who openly wish we were none of those and seek to prevent us from doing these things. They fear what they do not understand, even as their bogeymen are less often nefarious and duplicitous, and more often simply curious, inventive, and resourceful.

This message, that tinkering is not to be feared and that understanding is key, is important. It's not on the front page of the papers. It's not life or death. But it is its own little message of freedom. And that's something worth taking a stand for.

Re:Sanctity of Tech?

[wellingj]

What it amounts to is that people who think for themselves are no longer wanted in society.
When did this happen?
What should we do about it?
Who is John Galt?

Re:Sanctity of Tech?

[FoolsGold]

Fair point, but I'd argue what the parent is suggesting is that perspective is the key.

As in, with regards to all the true things that are important in a person's life and what should be worried about, technology should pale in comparison to, in the case of most men, finding a nice girl, raising a family, spending time with your kids, etc. THOSE aspects of life are what count to most people - the pleasures in life that are respected far more than one's crusade to protect the "sanctity" of technology.

Re:Sanctity of Tech?

[radagenais]

It is not the tech that we should sanctify, but the freedom of thoughts and actions that seek to satisfy curiousity and a thirst for knowledge.

And the freedom to do anything you please with something you rightfully own - most especially an object.

But so long as the burden is on Them to have to sue Us one by one to exercise their so-called "rights" and "licenses", I really don't see a real threat to these freedoms - at worst a nuisance. Possession is nine-tenth's the law, after all.

Re:Sanctity of Tech?

[Anonymous Coward]

Actually, I'd say it's more important that that - it's pretty much all that sets us apart from other apes. Intellectual "property" thugs seek to deny others their very humanity.

Re:Sanctity of Tech?

[Jurily]

Saving human life in Darfur is more important. Sounds like a WoW quest to me.

Re:Sanctity of Tech?

[EvilNTUser]

Are you saying that you spend so much time worrying about your family that you don't have time for anything else? Your argument is meaningless, and only serves to diminish the importance of technology rather than elevate the importance of "true things".

But let's look at this from the perspective of children, sure. Do you want them to grow up into a world in which the vendors control everything they can do with their devices? A world in which learning is impossible unless you're the best cracker who ever lived, and the economy is in the gutter because industries aren't adapting to new technologies? No, you probably don't.

And what if we replace the word technology with the word freedom? Are you going to continue being so cavalier about fighting one losing battle after another, small as they may seem?

As aimless as that article may seem to us who already know about all the abuse, maybe it'll actually reach someone who doesn't read slashdot.

Re:Sanctity of Tech?

[Mistshadow2k4]

I agree with you, but I think there's a flaw in your argument. Sure, life in Darfur is way more important, but it has been the allowing of people like the RIAA run rampant in one area that has set the example for others. If you can, say, screw over everyone because you're a record company, why can't I as something else do the same? Why can't I, as a doctor, screw people over, since I see lawyers getting away with it all the time? I don't know who said "rot from the core spreads outward" but he missed the mark; rot doesn't have to be at the core to spread.

Or maybe this only makes sense with a lot of beer.

Re:Sanctity of Tech?

[X-Kal]

Okay, but imagine a world in which we did not have access to news articles that are deemed upsetting or offensive, where controversial ideas are censored.

The tech lover's call to arms is a simple call to stop allowing companies to violate our constitutional rights in the name of copyright law, terms of service and other legal-speak reasoning. Is it right to have our civil liberties violated, all in the name of fighting copyright infringement? Should companies be allowed to charge us huge fees for early terminations, when they're not giving us the service we're paying for, anyways? Should ISPs be allowed to block user access to content they deem objectionable? We are getting a bad deal, and too many people are accepting it like business as usual.

Re:Sanctity of Tech?

[dsanfte]

Your argument is retarded, sorry. There's lots of time in life to support "would-be-nice" causes. It's not the zero-sum game you make it out to be.

Re:Sanctity of Tech?

[Anonymous Coward]

But just because you can put the diagrams to build a nuclear bomb on the internet doesn't mean you should.

Re:Sanctity of Tech?

[Anonymous Coward]

If people said the same things about rifles or road vehicles, they would generally be considered either loonies or assholes.

Re:Sanctity of Tech?

[rohan972]

What kind of idiot actually thinks there is some sort of "sanctity" to tech, or anything tech-related?

From TFA: "But now, as I look at technology zealots like myself ..."

Technology zealots, obviously.

Re:Sanctity of Tech?

[jollyreaper]

What kind of idiot actually thinks there is some sort of "sanctity" to tech, or anything tech-related? He works for Comstar?

Re:Sanctity of Tech?

[PolishPimpin]

What you forget to mention is that saving people in Darfur, Political expression in Tibet, and the economic recovery in the US all are going to have to rely on technology (in one way or another) to solve the problems that are present.

      A hinderence to technology can be linked to the hinderence of these causes.

Re:Sanctity of Tech?

[X-Kal]

Your argument is retarded, sorry. There's lots of time in life to support "would-be-nice" causes. It's not the zero-sum game you make it out to be.

If it weren't a zero-sum game, then please explain to me how we made it to the present-day situation. Assuming you've read the articles, you know exactly what I mean. It's easy to reduce technology-related news to "would-be-nice" - but when it becomes an integral part of our lives, and where the end user lacks proper rights that are usually reserved for corporations, we find ourselves in a pretty big mess. And I'm sorry that you find my argument "retarded" - but I was hoping for a slightly more intellectual response than that.

Re:Sanctity of Tech?

[cayenne8]

"in the case of most men, finding a nice girl, raising a family, spending time with your kids, etc. "

Close....chasing women to get laid is a good thing, but, that part about raising a family, etc, well, that just sucks all your time and money away from fun things like tinkering with stuff, travelling, buying fun toys, and chasing women to get laid with.

I suppose if you make a LOT of money...they I suppose you can have it all, but, that takes a LOT of money. And if you marry, you risk losing half of that when it comes time to upgrade to a newer model.

:-)

Re:Sanctity of Tech?

[SL Baur]

What kind of idiot actually thinks there is some sort of "sanctity" to tech, or anything tech-related? You didn't read TFA and you're the same kind of idiot as the author. The author nearly hits the mark, but his case would have been stronger if he had used software patents as his example instead of petty copyright violations by users of technology.

"Tech" helped rebuild the ruins of Tokyo after we stopped bombing it. High technology is raising many people out of poverty in India, and I hope my sons are able to do the same sort of thing in their Mother's birthplace - Mindanao (by becoming local jobs providers). So _I_ am an idiot who thinks there's 'some sort of "sanctity" to tech'.

Re:Sanctity of Tech?

[extrasolar]

Agreed. I think the point is that, while we know that these companies produce and support technology primarily for profit, we still have to stick up for ourselves in that their purpose, profit, isn't what we're here for. We might want to do things that are contrary to their intentions, we are spontaneous. We're about the appropriation of technology for *our* purposes, not theirs.

In my mind, and I apologize for getting too philosophical, this is really about a rebellion against the very concept of purpose, that a hammer is only for hammering, that a screw is only for screwing. "Hacking", even if that word sounds quaint today, to me means nothing other the art of re-appropriation, turning something meant for one purpose and giving it another.

We all know, somewhere in the back of our minds, that whenever we purchase a device, that that device was only offered for the sake of the company's bottom line, their profit. Very well, this is appropriate. But, as it has been for some time now, that initial purpose hasn't been the last time the company would try to make more money, more profit, from that device. The GPS functionaly of GPS-enabled phones are turned off until you purchase a $15/month subscription fee. The software we buy or download on our machines have built in advertising, spyware, and copy protection schemes.

Indeed, with most of the products we buy, the whole product itself is *designed* to make the company more money at the expense of the freedom of the customer.

So yes, I'd say that the sanctity of technology has been violated.

Re:Sanctity of Tech?

[bechthros]

there's sanctity in anything math-related. DNA, code, music.

Re:Sanctity of Tech?

[Anonymous Coward]

Or Americans?

Re:Sanctity of Tech?

[LinuxLuver]

Did he write that or is that just some journo's way of describing him?

Re:Sanctity of Tech?

[MrKaos]

Are you saying that you spend so much time worrying about your family that you don't have time for anything else?

Especially considering it has the opposite causal effect, likely they are too mentally lazy to realise they stand to loose the most from this selfish attitude. Anything that stifles innovation within the technology industry, threatens it (umm, pun unavoidable?). Laws constructed to artificially support old business models should be resisted because these type of laws stop our industry from evolving new business models, where for once the needs of business and individuals align, who better to actually understand that than technology professionals.

And what if we replace the word technology with the word freedom?

I live in Australia, and I've seen the some poor technology/business legislation, I write to my politicians about my concerns for certain proposals, I have had some success and even if you don't stop the legislation passing you may be able to suggest change to some portion of the wording used to allow a judge a more relaxed interpretation of the law. Further I've found that politicians on both sides of politics will generally advocate in your favor if you are respectful and provide constructive insights.

Are you going to continue being so cavalier about fighting one losing battle after another, small as they may seem?

Someone actually said this to me and I experienced a deep sinking dread. I was decribing the ramifications of our anti-terror laws included that he could be arrested and held without charge or any access to legal counsel, that if his wife saw and knew why he was taken that she could be gaoled (jailed) for five years for telling anyone. That he would have the burden of proving innocence instead of prosecutors establishing guilt, strict liability in sentencing (only ever used for parking fines), made worse because we have no Bill of Rights like the US or UK. I read those laws because they had laws pertaining to telecommunications intercept, email, IM etc and was horrified when I read the entire package.

I'm just glad that it wasn't the reaction of everyone.

But let's look at this from the perspective of children, sure.

Indeed. I think another factor is our entire economic engine is designed around consumption of resources, and frankly must change if we are to survive. Amongst other things, if a CEO cannot legally make decisions that are environmentally and socially responsible because they affect shareholder value then something in the way humanity conducts it's affairs is definitely broken. There will have to come a day when businesses of all sizes will have to face their externalities in the same way the coal industry is facing it's now. Our children must have the capability to adapt our "systemic" way of doing things through the freedom to innovate, if we constrain that with legal constructs we were to lazy to confront then we are actually allowing the engineering of our own demise.

I see the slow chipping away of our freedom, everyday one less freedom, I'd like to say I do what I do for altruistic reasons but the reality is it scares the shit out of me that so many people are dumbed down into a state of apathetic bliss these days, and I want to say something while I still can.

Re:Sanctity of Tech?

[Weedlekin]

"But just because you can put the diagrams to build a nuclear bomb on the internet doesn't mean you should."

Because not being able to find plans on the Internet will obviously be a real barrier to anyone with the resources to build a working transportable nuclear device.

Wow

[Creepy Crawler]

What a misguided, childish rant.

So, this is news? We see rants (and better quality at that) on the multitude of blogs. I guess we cant really count on anything else from cnet...

Interesting but no direction

[Coldeagle]

He makes some good points, but he doesn't really say much other than take up arms. Unfortunately the very people he's making reference to don't read CNET or any other technology slanted publication. I would almost say boycotting is the best way. Organize a boycott of companies that don't meet with our ideals. I already do this with Microsoft, AT&T, and Time Warner cable. I will not give my money to this companies because I staunchly disagree with their business practices.

What does everyone else think?

Re:Interesting but no direction

[Coldeagle]

Just to clarify by, "people he referenced," I meant the ones in public office and senior management.

Re:Interesting but no direction

[rtb61]

Being a little politically pro-active might also be called for. So not just a boycott but, actually making those offensive practices illegal and, punishable by long term imprisonment.

The internet provides the means by which the majority can regain control over politics and laws. The internet redefines how the public mind scape is formed and shaped. The mass media, greed is every thing message is dying, along with celebrity worship and the mindless messages that celebrities sell.

So a campaign of re-regulation, a campaign of corporate executive culpability and liability, a campaign of not only protecting what we have but also taking back what has already by stolen via corporate corruption of the political system.

Re:Interesting but no direction

[Coldeagle]

I would love to see that eventually, but what's the first step? If there's a major boycott going on, the media will start to pay attention. If that happens, maybe people will pay attention the message that our legal system is fraked up and needs a boost. FCC, Patents and copyrights, etc. We also need to start hitting the freaking polls people, and I don't mean the ones /.

Re:Interesting but no direction

[CodeBuster]

actually making those offensive practices illegal and, punishable by long term imprisonment.

Be careful what you wish for. There are far too many ill conceived laws on our books already and they do plenty more harm than good. There is no inherent right not to be offended. If we start passing laws against practices which some people find offensive then it will be the first step towards the end of freedom. This is what separates us in the civilized Western world from those in the east who live under religious law defining what is and is not offensive both in practice and speech with punishments such as cutting off hands and death. I don't know about you, but that is not how I want to live.

Always remember that the law is the application of violence or threat of violence and should be reserved for those cases where it is necessary to prevent and deter violence to others. The over application of the law, forcing people to live a certain way or not say certain things or the like, is a far greater evil than anything currently done by the corporations which you so detest.

Re:Interesting but no direction

[iminplaya]

So a campaign of re-regulation, a campaign of corporate executive culpability and liability, a campaign of not only protecting what we have but also taking back what has already by stolen via corporate corruption of the political system.

Are you now or have you ever been a... communist?

Re:Interesting but no direction

[spidr_mnky]

My first thought is that at this point, it's not practical to stop doing business with everyone I'd like to boycott. I try to take the positive approach, and keep an eye out for companies that actually do things I respect. I'll refrain from examples, because any "X is good because Y" argument can be countered with "X is evil because Z". In concept, though, I try to give as much of my business as possible to the good guys.

Whitelisting, as they say.

Re:Interesting but no direction

[Anonymous Coward]

He makes some good points, but he doesn't really say much other than take up arms. Unfortunately the very people he's making reference to don't read CNET or any other technology slanted publication. I would almost say boycotting is the best way. Organize a boycott of companies that don't meet with our ideals. I already do this with Microsoft, AT&T, and Time Warner cable. I will not give my money to this companies because I staunchly disagree with their business practices.

What does everyone else think? Just pirate their software. That'll show em.

--Male College Student, Root of all Evil

Re:Interesting but no direction

[rtb61]

Generally the application of communism has been nothing more than another version of totalitarianism, so no I never have been nor wish to be a communist. I am quite comfortable with being a social democrat, you know, you just might possibly have heard of it, a government of the people, by the people and for the people.

Why would wanting to ensure legal accountability for corporate executive officers be considered communism. Taking legal and moral responsibility for your actions might be considered a long way from corporate fascism but it is hardly at the opposite end of the political spectrum, it is generally considered to be the conservative middle ground. Yes, I know it does allow for legalised lying cheating and stealing but, you must understand and you should clearly see by now by the example set by the current US administration that it is inevitably destructive and more closely aligned with being a totalitarian traitor than a democratic patriot.

Re:Interesting but no direction

[iminplaya]

:-) Sorry, I forgot...

What time is it on Earth?

Re:Interesting but no direction

[Anonymous Coward]

So it's OK to use political violence on those you disagree with? Don't be fooled-- advocating for new laws and consequences for violating said laws is advocating violence.

Just because what you advocate for is a positive thing in your mind doesn't mean it will materialize in that way. There are several layers of the implementation of law, and you hold no power over any of them. The law you advocate for will not be written exactly as you wish it to be. The enforcement will be selective, and the penalties will not be fair. Those in power will use it to their advantage. New regulations will create new hurdles for small businesses trying to compete. At the end of the day all you end up with is government-created monopolies.

Microsoft isn't an evil corporation created by the "evils of capitalism" as I'm sure many of you here believe. They used the force and the threat of violence of the government's patent system to regulate away competition. I know the propaganda has told you otherwise, but try to have an open mind.

Re:Interesting but no direction

[Anonymous Coward]

I notice you missed sony from your list, who have done worse things in the last 5 years than the other 3 companies combined

who?

[Anonymous Coward]

"Now, a new group of people has emerged"

Who, exactly?

Re:who?

[darinfp]

"Who, exactly?"

Everyone who doesn't agree with him, of course. That's the way rants work,

Re:Maybe people should stop stealing music?

[Anonymous Coward]

I hope this post is some sort of lame copypasta otherwise you need to shoot yourself in the head for being suck a huge faggot.

Every day, fewer and fewer customers enter my store to buy fewer and fewer CDs. Why is no one buying CDs? Are people not interested in music? Do people prefer to watch TV, see films, read books? I don't know. But there is one, inescapable truth - Internet piracy is mostly to blame. So you have no clue why you get less sales, but you're quite sure it's internet piracy? Way to contradict yourself there, assface.

Re:Maybe people should stop stealing music?

[What Would NPH Do]

If the pirates can't buy the CDS to begin with, then they won't be able to copy them over The Internet, will they? False. Most of the scene releases of CDs and DVDs are stolen or leaked copies from someone on the inside of the production. You're blacklist idea will do all of jack and shit to stop piracy.

You'll keep hearing it

[TubeSteak]

How many times must we hear that video games cause violence before we stand up together and stop the spewing of inaccurate ideas? How many times must we listen to the RIAA tell us that college students are the root of all evil as it pertains to piracy before we tell the organization that it's wrong? How many times must we listen to public interest groups allow families to get off the hook instead of blaming them when "security concerns" are revealed to the public before we tell them the truth? How many times must we listen to people who have no knowledge of the technology industry restate the misguided ramblings of lawmakers before we vote for change? You will keep hearing all these things until your Think Tank writes papers & model legislation stating otherwise.

You will keep hearing all these things until your "experts" go on TV and intelligently explain your position to a media interested in death, sex, and scandal.

You will keep hearing all these things until your lobbyist "educates" misguided lawmakers.

I could keep going in that vein for quite some time, but what it fundamentally boils down to is either changing the structure of the debate or co-opting it for your own message. But honestly, who's going to pay for a 30 second TV ad with a montage of straight-A students saying "I play violent video games and I've never killed anybody"

Re:You'll keep hearing it

[Coldeagle]

Maybe EA, LucasArts, or TakeTwo would pay for them? Seriously, why aren't the big names in gaming spending any money on commercials about what crap it is that playing violent games makes you violent?

Seriously! At least Eminem makes a good point about the violence he spouts, it's just MUSIC, if your kids decide to go blow away their class mates, maybe you should look at yourself and not try to blame everyone else for your lack of parenting. My parents raised me to be responsible for my own actions and decisions.

Re:You'll keep hearing it

[name*censored*]

I just recently watched an episode of "A Bit Of Fry & Laurie" - and I think they had the right idea (and from 1989, ahead of their time!). If simulated violence made people want to act violent in real life, why not include depictions of heroes giving large sums of money to the game makers? That way, if they're wrong about video games causing violence, it won't matter because they'll be rich, rich, rich!

Re:You'll keep hearing it

[Anonymous Coward]

I've got a camera. I'll work free. Running Ubuntu Studio, so i got the edits. Find me those students, and I will do this before George Bush leaves office. I swear that. Hit me up: ildonjuan@yahoo.com

Yeah, don juan. Know why? Cuz I'm no anonymous coward. This isn't Cyrano de Bergerac.

Re:You'll keep hearing it

[westlake]

Maybe EA, LucasArts, or TakeTwo would pay for them? Seriously, why aren't the big names in gaming spending any money on commercials about what crap it is that playing violent games makes you violent?

Because when you take Rockstar out of the picture most of the problems go away.

Bioshock entered the market to rave reviews, healthy sales and nary a word of complaint. Half-Life has been on the shelves for ten years now. There are dozens of other examples.

The games that strike a raw nerve, the games that make headlines, do so for a reason.

Lucas doesn't award points based on the sadism of your kills. It doesn't invite you to mime a graphically explicit disembowelment with the Wii controller.

Lucas doesn't "game" the ratings system to get adult content in under the wire.

Re:You'll keep hearing it

[vuffi_raa]

You will keep hearing all these things until your Think Tank writes papers & model legislation stating otherwise there are many papers out, they don't get the airtime that a panic story like, "the virgina tech killer played violent videogames" - which in the end turned out to be sonic the hegehog when he was 10 years old....

You will keep hearing all these things until your "experts" go on TV and intelligently explain your position to a media interested in death, sex, and scandal tell me how many people involved in either technology or science own any media corps or have a controlling interest in them- I will tell you it is few if any at all- they are the ones that decide content not the pundants themselves

You will keep hearing all these things until your lobbyist "educates" misguided lawmakers. one- lawmakers follow puplic sentiment
two- you can't make a law that says "all videogames are untouchable" or "you can't sue anyone for IP theft" it doesn't make legal sense to do so-

Re:Maybe people should stop stealing music?

[Coldeagle]

You shouldn't categorize everyone who doesn't buy CD's as pirates. One of the reasons I don't buy CD's anymore is because I don't want the bother of converting them to MP3 for my iPod. It took me weeks to convert my collection of 400+ CD's so I could listen to them on my iPod. Now I just buy them online. It's much easier and more convenient.

Another reason I prefer purchasing online is the fact that I don't have to pay for all the songs on an album. I usually don't like between 30-50% of the songs on an album. Why should I pay to buy the songs that I don't really want to listen to?

A righteous rant, but no focus

[icebike]

Yes, we all have our hit list of hated Luddites and money grubbers, but this article is so much standing on on a soap box in a pouring rain screaming to passers by, (most of whom regard the screamer as a kook).

There is no rational plan of action, no believable tragedy for attack, and no suggestion for doing anything but throwing open the windows and screaming into the night.

Until we either change the laws we are pretty much stuck with the current situation of constant turf wars, suits and counter suits until the absurdness of it all starts to sink in.

There are signs that it IS starting to sink in. But not due to whining of the masses, but rather people suing ISPs, counter-suing the RIAA, etc.

Real actions. Pony up for the lawyers and go to court. The soapbox gets you nowhere.

Re:A righteous rant, but no focus

[somenickname]

Actually, I found TFA inspiring. I think we should all galvanize and form some sort of foundation to help protect the electronic frontier. Now if we could only come up with a catchy acronym for it...

Re:A righteous rant, but no focus

[distantbody]

no believable tragedy for attack

You've never experienced having to put down a perfectly adequate CPU and mobo because Tux Racer requires a faster GPU have you?

Re:A righteous rant, but no focus

[dangitman]

You've never experienced having to put down a perfectly adequate CPU and mobo because Tux Racer requires a faster GPU have you?

That's what gives life meaning.

Re:A righteous rant, but no focus

[Fred_A]

You've never experienced having to put down a perfectly adequate CPU and mobo because Tux Racer requires a faster GPU have you? *Sigh* yes, I miss My Tseng ET-4000 too :(

Re:A righteous rant, but no focus

[DarkOx]

People have to be made to care. If you start careing and doing things to that effect people get curious and start asking questions.

"Why won't you see that movie?" your friends may ask, and you can answer "Because its made by Sony pictures and they support an abusive and unfair form of property rights" you can answer.

"So you are not planing to get anything in HD that won't work with Analog component video or strait DVI?" answer "Yes because HDMI is evil, it offers you nothing that DVI with AC3 on digital coax or SPDIF does but criples your device, and they make you pay for this privilege."

You watch their reaction to those statments if they are curious and still interested you point them at inteligent and rational arguments. You them things like RMS's The Right To Read.

If we are patient and win enough converts eventual we will succeed in doing with our wallets what we can't with our votes. Staving these people to death.

What these organizations are trying to do is no less the curupt the ideals and vaules of western society and replace it with their own. Its nothing more and nothing less then a more insidious form of totalitarianism. Instead of abusing your body when you don't cooperate the just abuse your mind all the time. The thing to remember is all their power comes from apathy and complacency. Stop being apathetic, stop being complacent and others will fallow. Yes this will require you to make some sacrifices. It might mean that you can't watch the latest movies and TV in HD. It might mean that you have to fill out your tax forms on paper because you can't buy software that will run on your free platform at home.

You can do it! self reliance is possible! We can win! Revolution begins at home; don't let it end there too.

Re:Maybe people should stop stealing music?

[Jamu]

What a sad, sad story.

Re:Maybe people should stop stealing music?

[exley]

They have fought the War on Drugs with skill, so why not the War on Piracy? Okay, we know that parent HAS to be making a (very long-winded, boring) joke just because of that line. Right?

Re:Maybe people should stop stealing music?

[BeerCur]

okay I'll bite. If you are being truthful, your little record store is going out of business because it is an outdated method of selling music. It's bit like a stable owner blaming stage coach thieves in 1912 for the dwindling number of customers. It sucks for you, but it's time to find something else to do with your life.

Lots of Hot Air

[Comatose51]

Seriously man.

Sanctity of technology? I'm a software engineer. I help created technology but I don't worship it. I love when my code is nice and elegant but I also make trade-offs when needed because what I make has to work in the real world. Sanctity? What is this guy trying to sell? Only fanboys and snake oil salesman talk about technology as some Platonic ideal or traded as an object of worship.

Where has this guy been? Did he JUST now noticed the RIAA, MPAA, and corrupt lawmakers trying to subvert the spirit of intellectual rights and freedom? This didn't just happen over night. The DMCA was passed when Clinton was president.

Lastly, at the end of the rant, he has a call to action. What does he want us to do? Give us a plan. A rant without a plan is just a rant. Unite and rise up? Seriously man. We're not some Bolsheviks trying to overthrow the tzar. Get a sense of reality. The entire "article" is a bunch of hyperbole, obvious statements, and a total lack of any actionable items.

Give me a break. It's an insult to our intelligence.

Re:Lots of Hot Air

[Bill, Shooter of Bul]

Yes, its all very stupid. Is RIAA evil? of course. Are file shares of copry written material evil? Of course. Just because there are two sides,doesn't mean any of them are correct. In most wars both sides are wrong.

Re:Lots of Hot Air

[Heshler]

I agree that there was a lack of substance, but that is understandable considering the breadth of the issues. Yes it didn't have a plan; yes it was a rant. However, it was a provocative rant, which was the entire point. Basically saying let's get our act together. Should geeks have more political influence?

Re:Lots of Hot Air

[Anonymous Coward]

PrinceofThieves writes (article blurb)

Sanctity of technology? I'm a software engineer. I help created technology but I don't worship it. I love when my code is nice and elegant but I also make trade-offs when needed because what I make has to work in the real world. Sanctity? What is this guy trying to sell? Only fanboys and snake oil salesman talk about technology as some Platonic ideal or traded as an object of worship.

I would agree that the word is misused, but the mistake was made by the submitter and not the writer of the article as it appears no where in the article. We mustn't forget however that many also attempt to villainize technology instead of those misapplying it. Many would like to label the users of technology as well, so it is good you call him down for the use of "sanctity" as nothing would get the users and creators of technology labeled as being associated with "satanic" activities so fast as claiming to be "sacred". Of course we never did get the world corrected on "hacker" usage.

Re:Lots of Hot Air

[catmistake]

Right... So the use of words as a PR technique, replacing acurate but simple descriptions with lofty ambiguous terms, maybe like adding the word 'engineer' to job titles, such as sanitary engineer for janitor, or sales engineer for sales person, or software engineer for programmer... These kinds of shameless self-stroking marketing tactics can safely be ignored

Re:Lots of Hot Air

[Anonymous Coward]

Many years ago I walked into the office as a grinning co-worker got of the phone with his sister and started laughing. He then asked me if I remembered him telling me how his sister was having trouble getting her work done in the secretary position she held at an aerospace company, seems she was having to spend all her time assisting other secretaries with the new computers they had just switched them to in place of their typewriters etc. Being the only one in the office with a clue about word processors spreadsheets etc made her the go to person for everyone else.

Her immediate supervisor gave her a hard time over not getting enough of her assigned tasks done and complained to personnel etc.. However the office gossip had apparently already circulated the accurate story of what was going on. Her phone call to her brother was placed after she got called to the personnel office one day. Having went expecting the worst she was very suprised to find that she was being reclassified to the position of Software Engineer at a payscale a few times higher then what she was receiving.

Having grinned and laughed his way to this point in the story my co-worker's expression suddenly changed and he stated "hey, that means she is going to be making a lot more then I do and I have a college degree!" Amusingly he seemed a lot more interested in helping others get things done after that.

Re:Lots of Hot Air

[nurb432]

Ummm everything is technically copyrighted. ( at least in the US )

The debate is if unauthorized sharing of content is wrong, not about copyrighted materials in general. ( which is a RIAA tactic to confuse the issue. )

Oh, and i don't agree with your statement that its 'evil'. it might ( or might not ) be legal, but its not 'evil'.

Re:Lots of Hot Air

[catmistake]

Nice story. Ever considered submitting that to Reader's Digest "All in a Day's Work?"

Re:Lots of Hot Air

[Bill, Shooter of Bul]

Everyone calls *IAA evil, I was just using the common slashdot terminology to make a point. Its pretty clear at least in the US courts that it file sharing of copy written material is illegal. There have also been several class action suits proving illegal anti competitive action on behalf of the record labels as well. both are do illegal things, both are wrong. Right and wrong, good and evil may depend upon your value system, but you really have to ask if your value system has been skewed by what is best for yourself rather than what is best for everyone.

Re:Lots of Hot Air

[nurb432]

It would be nice if you were to use the accurate statement of 'sharing of copyrighted material with out permission'. Just saying 'copyrighted material' only marginalizes those that do allow it, and those that don't believe in IP as it is defined today. ( which is part of what the *AA's want to do, muddy the water and eliminate artists that don't play by the their rules )

I can point you to 1000's of example where the copyright holder specifically requests that that you share. ( be it music, video, software, textual documents )

( and that should tell you where my value system stands :) )

Re:Lots of Hot Air

[Deliveranc3]

What does he want us to do?

Organize, he wants us to start discussing these issues in a manner that encourages others to join the cause.

And while he sounds like he's on a soapbox techies are like cats, each has their own morality (often defined by Star Trek) and while most are idealists who suspect that their real peers will see things exactly the way they do some recognize the need for compromise.

Some points for discussion: Do we believe in freedom of speech if allows; internet pedophilia, copywrite violation, bomb design distribution, etc. Western internet service is pitiful, how much are we willing to suffer to get it working properly; Service outages, government control, high cost private isps, tiered service (god I hope not), etc.

As an avid slashdot reader I think we are largely united on these points, far more than most slashdotters realize.

Personally I think it's shameful that techies don't have a central organization. I'm considering he outcome of the current direction of IP legislations and resistence, I think the outcome will be tight control ignored by all. What I'd like to see is a nation stand up and violate IP openly, if they release their progress openly (This would also make it hard for anyone to try and stop them) many techies would move there it would also allow a developing nation could leapfrog developed nations.

I don't think this is beyond the abilities of the tech community, and while some people may disagree with this specific idea I think it's approximately the scope that should be considered.

- Del

Re:Lots of Hot Air

[vuffi_raa]

Right and wrong, good and evil may depend upon your value system, but you really have to ask if your value system has been skewed by what is best for yourself rather than what is best for everyone. by that very definition the **AA is evil and the filesharers are not. someone who is sharing a file is either ignoring a law which thy don't believe in or gaining the material that they do not have the means to afford- and that is the "evil" that is referred to
on the other hand, the **AA is pushing an agenda for personal means and disregarding privacy and personal liberties and bending the legal and justice system in a persuit to literally destroy the lives of those that don't fall in line with the agenda purely to threaten others to fall in line with the agenda.... this is why the **AA is evil- and I say this as a musician. The **AA is not about fairness or supporting artists or filmmakers or supporting the industry that they are involved wih any more than the IRS or the federal bank is about helping the economic needs of the people- they are conglomorates built only to support corporate interest of a select few at all costs to any who oppose them.

Re:Lots of Hot Air

[Bill, Shooter of Bul]

In the same sense that huge oil companies don't believe in global warming, file shares choose to believe that anything they are doing is not wrong. Trust me, the record companies don't think they are doing anything wrong either.

Re:Lots of Hot Air

[vuffi_raa]

In the same sense that huge oil companies don't believe in global warming, file shares choose to believe that anything they are doing is not wrong 2 totally different arguments and I will not comment on oil companies as I cannot legally, but I can say that your statement is completely wrong on both fronts.
the fact is that you cannot definitiveley say whether or not filesharing actually does anything harmful to anyone other than the **AA companies themselves (and that impact is debatable)- not the artists or the industry, but only those specific companies- what the entertainment industry IS doing is altering the fabric of our government and suing people out of house and home to push their agenda. That agenda is purely for control- in order for their old world business model to continue they must have a stranglehold on the artists and the industry or the model no longer works. Rather than growing to meet the needs of consumers, or educating themselves on current technology entertainment execs are using draconian methods and saying "pay up or else" rather than doing what every other company in a FREE MARKET is supposed to do and attempt to persuade and convince consumers that they are worth spending the $ on. Whether you agree with filesharing or not (and the false nubers that the industry puts up as a convincer), any person with a conscience cannot agree with the values and methods of the entertainment industry.

Re:Lots of Hot Air

[Bill, Shooter of Bul]

No, its exactly the same. I wouldn't expect anyone associated with the petroleum industry to understand, but I'll try again ( nothing personal, I've had friends in the industry that had to leave because they just couldn't live with the guilt -- re: Shell in Nigeria). A honest value system must take into account the situations of people other than yourself. To pretend that you are only hurting RIAA is a fantasy, a symptom of a corrupt moral system. Everyone knows that the entertainment industry is corrupt, but file sharing has also corrupted us all.

Re:Lots of Hot Air

[vuffi_raa]

#1 I don't work for the petroleum industry- I work in legal
#2 I am not talking about an "honest value system" I am talking about the moral compass that involves duplicating data that the creator (or person who purchased rights to the data) doesn't want you to do vs. manipulating or legal system and literally destroying people's lives- when you take the 2 into account 1 is very obviously on a huge scale negative and the other is questionable at best

Re:Lots of Hot Air

[Bill, Shooter of Bul]

I'm basically saying that both moral compasses are screwed up. Being in the legal field you can surely appreciate the meaning of a conflict of interest, and why judges cannot hear trials when dealing with parties that involve friends. I'm basically saying that the file shares have a vested interest in sharing files ( duh), and as a consequence of that they are not in the position to determine what is fair to all parties when concerning file sharing.

Re:Lots of Hot Air

[vuffi_raa]

yes, though if you are a pickpocket, you can still tell how bad it is if someone rapes and kills your family...

Re:Lots of Hot Air

[Bill, Shooter of Bul]

But you can't trust the pickpocket to explain why what he does is bad. That is my point. What other people do shouldn't affect what you do, and why. The rapers and murderers can always find some one who is worse. Maybe they only kill gang members and rape rapists, and justify their actions in the same manner " There is some one worse than me. I'm only doing what they deserve". Obviously, we can't trust them to give us an honest opinion on raping and murdering. Trust me the record execs really think that its them that are being raped and murdered for their crimes of pick pocketing.

Re:Lots of Hot Air

[vuffi_raa]

but in the end that is the same "blame the victim" mentality that you find people using to justify unreasonable actions everywhere (the nazis, the romans, hell- even our current administration)- like I was saying before- there is personal judgement and there are truly reprehensible acts one acts in ones self interest that may or may not partially effect the possible inflation of another's wealth and the other effects the entire poulation of the country and is bleeding throughout the world- effecting policy and stifling innovation, as well as clamping the open possibilities of the free market

But you can't trust the pickpocket to explain why what he does is bad. That is my point. What other people do shouldn't affect what you do, and why. The rapers and murderers can always find some one who is worse. Maybe they only kill gang members and rape rapists, and justify their actions in the same manner " There is some one worse than me. I'm only doing what they deserve". you must not be very fond of laws- it doesn't matter if the victim is a whore or a gang member, the fact is that breaking the law is breaking the law- there is a reason for felonies and misdemenors and manditory and maximum sentancing and that reason is so that when someone is caught jaywalking it isn't an excuse to execute someone that the judge doesn't like. When it comes down to it, a 12 year old kid downloading a hannah montana mp3 or installing a mod chip in a console is not a valid reason for a private corporation to bear forth legal action that destroys the entire family for life.

I must say,

[v(*_*)vvvv]

technology is such an old and abused term I say we stop using it right now. The word is a total buzz kill. Computers and circuitry are already ubiquitous enough that we can just factor this "technology" reference out.

If in 20 years we still refer to our "toys" as "technology" I would be damned.

Re:I must say,

[dangitman]

Fire and the wheel are still technology. It doesn't matter how old a technology is, it's still technology. Perhaps that puts it in too stark terms for you? People would be pretty outraged if they couldn't light a fire or breathe oxygen without paying licensing fees. But that's the way it's going. So, perhaps the term is unexpectedly apt?

Personally, I find "tech," "technological" and "IT" to be more offensive and abused than "technology." What do you think it should be called?

Re:I must say,

[v(*_*)vvvv]

Well, when is the last time you used the word? You can argue anything is technology (as demonstrated by your fire and wheel example), and that is what businesses have done. And that is why when we hear the word we need to know more, because it holds no weight. It is redundant.

This article seems to claim that there are tech lovers and tech haters. Even those who work for the RIAA have their fancy cell phones and laptops and iPods. Even music labels are tech savvy in that they are all over iTunes.

Another word? How about remove it where it is redundant, and use "feature" where it refers to something. Try it.

"IT" is the only word I would defend, since it refers to a category of jobs. I would never say "information technology" though.

Re:Maybe people should stop stealing music?

[Anonymous Coward]

What the hell? Copy-pasta on Slashdot now?!

Get the hell back to 4chan you moron.

Re:Maybe people should stop stealing music?

[Anonymous Coward]

Wow. You are a total douchebag, no wonder no one wants to shop at your store. I especially like the part where you seem to have a mouth as "filthy" as some of the music you have banned in your store.

Re:Maybe people should stop stealing music?

[Trespass]

What the hell? Copy-pasta on Slashdot now?!

Get the hell back to 4chan you moron. Hey, it works for the editors.

Question about this "to arms" thing...

[russlar]

Does taking up arms require me to get off my couch? That would really be a deal-breaker.

And of you want me to go outside at all, forget it.

Re:Maybe people should stop stealing music?

[NoobHunter]

To quote a favorite movie of mine..."And Jack Left Town!"

At the end of the day...what it boils down to is the societal slant to defer consequences and responsibility on others, in this case...the minorities.

RIAA: Our system is dying, the consequence should be to invent a new system. But we will slough it off and punish the innovators so the old bags of shit still running the cartels can stuff their pockets and keep paying for the whores and crack.

MPAA: We are similar in situation to the RIAA except we produce MegaTons of shit and expect people to overpay for it. We should screen the shit we decide to produce more but instead, we will punish those we should be embracing so we can also keep paying for our whores and crack.

Pro-Familly and Anti-VideoGame Violence: Holy shit, where do I begin? We refuse to admit that the reason the youth of today is in a downward spiral of self-destruction is because we pamper our children to the point where they believe they are more righteous than we, the parents and teachers are. We refuse to expose them to the realities of life because it may damage them but when they lack the psychological tools to deal with life once it hits them in the face, we blam everyone except for ourselves because frankly...we are not to blame. Video Games and Movies and Music teach our children to do drugs, shoot guns and kill people. I mean...sure Grand Theft Auto is rated M for Mature and 17+ but I will buy it for him/her anyways. I mean...it's just a video game...but I will blame the development companies when my 12 year old swears like a sailor and tells me to frack off because...well...he saw it in the video game they made....It's not my fault...

The Gov't (In this, I include the Canadian and US Governments because they are just as bad as the other in this...): All of the above can pad my pocket for millions of dollars so they must know what is right for everyone...right? I mean, what harm can passing a bill that a Lobbyist proposed do? Net Neutrality? The Internets? All those tubes? Sure! Let the ISPs control them freely! After all, China had it right, except for all that killing. We just need to figure out a way to do it without everyone noticing....and anyone that refuses? I hear Guantanamo Bay still has a few empty cells.....
That Jack Thomson guy seems so nice! He really has the people in mind and he does think of the children!

I think I covered most of them....putting myself in their frame of mind actually hurt....alot. Where's that bottle of whiskey?

Re:Maybe people should stop stealing music?

[evil_aar0n]

> Why is no one buying CDs? ... I don't know. But there is one, inescapable truth - Internet piracy is mostly to blame.

You just admitted you don't know, but you're sure it piracy. Does that make sense?

Maybe they're not coming to your store because they don't like the hypocrisy of some Jesus Freek pulling a Dirty Harry on teenage kids.

> fought the War on Drugs with skill.

Either you're Nancy Reagan, still with the blinders on, but after a real heavy binge, or you're a shill for the *AA.

Regardless, if you can't see that your business is doomed - or you _do_ see that it's doomed, but you persist - then you deserve whatever untoward fate befalls you.

Geek Voting Block

[Heshler]

I wonder if geeks could form some sort of voting block/interest group. We could stand up to tyranny. Seriously though, I'm not sure the extent to which this is feasible. First of all, people don't generally expect politicians to have a clue about tech. In Canada, it is a non-issue. These kinds of issues can simply be sidestepped by politicians. I guess the question is: how many people (not just /.) would actually change their vote based on a candidate's tech policy? Personally, Obama's tech credentials put him just over McCain (if I could vote there), but ALL OF PARLIMENT/CONGRESS needs to understand these issues in order to enact sound policy and not be easily persuaded by lobbyists. But let's be honest. Many/most of these issues have little tangible effect on typical people. It's hard to persuade people that tech issues are up there with Heath Care and the Economy.

Re:Geek Voting Block

[Coldeagle]

Problem is not many geeks have the $$ to make an interest group! Most of us are well off, but not that well off.

Maybe more of us need to run for office so we can educate the lawyers in Congress about what affect their policies on technology have!

I would say let's start our own political party but so many of us are of different opinions on non-technology related politics. (as seen by the ramped Ron Paul debates seen on /.)

Re:Geek Voting Block

[CodeBuster]

We have at least one card carrying programmer congressman right now, Bill Foster, representing the 14th district of Illinois.

Re:Maybe people should stop stealing music?

[Anonymous Coward]

Yes, this is a really old troll copypasta, sometimes the word games is substituted for cd's. http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&safe=off&client=safari&rls=en-us&q=As+a+record+store+owner%2C+my+business+faces+ruin.+CD+sales+have+dropped+through+the+floor.&btnG=Search

Geek Wakeup Call

[Doc Ruby]

Gee, a call to arms at 11:30PM on a lovely Spring Friday night.

This manifesto is going nowhere. At least not this weekend.

Re:Maybe people should stop stealing music?

[Anonymous Coward]

You must be new here.

It's not that I'm apathetic...

[MrKaos]

...it's that I just don't care.

NOT MORE REGULATION

[sporkme]

The problem is not a lack of regulation; it is that there is already excessive regulation--of end users. The means for organizations like the ones mentioned are based in existing law. The solution is not to make MORE laws, but to repair or preferably repeal the "broken" laws.

What is it that they say about insanity? Doing the same thing over and over, expecting a different result... something to that tune. We do not gain freedoms from more laws. Fouling up the code further for people on down the line is not such a great idea, because that's how we find ourselves here. We are the victims of good intentions and unintended consequences.

So, be politically proactive, but focus that energy on removing the legal weapons that are aimed at the public. Instituting NEW weapons aimed at troublesome organizations constitutes a legal arms race, and that only ends in a cold war!

Re:NOT MORE REGULATION

[Anonymous Coward]

If there are police abuses, do you abolish the police force? No, you institute tougher regulations to prevent more abuse. I don't know why regulation has become the bogeyman for some. It certainly solves more problems than it creates. The recent subprime mortgage crisis could have been prevented if current regulations would have been applied more broadly. Instead, our tax dollars are paying for an enormous bailout of big business.

No, the problem with the RIAA is not an abundance of regulation. It is that well-funded industry groups have undue influence in the government to the point where they can draft legislation. You could fight tooth and nail to have those laws repealed, only to have them immediately replaced by worse laws. Or you could try to prevent them from being able to use their wealth to control the government.

Re:NOT MORE REGULATION

[Anonymous Coward]

The problem with what you say is that some of the problems that have been caused by regulation won't just disappear when there is no regulation. Just look at the monopolies taht the government has created. De-regulation isn't exactly breeding large amounts of competition. Why? Because the government funded the monopolies for so long that anyone else getting into that industry is at a serious disadvantage. Maybe *more* regulations on the monopolies isn't going to help things, but sitting back and 'letting the market do its thing' isn't going to work either.

hypocrite

[Anonymous Coward]

CNET has staunchly stood for everything this W/U claims to oppose. Yeah, I've wanted to get a call to arms to fight back against those who want to take away our technology freedom.

That's why I joined the Free Software movement. My enemy is Microsoft, Adobe, and CNET.

Technology must be stopped!

[iminplaya]

Won't somebody please, think of the authorities? Jackboots aren't free, you know.

just like real life

[nguy]

In real life, all sorts of things are being regulated and prohibited as well. Sometimes, it makes sense (monopolies), sometimes it doesn't (sex, drugs). It's just the way governments and people work.

A motherboard with OpenBIOS would be a good start

[distantbody]

...I believe (I may be wrong) that, unfortunately, there isn't any single entity that is 1.coordination 2.delegating and 3.prioritizing the development of Open Hardware; the closest being The Open Hardware Foundation, and that is closest in name only, as it is currently only working on the Open Graphics Project.

Wikipedia's Open source hardware page otoh informs me of numerous Open Hardware projects, but still, no coordinating entity/s.

Sure some may argue that they don't want to be organised and would rather produce something for hobbyists not mass consumption, but I think a look a the positive role organizations such as the FSF, The Linux Foundation and numerous others have played in developing viable Open Source Software is a good example of why much more coordination would be beneficial in the Open Hardware realm.

Saving human life in Darfur is more important...

[Anonymous Coward]

Saving human life in Darfur is more important

Not really.

If everyone in Darfur died tomorrow would your life change as much as when 3000 folks died in the 9/11 attacks? How about if just your immediate family died?

The cold hard truth is that not every life is equal to most people.

I'm just saying...

The first step

[symbolset]

The first step is to put down our Slashdot fetish and (excuse the term) troll the sites the common folk frequent. They need to know. We can tell them. If we don't there are plenty of astoturfers in a Bangalore web center where people get a few bucks a day to post the same lame FUD every day.

Those of you who frequent the informed corners of the www may be shocked to discover the information more common folk are offered as fact. It's apalling.

Hell, make it a game. Make a website where you get points for correcting disinformation on popular websites, with moderation and prizes. Share donations with the best posters. That would work.

Re:The first step

[rtb61]

Generally I go with politely informing the miss-informed during those all to frequent 'free' service and support sessions, all done in a friendly manner to ensure word of mouth to spread in forums and social networks that I have no real desire to visit. Best to leave the trolling to the marketdroids.

Missed the point

[sjames]

There is a problem, but the article managed to barely graze it on it's way to somewhere else (I'm not sure where).

The part about ripping was there and made sense but that's about it. The real problem is things like media companies driving efforts to force manufacturers to design hardware primarily to make sure it doesn't do what the owner wants.

In turn, that makes open hardware a real problem to obtain. Not that I think we would otherwise get firmware source with a new DVR, but I'll bet manufacturers would make a lot less effort to hinder hacking if they weren't forced into it.

There is a nasty trend towards more expensive, lower performance, and less versatile standards just to please a 3rd party (HDMI cables anyone?).

Part of Vista's problem is that so much of it is designed to prevent the user from (God forbid) copying a movie. Meanwhile, all the electronic "tilt switches" will surely drive up the cost and lower the performance of video cards with no benefit to the buyer whatsoever. An estimated 10% of the nice new CPU you paid for is dedicated to making sure you haven't modified the video card you bought.

In truth, the lot of it is interferance with ownership.

Re:Maybe people should stop stealing music?

[radagenais]

Who buys CDs any more? Download, upload. It's the latest thing.

Re:Maybe people should stop stealing music?

[Anonymous Coward]

In my day, people were smart enough not to waste their time responding to stuff like this. Darn kids nowadays...

No, I'm New Here.

[New Here]

No, I'm New Here.

Really old news

[Yvanhoe]

People had the same idea years ago. They founded the EFF. You can help them finance their crusade, it has been an ongoing effort.

Re:Maybe people should get a fucking clue?

[Anonymous Coward]

Holy Shit You Are A Loser.

The Vote

[DigitalisAkujin]

This is one of the reasons I'm voting for Obama in Tuesday's PA primary,
-He's for net neutrality so that becomes assured for another 4 years at least and would give the internet time to become even more dependent on the concept. There's a certain threshold with internet where network neutrality needs to be maintained for a long enough period to which the public gets educated enough on the concept that they won't accept an un-neutral internet.
-Advocates copyright reform.
-Advocates patent reform.

among other things... http://www.barackobama.com/issues/technology/

Also, Hillary wants to censor videogame sales further which screams "Nanny state" to me.

Generally speaking I don't really think the above issues are prime but I do think that it's about time with the Health care issues and voting for any Republican right now would most assuredly put the United States on a path towards losing our super power status. It won't really drive us down it's just that we're so stagnant that we're just gonna be watching the European Union and China pass us by and new emerging technologies.

A lot of people view the Democrats as simply instigators of a Socialist agenda but the idea is that the United States is so rich and so filled with money that it just makes sense to provide the ability to heal anyone in the country without them having to pay out of their pocket. It's a simple investment in the human capital of this country. Sure you'll be paying more taxes but the reward will come from the increased productivity of the population thereby driving up GDP.

Re:The Vote

[Weedlekin]

"Advocates copyright reform.
http://www.barackobama.com/issues/technology/"

Obama's copyright changes in the link you provided seem to be promises to increase protection for copyright holders at home and abroad. This is pretty much in line with the voting record of both major US political parties, who only ever change copyright laws in ways that benefit corporations.

Re:Maybe people should stop stealing music?

[chuckymonkey]

Where's that bottle of whiskey?

Ahhhh, we have a philosopher. Whiskey and tears my friend, whiskey and tears.

Changes to be made

[Anonymous Coward]

Music:
The most hilarious thing about the RIAA is not that music shouldn't be pirated. The truth is, it shouldn't. The funny thing is that they actually BELIEVE that these artists (less their managers/producers) deserve the amount of money they get. It's ridiculous. Everyone who isn't a celebrity toils away at their hard jobs, while freeloaders go on American Idol and suddenly have a record deal out of nothing. What happened to working for what you want? Even the artists who worked hard to get where they are: they just sing a few songs, tour, and make millions. Who the fuck do these people think they are?

It's our fault that we'd allowed them to be elevated to this godly status in the first place. Truth is that music artists, and celebrities, don't deserve the amount of money they get. And this just a small part of what drives the costs of media up so much. Don't even get me started on the corporate corruption, and the disdain that iTunes store, and the like, have brought to the industry.

Movies:
Who says I can't make a copy of my own DVD? If I buy a video from Columbia Pictures and the DVD gets scratched. The movie is ruined and I can't watch it anymore. But how much was the physical DVD worth? About 50 cents and a .0002ms stamp by the master. Hard job... but will they send me a new copy of my movie, despite the fact that it's the CONTENT I bought, NOT the DVD. No, they won't. This is yet another problem with the industries.

ISPs:
This is more of a difficult issue. Yes, we know they are screwing us. But it's difficult to tell just HOW MUCH they are screwing is. The quality of your connection speed is more difficult to quantify. This is of course because of the fact that the internet is just that, a network of networks. They use this to their advantage.

If people knew that they should be getting X speed from Y server all the time, but were in fact getting a lower speed than what they paid for, they would immediately contact the Better Business Bureau. The quality of an internet connection should be REQUIRED to be realistically quantifiable. This would be the only solution to getting the service you paid for. Otherwise, you really have no case. This will only happen once new better protocols are released, and more tech-savvy people are placed as government officials. For now, it's ridiculous what the telecom companies get away with.

Anyway that's my rant. Night.

Re:Changes to be made

[jbengt]

. . . despite the fact that it's the CONTENT I bought, NOT the DVD.

No, you bought the DVD.
A single physical copy that the doctrine of first sale says you can do anything you want to with.
You did not buy the legal right to copy it, though you may have that right by virtue of laws and court rulings.(YMMV)
Use of the word "content" can be somewhat misleading in the context of Imaginary/Intellectual Property rights.

Re:Changes to be made

[Anonymous Coward]

No... if I wanted a DVD I would have headed to the store and bought a pack of writables... People don't buy CDs or DVDs for the physical property, they buy it for what's on the medium. This is true despite what any law states.

Either way, physical mediums are on their way out... so that portion of the argument is nullified.

Re:Changes to be made

[Weedlekin]

"The funny thing is that they actually BELIEVE that these artists (less their managers/producers) deserve the amount of money they get."

Don't believe the industry's own propaganda about protecting the interests of artists, because the only people they think deserve any money is themselves. Artists a merely a vehicle for getting that money, and the companies do everything possible to approach their ideal of ending up with a situation where those artists actually owe them money after everything their accountants can come up with has been deducted from artist royalties.

Creative accounting that screws people out of royalties is a long-standing tradition in the entertainment industry, hence the fact that (for example) big movie stars and directors with clout insist on large up-front payments, because even the most successful movies neatly avoid paying any royalties or taxes by managing to bleed red ink after their accountants have spent a few months juggling the figures.

Re:Maybe people should stop stealing music?

[Anonymous Coward]

Obviously your one of those old people that cant see that PHYSICAL medium sales are dying, and online music sales are soaring.
I dont hear the Apple iTunes store going out of business do you? No, I just hear your ancient business strategy being left in the 20th century where it belongs.

Re:Maybe people should stop stealing music?

[Brother Phil]

You don't want to take whatever shit they shovel at you and pay over the odds for the privilege?
What are you, some kind of islamist hacker terrorist?;)>

lynch the bastards!

[Anonymous Coward]

Got my torch and pitchfork and im right behind u brother.

Why are women forced to pay ridiculous sums...

[Anonymous Coward]

...of cash for stealing 20 songs?

Because even seasoned journalists (moreover in rallying cries like this) can be tricked into using and spreading legally inaccurate demonizations like "stealing" and "piracy" that have only been coined to exaggerate IP infringement out of proportion?

Re:Maybe people should stop stealing music?

[Anonymous Coward]

So, you say you sell Christian music, and your business is going down (as pretty much any other business around, retailers even [guess they found a way to download hardware off the 'net too, let me know if you know how]). Tell me though, Christian music is often heard by, you know, Christians, whatever happened to "Thou shall not steal?"

What I mean to say is: Don't blame others because of the consequences of your own actions, you just said yourself you lose costumers because of your own system. Do you think costumers rain from the sky? Ever heard of market penetration? There is a limit of people who will buy X. After those people have bought X, you will have to introduce Y or face loss. That's economics 101 for you. If you reduce your client base, then the less X you will introduce and the sooner you will have to get a Y. Guess what? Don't have the Y? You go into a crawl. REAP WHAT YOU SOW.

Anonymous Coward

[Anonymous Coward]

I like what the guy had to say... but not enough to sign up for an account on cnet and say, "yeah man, I've got your back." If someone with an account there sees him over the weekend, please share my sentiments with him. Now, on to the real order at hand, once we've ripped power away from the ludites, how far is too far when it comes to revenge. Revenge of the nerds they drove a tank through a wall. Well, now to keep up, I'll think I'm gonna need to at least bust out the coffee mug and think this through.

mod parent up

[sorak]

I really wish I had some mod points right now. This article sounds like such wishy-washy, unrealistic crap. I can't wait to read his next article: "Hey y'all we should do something about the homeless", or "Kids, stop humping. That's how babies are made"

Re:Maybe people should stop stealing music?

[Christophotron]

Copy-pasta? On my slashdot? It's more likely than you think.

http://www.kuro5hin.org/story/2003/10/2/103735/275

Design your revolution

[elucido]

Revolutionary software and hardware designs will bring you a revolution of options.

If you want a call to arms, the best ideas would be new legalese licensing schemes to protect privacy rights, and the rights of the tinkerer.

New software designs which promote tinkering and interaction, such as free software. Use your creativity to promote your liberty.

Re:Design your revolution

[tepples]

New software designs which promote tinkering and interaction, such as free software. Use your creativity to promote your liberty. Free software is useless without hardware on which to run it. That's what some of the companies in question (Apple, TiVo, Microsoft) have been doing: trying to deny us the right to use hardware that we buy as we wish.

Start promote free technology

[elucido]

It's time that the technology industry gets intelligent and stops being stupid. Intelligently design your technology.

Napster was a great idea, it's decentralized. The way to solve this is to decentralize by design and bring as much power as you can to the user through the design of the software itself.

Forget politics. Build and innovent.

[elucido]

Liberty through creativity!

Liberty through creativity

[elucido]

You understand the technology, they dont.

You understand the code, they dont.

You designed the hardware, they cant.

You created the protocols, napster, linux, slashdot, programming languages and compilers, encryption and decryption software, etc.

Start by making sure everything you design and create in the future increases the liberty of the user, call it user-centric design. No more client-server, or slave master designs. Peer to Peer, and Hive designs are the answer.

Decentralize and distribute.

Grow a spine, be spiritual about your work.

[elucido]

Wouldn't you rather code with a purpose?

Anyone can be a software engineer, don't you want to change the world?

Re:Grow a spine, be spiritual about your work.

[Anonymous Coward]

The purpose of nearly every programmer and software engineer is to make money from their labour and nothing more. Only a tiny percentage could beg to differ, not all of us could be Linus Torvald or RMS.

There is scarcely any more 'sanctity' in writing code then there is in digging a trench.

Of course none of this detracts from it's overall importance as we depend greatly on them. But it's silly to mistake writing software for something as philosophically or spiritually enlightening as reading Schopenhauer, Kant or Hume for the first time.

Geeks decide elections.

[elucido]

It's the geeks that rigged the voting machines.

New American Theology of Civil Submission

[elucido]

If you want to know why technology must be stopped, it's because technology is making all the wrong people smart and successful. Also technology promotes disobedience and the point of society is to promote and maximize submission.

-> New American Theology of Civil Submission

YES!!! PERFECT SOLUTION! everyone read the ^ post!

[elucido]

The open hardware solution is the ultimate solution.

The question is, how do we make it cheap enough for the masses to get involved? We don't own factories in China yet.

What about through non profit organizations? How about we form a church?

The EFF are a bunch of lawyers.

[elucido]

What if we don't want to give money? what if we want to actually DO something ourselves using our own talents?

Re:The EFF are a bunch of lawyers.

[winwar]

"What if we don't want to give money? what if we want to actually DO something ourselves using our own talents?"

Then study to be a lawyer :) Or write letters to your congresscritter, your state legislator and/or the appropriate federal/state agency.

If the opposing side has lawyers, you generally need one too. Hell, even to get basic government services like worker's compensation you often need a lawyer.

Lawyers seem to be the socially accepted (mandated) way to solve problems today.

Vote for the submission party.

[elucido]

It doesn't matter which party you vote for or which church you go to, they all teach submission.

Submission Theology

"stop them from being able to do what they want"?

[nurb432]

Well, thats sort of elitist and hypocritical. Just another set of people to ignore as far as i'm concerned.

Election Integrity is the root of it all

[myspace-cn]

I agree with you, I want to add.

It is the electronic voting machines (all vendors, all models that tabulate) which have all failed, or been cracked. They are the ROOT of what got us in this mess. We shouldn't have ever used electronics to count votes, there can ***NEVER*** be oversight of electronic signals. The only thing electronics should have been used for is PRINTING PAPER BALLOTS.

Given Voter Roll Purging (some of that is electronic now too), broken Chains of custody, and The Electoral College (bypassing the will of the people.)

Add to that mix a fascist corporate media (Not in the public's interest) that has NEVER gave this more than 30 seconds of air time, or follow up, or take it any more serious than a UFO sighting. Yet still the FACT remains it's a national security nightmare.

You should be protesting at the network TV stations--Forget the Whitehouse. Go file a COMPLAINT in your local network television stations public file.

What we have is an abusive use of electronic technology by government.

In EVERY case where government uses electronics, it ALWAYS abuses it

Let's look back...Databases stolen, Secrets Stolen, Wiretapping, Electronic Torture /Harassment /Pain Weapons, Electronic Vote Tabulation, Video Surveillance.

The list goes on and on, they ALWAYS screw up when they regulate it for citizens.

We will all have to be pro-active pretty soon. As soon as everyone starts to realize $65 trillion dollars is vapor. Maybe then you'll demand the FED is put in prison for life, the failed bank CEO's in prison for life. Why if the TAXPAYER has to bail out the banks, are the banks now not owned by the taxpayer? hmmm?

It's corruption and theft and murder.

Until we regain Election Integrity, none of these messages, rants, Journalists, tv stations, government workers (there are actually good people that work for government), taxpayers, citizens, blogs, radio stations, emails mean squat.

Our (cough) representatives do not have to listen to us, some still don't even have a fucking email address.

Election Integrity is in ***FACT*** the root of it all

Re:Election Integrity is the root of it all

[cayenne8]

"The Electoral College (bypassing the will of the people."

I'm with you on most of your other points...but, I like the idea of the EC and how votes are done. This is to keep the votes more equal between the states...populous and not as populous. Remember, you are citizens of your state first, then a US citizen, and if it were just straight popular vote, then smaller states would never be represented

Re:Election Integrity is the root of it all

[cayenne8]

oops...I hit submit instead of preview...this is what I meant to say

"The Electoral College (bypassing the will of the people."

I'm with you on most of your other points...but, I like the idea of the EC and how votes are done. This is to keep the votes more equal between the states...populous and not as populous. Remember, you are citizens of your state first, then a US citizen, and if it were just straight popular vote, then smaller states would never be represented....and ALL states in the union deserve the same equal representation and power in how the US is run and its policy.

I do wish, that the electoral votes for each state were a proportion of the popular vote of the state...and not the all or nothing...and I'd like guarantees in the college that the electoral voters HAD to vote accordingly....but, that is up to the states at this point.....

Anyway...I like your other points.

How to boycott the oligopoly?

[tepples]

Organize a boycott of companies that don't meet with our ideals. I already do this with Microsoft, AT&T, and Time Warner cable. If AT&T is the phone company where you live, Time Warner is the cable company where you live, and AT&T is the only mobile phone company that can provide consistent bars where you live, then how do you get telephone or Internet access in your home?

The gas bag

[westlake]

I would almost say boycotting is the best way. Organize a boycott of companies that don't meet with our ideals. I already do this with Microsoft, AT&T, and Time Warner cable

As if babbling on about the "sanctity of tech" wasn't pretentious enough.

Now again we have the geek talking boycott.

In markets where he is less sigificant a presence than the sixth grader with her first cell phone.

The tip of the iceberg...

[moxley]

Well, from some posts here it seems some feel this guy is being overly dramatic or making a mountain out of a molehill.

I couldn't disagree more; I think organizing against this sort of stuff IS important and is one of the few things people can do to push back against this consortium of corporate and government interests who have aligned against the people.

The issue isn't only DRM or the RIAA - that is but the tip of the iceberg and the government certainly knows that. All of these issues are related; DRM and RIAA, Net Neutrality, what seems to be an ongoing campaign to emphasize "the dangers of the internet" in the mind of the public and the abuse of the legal system and legislative process.

I believe that the internet right now is making governments, corporations and ALL of the status quo old guard 'powers that be' extremely nervous. Never before have the people been able to have access to so much information and organization tools, instantly. TO be able to communicate a viewpoint or idea to milllions around the world, instantly - without the approval or oversight of any authority is amazing and is something 'the people' have never had before.

News bypasses "gatekeepers" thus making public perception more difficult for govt/corps to mold and the agenda more difficult to set.

People can educate themselves about anything - history from a multilateral perspective without whatever sort of influence or omissions are involved in textbooks and without going through the sort of "cogs for society" production mills that many colleges and universities seem to be.

People around the world can organize together quickly and share information, they can rally around a cause and share pictures - we have citizen journalists, etc. We hear about things instantly that we NEVER would have heard about 20 years ago unless the TV or newspaper news covered it - and you know how that goes, they color the story or leave out crucial details or ignore it entirely, etc).

As governments of the world become more repressive (particularly western ones) with the buffet bonanza that is the neverending sham on terror; and with more countries unpegging their currency from the dollar and the economy heading into what many uncompromised experts feel is a global depression things are going to get more and more restrictive.

This is about control - and aside from the "consumer rights" angle of this I believe that there are deeper issues here.

I think that there are a lot of people in positions of power who have this vision of the internet/pc of the future:

A machine is definitively registered to a person like a car or something and/or you need a license to go online; the internet is like some cross between early AOL and the Home Shopping Network, net neutrality no longer exists and independent websites are effectively rendered rare, expensive to manage, and basically not effectively available because anything unofficial/not corporately bankrolled is carried at the lowest priority. Software and songs are no longer owned - EVERYTHING on on the network/net and if you stop your subscription or are turned of for any reason you no longer have any software, music, or anything...

I know it sounds like a picture painted from a bad sci fi movie, but if there is one event (like a "terror attack where the net is used to take down a power grid or in some other way, or someone important has their child kidnapped by pedophiles and the internet played a part or something like that) where the net is used in a criminal manner that is large enough to sway pulbic opinion it will be like the patriot act all over again.

My point is that with how much everything else seems to be going downhill in regard to personal freedom in the US/UK and the trust that the individual has sovereign rights and is innocent until proven guilty, and all of these commonly held beliefs upon which western free countries are supposedly based, the internet seems like the last bastion of true democracy and freedom - net neutra

Re:Maybe people should stop stealing music?

[Anonymous Coward]

We refuse to admit that the reason the youth of today is in a downward spiral of self-destruction is because we pamper our children to the point where they believe they are more righteous than we, the parents and teachers are. The youth of today don't seem to be any worse off than their parents or grandparents. The anti-videogame folks are trying to solve a problem that doesn't exist by lashing out at something they never had while growing up. That's exactly what their parents did, and I'm sure some of their kids will do the same when they're older.

That bit about excessive pampering is a myth. And heaven forbid kids be self-righteous and disrespect authority. It sounds a lot like a case of get-off-my-lawn syndrome.

Google needs to sell hardware

[elucido]

This is why Google needs to get into the hardware business.

Mod parent up.

[Anonymous Coward]

If AT&T is the phone company where you live, Time Warner is the cable company where you live, and AT&T is the only mobile phone company that can provide consistent bars where you live, then how do you get telephone or Internet access in your home? Also, if you own a 401k or other retirement savings account, chances are you are supporting a member of the oligopoly. Don't believe me, you can check.

Organize a boycott of companies that don't meet with our ideals. I already do this with Microsoft, AT&T, and Time Warner cable. Not that I am defending the status quo, but it might be helpful to have a greater appreciation of what you are up against.

Re:Maybe people should stop stealing music?

[TheRaven64]

It's an old troll that's been copy and pasted into pretty much every article even tangentially related to the music industry. Please don't feed the trolls.

Tech has sanctity

[unity100]

its directly tied to creative activities of the human psyche. same kind of link was there in between renaissance works and their creators. resulting creativity and sharing and inventiveness resulted in renaissance. you can see similar traits in tech, internet and i.t. sharing, free speech, opportunity, choices and all.

attrention species 8472

[urban_warrior]

i must warn you we are armed with borg nano-probe warheads.....

Re:Maybe people should stop stealing music?

[Hijacked Public]

7 or 8 years ago a person would have to work a lot harder than this, and be a lot more subtle, to get this many serious replies with a troll. A consequence of the anti-trolling measures implemented with Slashcode is that the readership here has become much less Adequate at spotting trolls in the first place.

The "Technology War" began awhile ago.

[ClioCJS]

This is the first article on slashdot that describes what I have been calling the "Technology War" for quite a few years. The point is that governments around the world are trying to make it so that technology does what THEY want, but at the same time trying to take away rights from civilians to use the technology that THEY want.

One small example? Radar detectors being illegal in my state. Another example? DRM. Another example: Photographers rights to take pictures in public coming under fire.

Please check out some of these links; I have been saving stories which fall under the "Technology War" category:

The links: http://del.icio.us/ClintJCL/TechnologyWar

I have also blogged about a lot of them, but these would be harder to read than my saved links:

http://clintjcl.wordpress.com/category/politics/technology-war/

Another facet of the technology war: As real-world situations are replaced by virtual/technological situations, the corporations are trying very hard to ensure that the same rights we had in the real world do not transfer over to technology. There are a lot of situations that fall into this rather broad description.

I'm trying to make more people aware that there is a global phenomenon going on here. It's not a bunch of evil men in a board room conspiring against us while laughing maniacally in the dark; it is simply a side-effect of a lot of global abstract forces at work.

Mentors Needed

[Embattled]

As an educable middle aged American trying to break into geek ranks late in life, I wonder if many here who will have earned the title appreciate how unique they are to be self taught in these esoteric realms. I try and try, but I fail to achieve so much as a burn of an .iso file based bootable CD. And I am a physician who matriculated in college at the age of 15. It just is not easy. And the only way forward is for people like me - of only modest intelligence - to be mentored by gurus like yourselves in order to be freed of our indentures to the commercial overlords of electronic signalling. Here's hoping this call to arms will inspire many to become mentors!

Email me when this works

[Master of Transhuman]

Your typical "let's all get together and..." - do fuck all...

Re:Sanctity of Tech?: Literalists get an "F "

[Chingis Xaan]

Some people don't get it about tech because they have to lug around the childish baggage of being literal; no doubt a vestigal defect in the herd. Literalists dot the political landascape, to wit - taliban and evangelicals; crusaders and zealots to name a few. Science rises on a bold new landscape of truth and beauty in spite of neocon nonsense, literalists, evangelicals, fundamentalists,... as Slashdot shines as a new tower on the web. Allow me to think abstractly in the open here as an exercise in analytical thinking - for the fellow who would find "Sanctity"... What Slashdot meant was a call to write and distribute KNOWLEDGE in the public domain much as a RFC does when new technologies emerge (internet was born from a series of RFCs). If that is not plain and simple enough - here again is what the intent of the article was. MAny people spend hours trying to slant articles towards god, religion, conservative agenda etc. and the author believes this is incorrect or not good. Simple. I believe this too. Remember the "theory of evolution" is as valid an expression as the "theory of gravity". I am happy calling it gravity and happy calling it evolution. Some people still cling to the incomplete terminology of the early days of any given scientific research including gravity and evolution both of which are demonstrable in any primary school. Interesting to watch as the self correcting errors of such people inevitable adjust their very own flight path. I've had to give a few hard line "F"'s in some of my courses. The comments of StreetStealth, god what a cunning moniker (wink wink) receive an F for my course in science; s/he must repeat the course. And also I'd make a referral to the campus psychologist for Mr/s Stealth, I feel this person's seething arrogance in quick reference to "idiot" and "Sanctity", both of which could be said to appear as psychotic - may be detrimental to his/her psychological well being.

Re:He should have heard about GNU.

[Anonymous Coward]

He should have heard about GNU.

No kidding. I only skimmed the article but I all I saw was the usuall RIAA and such things. That's valid, but what we especially need is to stand up to all the GNU and open source zealots and tell them to get the fuck out of tech. Tell the fucking kooks to keep their religion out of our tech! Computers used to be so fun, until these wackos came along and injected hate into everything.

Re:Maybe people should stop stealing music?

[GWBasic]

Why is no one buying CDs? ... I don't know. But there is one, inescapable truth - Internet piracy is mostly to blame. You just admitted you don't know, but you're sure it piracy. Does that make sense?

I got sick of paying $17+ for music that amortized itself before I was born!