Slashdot Mirror


Pirate Bay Cofounder Utterly Bankrupts the Music Industry (torrentfreak.com)

JustAnotherOldGuy writes: Peter "brokep" Sunde, co-founder of The Pirate Bay, has built a machine that makes 100 copies per second of Gnarls Barkley's "Crazy," storing them in /dev/null (which is of course, deleting them even as they're created). The machine, called a "Kopimashin," is cobbled together out of a Raspberry Pi, some hacky python that he doesn't want to show anyone, and an LCD screen that calculates a running tally of the damages he's inflicted upon the record industry through its use. The 8,000,000 copies it makes every day costs the record industry $10m/day in losses. At that rate, they'll be bankrupt in a few weeks at most.

261 comments

  1. I'll buy him another by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    If it will speed up the process and kill them faster.

    1. Re:I'll buy him another by GloomE · · Score: 1

      "And then I remember to relax, and stop trying to hold on to it, and then it flows through me like rain and I can't feel anything but gratitude for every single moment of my stupid little life... You have no idea what I'm talking about, I'm sure. But don't worry... you will someday."

    2. Re:I'll buy him another by linear+a · · Score: 2

      At $100,000 fine per copy he'll go broke a lot faster than the music industry does. And he'll bankrupt the whole Earth in about 5 months.

    3. Re:I'll buy him another by matbury · · Score: 4, Interesting

      He should open source his hacky Python code so that everyone who wants can join in and speed up the process. I've got a Raspberry Pi sitting here just waiting to bring down the entire music industry. I'd like to start with Celine Dion's, Brian Adams', and Justin Bieber's record companies and move on from there.

    4. Re:I'll buy him another by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      He's too late. Things like iTunes, Google Play, YouTube, SoundCloud, Bandcamp, etc. have already killed the RIAA.

      These days a personal computer is better and more powerful than any standalone music studio equipment and anyone can self publish. The RIAA fabricates ridiculously large damages because they know they're bleeding out, not because of piracy but because their power over artists and antiquated business model is dead.

    5. Re:I'll buy him another by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Funny

      Canada must have really pissed you off...

    6. Re:I'll buy him another by flappinbooger · · Score: 2

      At $100,000 fine per copy he'll go broke a lot faster than the music industry does. And he'll bankrupt the whole Earth in about 5 months.

      no, it's ok, he's not uploading it to anyone.

      --
      Flappinbooger isn't my real name
    7. Re: I'll buy him another by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Please explain how a USB mic going through a shitty Behringer I/O in a bathroom is better than a U87 in an acoustically tuned space running through a Neve pre.

    8. Re: I'll buy him another by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The great equalizer of autotune, mang.

    9. Re:I'll buy him another by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I don't blame him. Canada's system was already set up so that when buying blank recording media you always paid a small fine for criminal activity that you *might* commit in future.. But now they've passed repressive copyright legislation to top it off. Don't recall anymore precisely what it was but it amounts to a government collecting taxes .. still.. off of illegal activity. Profiting from criminal activity is illegal.. except.. apparently.. when the Canadian government does it.

    10. Re: I'll buy him another by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Why don't you Ask all the recording studios that are going out of business.

    11. Re: I'll buy him another by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      USB is digital and a PC can do more than your standalone studio hardware ever could through software. Seriously, you're talking about using analogue equipment? HAHAHAHA! How very quaint and adorable.

      You might also take a look on Amazon some time. Good mics are cheap and easy to get. You can get a Yeti Blue for about $100 or a 3Dio for less than $1000. Sound proofing is also cheap and easy to get.

    12. Re: I'll buy him another by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I bet you only use $10,000 oxygen free ethernet patch cables too. You know, to ensure that all of the bits are of the highest quality and moving in the correct direction.

    13. Re: I'll buy him another by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Autotune? Isn't that the crutch that the big RIAA music publishers with legacy-style recording studios use for everything?

    14. Re:I'll buy him another by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Are you saying there should be another Raspberry Pi connected to the first one, which would serve as /dev/null FTP server? Sounds like a plan.

      And what's really terrible - every Linux user, and even Android phone owner, has the /dev/null, which, according to the common sense of music industry lawyers, is a solid basis to charge a copyright tax.

    15. Re:I'll buy him another by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I think Sunde's argument here has nothing to do with sharing the files. The argument he seems to be countering is the sensibility of "damages" that clearly don't have damaging effect. This line of argument is ingenious, as it surely can't make him more culpable, but it can blow a huge hole in arguments about unrealistic damages, and force the legal arguments to take another form, which may be weaker, but certainly less able to claim "damages" except in a purely statutory fashion, which will further cast doubt upon the legal underpinnings.

    16. Re: I'll buy him another by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That money that is collected from blank media actually goes straight to the recording industry. In fact it has not been just Canada that has it, or did you really believe that cd's cost more than a fraction of a cent to make, dvd's more than pennies, or better yet blue ray media that is almost non existant... but if you can find it will cost you a much heftier "tax".

  2. hmm by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    That's crazy.

  3. That bad... by __aaclcg7560 · · Score: 5, Funny

    You know a song is really bad is when it goes straight to /dev/null without being heard.

    1. Re:That bad... by pr0fessor · · Score: 4, Funny

      There may be a guinness world record in there. "The song with the most deleted copies."

    2. Re:That bad... by TWX · · Score: 1

      I can think of a few that I really wouldn't have minded if they'd done that...

      --
      Do not look into laser with remaining eye.
    3. Re:That bad... by jd2112 · · Score: 4, Funny

      mv Justin_Beiber /dev/null

      --
      Any insufficiently advanced magic is indistinguishable from technology.
    4. Re:That bad... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

      I tried that but just got back the message

      "Error: There's some things even I don't want"

    5. Re: That bad... by robi5 · · Score: 5, Funny

      That would be U2

    6. Re:That bad... by arth1 · · Score: 1

      You know a song is really bad is when it goes straight to /dev/null without being heard.

      Having had the misfortune of hearing the song (for lack of a better word), I think the first copy should have been made to /dev/random, as it surely would have increased the kernel's entropy pool significantly.

    7. Re:That bad... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'd be happy to just:
      cat Justin_Beiber > /dev/null

    8. Re:That bad... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What does a song sound like when it goes to /dev/null when there's nobody around to hear it?

    9. Re:That bad... by zapadnik · · Score: 1

      Did it make you crazy? probably !

    10. Re:That bad... by OrangeTide · · Score: 1

      EDONTWANT

      --
      “Common sense is not so common.” — Voltaire
    11. Re:That bad... by Coisiche · · Score: 5, Funny

      So you actually have a directory called Justin_Beiber?

      No wonder you're posting as AC.

    12. Re:That bad... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No, no, it's If a song is re-recorded to /dev/null...would it still make a sound?'

    13. Re:That bad... by FrozenGeek · · Score: 1

      Yes, please. As soon as possible, please.

      --
      linquendum tondere
    14. Re:That bad... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Noo!!! I hid my porn in there!

    15. Re:That bad... by ebvwfbw · · Score: 2

      [localhost.localdomain]$ mv Justin_Beiber /dev/null

      Error - /dev/null has enough crap in it already. Please simply unlink it.

    16. Re:That bad... by Cow+Jones · · Score: 1

      If you actually did this (as root), your next commands would be something along the lines of...

      mknod /dev/null c 1 3
      chmod 666 /dev/null

      --

      Ah, arrogance and stupidity, all in the same package. How efficient of you. -- Londo Mollari
    17. Re:That bad... by AlabamaCajun · · Score: 1

      Now that is one massive ear-worm, luckily the Raspberry Pi does not ears include ears in the stock model.

  4. He should use... by valnar · · Score: 2

    a Miley Cyrus track instead. At least make a secondary point as you're doing that.

    1. Re:He should use... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That doesn't work. You just get an error when you try to send Miley Cyrus to /dev/null. It turns out that to destroy Miley Cyrus tracks you have to send them to /dev/knickers.

    2. Re:He should use... by aaron4801 · · Score: 1

      Putting a sucking void in /dev/null is sort of like putting a portable hole inside a bag of holding. Don't try this at home.

    3. Re:He should use... by Opportunist · · Score: 5, Funny

      He tried, but even /dev/null didn't want to accept this as input.

      --
      We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
    4. Re:He should use... by lgw · · Score: 2

      Her tracks can only be destroyed in the forge of evil where they were made. So just send em to dev/mordor/mtdoom/null and it works great.

      --
      Socialism: a lie told by totalitarians and believed by fools.
    5. Re:He should use... by Number42 · · Score: 1

      Don't listen to this guy. They've got free gigabit Wi-Fi on the Astral Plane.

    6. Re: He should use... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No that would be /dev/tramp

  5. Accounting 101 by sunderland56 · · Score: 2, Interesting

    These are not losses. They are unrealized potential profit. Nobody is actually losing anything.

    (Well, other than /dev/null, which is going to go insane very soon after being forced to listen to Gnars Barkley).

    1. Re:Accounting 101 by jaymz666 · · Score: 4, Insightful

      That would be the point, no?

      That many of the copies downloaded would be unrealised sales in any case

    2. Re:Accounting 101 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      These are not losses. They are unrealized potential profit. Nobody is actually losing anything.

      (Well, other than /dev/null, which is going to go insane very soon after being forced to listen to Gnars Barkley).

      He's about to make a huge physics contribution. We'll soon discover how to get information back out of a black hole. You just send enough of the worst kind in and eventually the black hole will vomit it back out--it doesn't want it!

    3. Re:Accounting 101 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Although I understand the point he would like to make, he's not doing anything but being stupid. Making copies and then immediately deleting them is not the same as making copies and then distributing them to millions of people for free.

    4. Re:Accounting 101 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yes it is, at least legally speaking. A copy is a copy and (aside from fair use) legally each copy counts as a loss. It doesn't matter whether it is done via p2p, copying it onto a data cd for someone in person, or even just repeatedly copying them to /dev/null.

    5. Re:Accounting 101 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

      These are not losses. They are unrealized potential profit. Nobody is actually losing anything.

      #Wooosh!

      the whole idea is not that this represents actual losses.. but that it represents what the record labels say are their losses whenever they bring up piracy and torrents and file lawsuits

    6. Re:Accounting 101 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Whhhhoooooosh!

      Except the RIAA considers a copy a lost sale, and they've successfully used it in court and won - with massive payouts.

    7. Re:Accounting 101 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      ..He's about to make a huge physics contribution..

      Slightly disagree,
      physics? no, metaphysics? maybe..
      the daemon that lives at the bottom of the /dev/null hole, just how many copies of that song will it endure before it decides to apply some remedial reciprocal retaliation on the input source (i.e. the sad excuse for a reality that insists on feeding it this material)?

    8. Re:Accounting 101 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Problem is that the rights owners have overlapped an essentially Christian view of right and wrong / good and bad on the essentially amoral music industry. The music industry is not and never has been about doing the right thing. It has a much in common with a gang than a service industry. The music industry is all about how the fuck can It make as much money from you faggots as It possibly can. The music industry will lie / cheat / steal / kill to realize a profit. The music industry does not care about supporting and developing musical talent. The industry believes in making you pay so they can afford hookers and cocaine. Every time you copy a song you are supporting freedom and striking a blow against tyranny and gangstarism.

    9. Re:Accounting 101 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Although I understand the point he would like to make, he's not doing anything but being stupid. Making copies and then immediately deleting them is not the same as making copies and then distributing them to millions of people for free.

      using the Pythonesque logic beloved of the copyright Mafia, surely

      Kopimashin$ cat crazy.mp3 > /dev/null
      Mymashin$ cat /dev/null > yet.another.copy.of.crazy.mp3

      the files are identical, (/dev/null == yet.another.copy.of.crazy.mp3 as far as checksums etc are concerned)
      ergo, I'm a witc^H^H^H^Hpyrate

      Just think, right now all those /dev/nulls out there on the interwibbles, all capable of replicating *exactly* what the Kopimashin has copied to this /dev/null device (and as I've multiple machines with this magic /dev/null piracy enabling tool, I'm obviously a Mr Big)

      The fact that when I play this magic copy nothing comes out the speakers, is quite serendipitous...

    10. Re:Accounting 101 by Rei · · Score: 5, Insightful

      I think the point is a bit weak. If he were to try to make this argument in a courtroom to argue that the RIAA's standard for lost sales is unreasonable, the RIAA attorneys would simply say that he's not "making available" copies, that he's akin to a factory churning out knockoff purses and throwing them in a furnace - nobody would say, the attorneys would argue, that those knockoff purses that are immediately destroyed are lost sales. However - back to their standard argument - a person who downloads a song they want is a potential buyer who will no longer buy the song.

      The RIAA argument is still of course wrong, but this stunt has no bearing on the wrongness of their argument because it doesn't affect anything that they're actually arguing about - other humans who want a song acquiring it without paying for it.

      --
      That was either the start of something bad or the end of something stupid.
    11. Re:Accounting 101 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's more than a bit weak. It's asshattery and the fact that people here think it's brilliant shows how far removed they are from reality.
       
      Thankfully those who are still in control of their faculties are going to shrug this off for the moronic stunt that it is.
       
      This does nothing but discredit yet another facetious "argument" from the copywrong crowd and presents them as the low lifes that they are.

    12. Re:Accounting 101 by arth1 · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Peter Sunde risks falling within non-infringing use here, with a satirical art installation. That would defeat his purpose, I would think.

      It would have been a much more convincing argument if he, as he made the copies transferred them to Gottfried and Fredrik, who then played them at super-speed before deleting them.

      Or uploaded the song to pastebin or somewhere, one bit at a time. When, exactly, would the copyright infringement kick in?

    13. Re:Accounting 101 by jones_supa · · Score: 1

      Copies are essentially free. However, the entertainment value that they carry, is the thing that is sold.

    14. Re:Accounting 101 by jones_supa · · Score: 1

      Makes sense. The artist or the record company did not intend free copies as part of their distribution chain.

    15. Re:Accounting 101 by vux984 · · Score: 5, Interesting

      I think the point is a bit weak. If he were to try to make this argument in a courtroom to argue that the RIAA's standard for lost sales is unreasonable,

      Ah; but how often does the RIAA actually attempt to establish lost sales, aka ACTUAL DAMAGES?

      From what I've seen they tend to collect on Statutory damages.

      he's akin to a factory churning out knockoff purses and throwing them in a furnace - nobody would say, the attorneys would argue, that those knockoff purses that are immediately destroyed are lost sales.

      True. But it IS enough to trigger statutory damages; which do not require any actual damages to be established, nor indeed to even hypothetically exist.

      but this stunt has no bearing on the wrongness of their argument because it doesn't affect anything that they're actually arguing about - other humans who want a song acquiring it without paying for it.

      I think this exercise, if nothing else highlights the absurdity of 'statutory damages'. Not to mention that any media coverage it gets brings attention to the larger real issues with current copyright law.

      And I think if the RIAA were required to demonstrate the actual harm an individual sharer tends to cause the whole thing would fall apart. e.g. if my upload ratio is 20 on an a song, i've effectively supplied 20 copies of that song. That puts the actual maximum harm at $20 for that song if we assume everybody that downloaded it would have paid retail for it if it wasn't available.

      And even that's ridiculous on its face. 8 of them wouldn't have bothered to get the song at all. 5 more didn't care about the quality and would have ripped it from youtube or spotify or the end credits of the movie it was used in, or the radio, or made a copy of a friends CD, or something. 3 of them are children who don't have the dollar, 3 more are from countries where the song isn't readily available or a 1$ is their daily food budget.. leaving one guy who wanted a high quality track, and would have paid for it if he hadn't been able to just download it. Actual damages to music industry: $1

    16. Re:Accounting 101 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That was a whole lot of wishful thinking you presented there. A bit rude, too. You smell like a shill. Happy Christmas!

    17. Re:Accounting 101 by kheldan · · Score: 1

      However - back to their standard argument - a person who downloads a song they want is a potential buyer who will no longer buy the song.

      Sure.. and if I record a song I like off the radio instead of buying it, then I guess they have to sue me for that, and sue the radio station for 'making it available to me', and since much is distributed digitally still via mp3 compression, you can't say that the loss of quality over FM broadcast makes any difference; it's 'good enough for me', I can hear a song start-to-finish, so what if it's only FM quality? They're rediculous.

      --
      Are YOU using the TOOL, or is the TOOL using YOU? Think about it!
    18. Re: Accounting 101 by jblues · · Score: 1

      That might save the music industry, but it could be very destructive for the sock industry if all the odd ones were suddenly to return.

      --
      If it acquires resources on instantiation like a duck, then its a shared_ptr<Duck>
    19. Re:Accounting 101 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      These are not losses. They are unrealized potential profit. Nobody is actually losing anything.

      Yes, that's the joke.

    20. Re: Accounting 101 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Is a person who downloads still a potential buyer if they would have just done without the song?

    21. Re:Accounting 101 by gnasher719 · · Score: 1

      True. But it IS enough to trigger statutory damages; which do not require any actual damages to be established, nor indeed to even hypothetically exist.

      Maybe that is why he copies only one song again and again, because statutory damages are _per work_. This limits his risk.

    22. Re: Accounting 101 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      cry me a river. Singing talent is way overrated go tell them to work a 9-5 to hell. I don't blame pirates I blame the music industry for not adapting. F'ing aholes. I'm glad pirates have put a ceiling on music costs..

    23. Re: Accounting 101 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The radio station pays a licencing fee to play the music, so they won't be sued for making it available.

    24. Re: Accounting 101 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'm not. There is a lot of talent that is doing something else now, and that is a loss to everyone.

      In the past, music moved entire generations. Songs were a shared item in common with people. Now? What are the significant bands which can release albums that can stand toe-to-toe with "The Wall" or "Pretty Hate Machine"? I'm guessing "Bangerz" is the height of what the music industry can come up with for this decade.

      I wouldn't blame it entirely on the pirates, although the entitlement issue of "must have free music" is disgusting. It would be nice for people to actually buy -something- from the band. I would blame it on Spotify and their pittance they give artists, as well as the 99 cent song. In the past, a band could sell a number of albums, and do OK. 100 99 cent tracks, split amongst a band, is not going anywhere.

    25. Re:Accounting 101 by wierd_w · · Score: 1

      clearly, i need to make a char device called magichat.

      all it does is return a string of binary expressions until stopped, based on a single input: initial file position.

      it generates its output on a permeutation of every possible value; once every possible value of one byte is reached, it moves the scope by one byte and computes again. it does this to a scope of infinity.

      since this output is very orderly, it can be perfectly predicted, and by its very nature, will contain all data that a computer is capable of storing, and in a fashion easily accessed. all you need is an offset and a length. studious use of dd would let you play an mp3 directly from it, through a pipe.

      this is what would destroy the riaa argument. this simple brute force generator would contain all storable knowledge, and would show that the making available is moot.

      imagine the piracy potential. instead of a torrent, you send a 1kb text file containing the dd invocation with a bash header.

      suddenly, telling people how to use dd becomes copyright infringement.

    26. Re: Accounting 101 by kheldan · · Score: 1

      You're ignoring the 'recording it off the radio' part. What if I record it off the radio and make an MP3 out of it, then pass that around to whoever on the Internet wants it? Then they come after me, and I tell them, "I recorded off the radio". Now what do they do? Shut down all the radio stations? What you're ignoring here is that long before the PC or the Internet this exact thing was going on, and the recording industry, if they'd had their way, would have made cassette recorders illegal to own, but it was a rediculous idea so that never happened. It's just as rediculous now.

      --
      Are YOU using the TOOL, or is the TOOL using YOU? Think about it!
    27. Re: Accounting 101 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No one with the talent of Floyd has quit music. And there's tons of great music today, whether or not you can admit it. Adele,tons of indie, hell bieber is good now.

    28. Re: Accounting 101 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And now everyone knows you are full of shit.

    29. Re: Accounting 101 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Neither did any TV shows, but we are still allowed to record them. And those cost more money to make, yet no one is bitching.

    30. Re: Accounting 101 by fluffernutter · · Score: 1

      Somewhat incorrect. They have purchased a license to play the song on the radio. They have not purchased a license to allow you to record the song so the point is valid.

      --
      Laws are rules for the court, but merely a bottom bar to hit for life. Think beyond laws in your actions always.
    31. Re: Accounting 101 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's "ridiculous," not "rediculous." Not hatin', just sayin'.

    32. Re:Accounting 101 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      what if they played them all at normal speed, but each starting at a slightly different time. Okay, it would end up as a DC current... wait... is this how DC power supplies work?

    33. Re: Accounting 101 by Talderas · · Score: 1

      Commander Hoek and Cadet Stimpy found all the missing left socks. Unfortunately the Commander and Cadet imploded and the mission ended in failure before they could report back to Earth with the coordinates.

      --
      "Lack of speed can be overcome. In the worst case by patience." --Znork
  6. Oh the Humanity! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    He must be stopped!
    Think of the children.

    1. Re:Oh the Humanity! by Opportunist · · Score: 3, Funny

      Send them to /dev/null.

      --
      We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
  7. brilliantly absurd and hilarious by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Shows the nonsense of basing an economy on signals on a wire. It's time for a revolution.

    1. Re:brilliantly absurd and hilarious by SJHillman · · Score: 2, Funny

      Sorry, I sent Beatles.Revolution.mp3 to /dev/null

    2. Re:brilliantly absurd and hilarious by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's not brilliant. It's stupid as shit and will accomplish nothing.

    3. Re:brilliantly absurd and hilarious by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      ....which you can actually do now, because as of today 12-24-2015 the Beatles catalog is available on all major streaming services.

    4. Re:brilliantly absurd and hilarious by RelaxedTension · · Score: 2

      It's not brilliant. It's stupid as shit and will accomplish nothing.

      Except that now many people are talking about this, and about the absurdity of the music industry calling copied songs actual monetary losses.

      Seems like it's accomplishing a lot, actually.

    5. Re:brilliantly absurd and hilarious by jones_supa · · Score: 1

      So can we just buy 1 album and then make free copies for the rest of the people interested in it?

    6. Re:brilliantly absurd and hilarious by radja · · Score: 1

      everyone can claim to be a member of the group 'humanity'. Anyone can download the album, and give those rights to a group. That may be a company, or it may be the whole of humanity.

      --

      No one can understand the truth until he drinks of coffee's frothy goodness.
      --Sheikh Abd-Al-Kadir, 1587
    7. Re:brilliantly absurd and hilarious by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The only people talking about it are the same people who were already talking about. No one outside of the Internet nerd bubble either knows or cares.

    8. Re:brilliantly absurd and hilarious by Lunix+Nutcase · · Score: 1

      Is it on CNN? Fox News? MSNBC? The BBC? Any national or international news station or website? If not, the GP AC is correct. Nothing will come of this. The average person won't ever hear about this.

  8. Wish he'd do that with Windows by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    And put MS out of business. Then I wouldn't have to fix my grandma's Win10 machine every time she decides to punch the monkey.

    1. Re:Wish he'd do that with Windows by Tablizer · · Score: 2

      Ironically, many believe MS turned a blind eye to pirating early on to gain market share, and eventually market lock-in. They only cracked down once they had a strangle-hold on the market. I do remember it was easy to copy some early MS software, even as other vendors put in more protections.

      It's yet another reason that pirating loss claims are often exaggerated or misleading.

      Then I wouldn't have to fix my grandma's Win10 machine every time she decides to punch the monkey.

      I'd be tempted to play if it were Sock Bill Gates.

    2. Re:Wish he'd do that with Windows by sims+2 · · Score: 1

      I was actually really surprised years ago that you could duplicate a windows install disk without having to do any fix up or emulation for drm.

      Afaik you still can today with windows 10. As long as you have a genuine key your golden even if you installed from copy of a copy of a copy of a backup copy of a windows install disc.

      Try doing that with pretty much any game.

      --
      Minimum threshold fixed. Thanks!
  9. I do the same thing... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Funny

    ...but with the Koran. Let's seem 'em come and jihad me!

    1. Re:I do the same thing... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      ...but with the Koran. Let's seem 'em come and jihad me!

      I thought /dev/null was an infidel ?

    2. Re:I do the same thing... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You will be promoted to sainthood, as you have potentially distributed the holy word with Pi-like efficiency.

    3. Re:I do the same thing... by Catbeller · · Score: 2

      Burn a flag and a bible in Colorado Springs, see what happens to you.

    4. Re:I do the same thing... by Darinbob · · Score: 1

      The police would rule it a case of suicide.

    5. Re:I do the same thing... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Probably nothing, Capt. Moral Equivalent. How many US flag-burning related deaths can you find in all of America over the last 50 years?

    6. Re:I do the same thing... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      jihad me at hello

    7. Re:I do the same thing... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      almost certainly nothing would happen to you in that scenario. what was the point you were trying to make...?

  10. Well by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    As an audiophile, I am able to hear music even from /dev/null. So good luck with arguing in court that the copies are useless.

    1. Re:Well by glitch! · · Score: 2

      As an audiophile, I am able to hear music even from /dev/null.

      The same way a file encrypted with a one-time pad can be decoded as a pornographic novel?

      --
      A dingo ate my sig...
    2. Re:Well by arth1 · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Speaking of...

      If I XOR an MP3 file with a one time pad, and upload the file to somewhere, but keep the pad secret, have I created an illegal copy?

      What if I upload the pad the day after the copyrights for the song expire?

      What if I the pad was never stored anywhere, but discarded byte for byte as it encrypted the file?

      What if the file was resampled to 1 bps first?

      The problem is that the music industry and politicians wants black/white laws that work in their favor, while common sense says that unless the copyrighted work is of value to the recipient, there can't be an infringement.

    3. Re:Well by AmiMoJo · · Score: 1

      We live in a world where numbers can be illegal because a computer program can interpret them as a song or an image.

      --
      const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
      SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
    4. Re:Well by fluffernutter · · Score: 1

      As a parent, I would much prefer to hear ANYTHING from /dev/null.

      --
      Laws are rules for the court, but merely a bottom bar to hit for life. Think beyond laws in your actions always.
    5. Re:Well by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      But doesn't the plaintiff still have to show demonstrable harm? Just asking.

    6. Re:Well by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yes

      No

      Yes

      Yes

  11. Maybe they should sue him by Chas · · Score: 1

    And charge double!

    --


    Chas - The one, the only.
    THANK GOD!!!
  12. That's... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ... a whole lota Crazy!

  13. This is "news"? by Christopher+Cashell · · Score: 0, Flamebait

    Ok, first of all, this is one of the dumbest "news" stories I've seen here in a while. It's really lame.

    Secondly, he had to write python for this stupidity? From any bash shell:

    while (true); do cat /path/to/song.mp3 >> /dev/null; echo "Another copy made." ; done

    I think I actually lost intelligence by reading and spending 30 seconds thinking about how dumb this whole thing is.

    --
    Topher
    1. Re:This is "news"? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      LCD display for the win.

    2. Re:This is "news"? by freeze128 · · Score: 1

      Your 1 line of code doesn't calculate how many copies per second are being made, or reports how many copies were made after a period of time.

    3. Re:This is "news"? by Jason+Levine · · Score: 1

      And he also thinks this somehow hurts the music industry? Private copies (not shared with anyone) are completely legal. I'm sure the RIAA would love for it to be "you bought the MP3 for that one device and need to buy it again for devices 2, 3, 4, etc, but this isn't the case right now. If I buy a CD and rip it (or buy the MP3 from a place like Amazon), I can copy it a million times all over my computers, phones, tablets, etc and there's nothing the music industry can do about it.

      Now, if he had set up some sort of "automated dev/null file sharing network" where the system downloaded torrents and automatically deleted them, he might actually be able to make a statement. But essentially saying "I copied the file and deleted it a million times" says nothing except perhaps that you have too much free time.

      --
      My sci-fi novel, Ghost Thief, is now available from Amazon.com.
    4. Re:This is "news"? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You can do it faster using C instead of python, increasing the damage

    5. Re:This is "news"? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Mental arithmatic obviously.

    6. Re:This is "news"? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You pipe it to wc, if you want to count. Duh.

    7. Re:This is "news"? by dysphemism · · Score: 1

      it will be news when the riaa and mpaa sue him for it. you will really see what loss of intelligence means then :p a more sophisticated bourne shell version: #!/bin/sh cd /path/to/music echo `find . -type f -name \*.mp3 -print | wc -l` copies per line of output while : ; do find . -type f -name \*.mp3 -print0 | xargs -0 -n 25 cat | dd bs=4096 status=progress >/dev/null; done

    8. Re:This is "news"? by freeze128 · · Score: 2

      Brilliant! You have at your disposal an entire computer.... A machine DESIGNED for performing repetitive and tedious tasks, and you're asking *ME* to do math in my head? You're fired!

    9. Re:This is "news"? by wonkey_monkey · · Score: 1

      And he also thinks this somehow hurts the music industry?

      No, he doesn't actually think that. If anything he thinks the exact opposite, but really it's just a piece of performance designed to Make You Think.

      --
      systemd is Roko's Basilisk.
    10. Re: This is "news"? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Probably not much. Pypy copying bytearrays to devnull doesn't leave much room for improvement.

    11. Re:This is "news"? by sjames · · Score: 1

      Of course he doesn't. That's the whole point! According to the warped illogic put forth by the *AA in various courts, it should bankrupt them in a week or two. That's what he wants to get people to think about and question.

    12. Re: This is "news"? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The poor sentence structure already demonstrated 3rd grade English

    13. Re:This is "news"? by fluffernutter · · Score: 2

      The point is, by the logic presented by the music industry and the logic used against Pirate Bay this WILL hurt them. He is proving that it will not, so therefore it begs the question why they were allowed to use this logic in the first place.

      --
      Laws are rules for the court, but merely a bottom bar to hit for life. Think beyond laws in your actions always.
    14. Re: This is "news"? by robi5 · · Score: 1

      Or node.js for non-blocking IO.

    15. Re:This is "news"? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No, it does, because it doesn't matter how many "copies" are being made. They're not meaningful copies. Saying that copy the contents of a file to /dev/null is an infringing copy that the RIAA cares about is completely silly. By that logic, every time I listen to a song I'm copying it from disk to memory, then copying it from memory to an audio decoder, then from the decoder to my audio output. Holy crap, I've made multiple copies just listening to the song. Except that's dumb, just like the original article.

      As much as I hate the RIAA, this kind of crap doesn't do anything to solve the current issues with copyright and intellectual properly laws. This just confuses the issue further.

  14. Re:Now explain that to the judge by cfc-12 · · Score: 5, Funny

    Clearly it's the same mechanism by which the sun's energy is being sucked up by those solar panels in Woodland, NC.

  15. Howdy partner, another audiophile here by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    Now that you mention it, I am noticing a tiny itty-bitty quality loss caused by storing the FLAC bits in /dev/null. Are you able to notice this quality loss?

    1. Re:Howdy partner, another audiophile here by plover · · Score: 5, Funny

      My /dev/null has a hand rubbed walnut finish, a tube stage feeding a hand-wound transformer, polarized cables, Ukranian porcelain stand-offs, and anti-magnetic monopoles crafted from moon rocks to lower the noise floor. It's extremely danceable.

      --
      John
    2. Re:Howdy partner, another audiophile here by lgw · · Score: 1

      Bah, all that's useless without proper power conditioning, including a perfect synthesized sine wave, plus you have to replace all the electrical outlets in your house with hospital plugs to avoid connection noise. And even then you get aground loop unless you cross-wire the power inputs to put live current across the device chassis!

      Of course it goes without saying that you have only the best hand-laid pure copper power cords, with Egyptian porcelain stand-offs with vibration damping for the power cord (never confuse your stand-offs!), otherwise you won't perfectly capture those fast transients and your /dev/null will still sound digital.

      --
      Socialism: a lie told by totalitarians and believed by fools.
    3. Re:Howdy partner, another audiophile here by Anne+Thwacks · · Score: 1

      Yay. I am break dancing on the new, low, noise floor even as you squeak!

      --
      Sent from my ASR33 using ASCII
    4. Re:Howdy partner, another audiophile here by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What? No rich Corinthian leather?

      noob

    5. Re:Howdy partner, another audiophile here by Feral+Nerd · · Score: 1

      My /dev/null has a hand rubbed walnut finish, a tube stage feeding a hand-wound transformer, polarized cables, Ukranian porcelain stand-offs, and anti-magnetic monopoles crafted from moon rocks to lower the noise floor. It's extremely danceable.

      Huh, quaint... mine is made of solid Adamantium with superconducting Unobtainium coils.

    6. Re:Howdy partner, another audiophile here by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Don't forget the $10,000 audiophile grade ethernet cables to hook everything together.

    7. Re:Howdy partner, another audiophile here by plover · · Score: 1

      Meh, everyone who knows anything about true hi fidelity knows that only Persian porcelain power standoffs are the real deal, and that Egyptian porcelain does virtually nothing to prevent the cross-induced eddy currents that raise the dynamic transversal power cord impedance. You'll get so much hum you'd think the amp was housed in a beehive. If you're going that low-brow, what's next? Are you going to suggest heresy, and use garden-variety extension cords instead of oxygen-free-copper speaker cables? I say, you may have to cancel your subscription to Audiophile magazine.

      --
      John
    8. Re:Howdy partner, another audiophile here by plover · · Score: 1

      All right, which of you musical heathens modded this funny? My /dev/null far outperforms the stock /dev/null, you just can't hear it.

      --
      John
  16. 1-to-1 loss, bad math by Tablizer · · Score: 4, Insightful

    The 8,000,000 copies it makes every day costs the record industry $10m/day in losses. At that rate, they'll be bankrupt in a few weeks at most.

    This implies an 80-cents loss per copy, which probably makes the incorrect assumption that almost every copy prevents a legitimate sell (of roughly $1 per song).

    Often people will take something given for free even though they would otherwise NOT purchase it if the free option didn't exist. And often they are just test-listening to a song to see if they like it.

    If I'm walking down the hall at work and somebody offers me a free donut, there's a pretty good chance I'd take it even if it's not my favorite kind. But put that very same donut for sale at a typical donut price, then I'd be much less likely to purchase it because likely it's not the flavor I want and/or I don't really feel like a donut at that time, at least not enough to part with cash for it.

    I suspect the real lost-sales ratio for songs is more like 10-to-1.

    Industry lobbyists often make the 1-for-1 false assumption in loss claims. I don't know whether its ignorance or spin, but suspect the second.

    1. Re:1-to-1 loss, bad math by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Uh, you do realize this is exactly the point he is trying to make, right?

    2. Re:1-to-1 loss, bad math by Lisias · · Score: 1

      Industry lobbyists often make the 1-for-1 false assumption in loss claims. I don't know whether its ignorance or spin, but suspect the second.

      Good was the times in which lobbyists knew they're lying.

      I'm afraid that nowadays they believe in this bullshit.

      --
      Lisias@Earth.SolarSystem.OrionArm.MilkyWay.Local.Virgo.Universe.org
    3. Re:1-to-1 loss, bad math by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I think that's the point. Showing that the industry claiming millions in losses from downloads is ridiculously exaggerated.

    4. Re:1-to-1 loss, bad math by show+me+altoids · · Score: 2

      If I'm walking down the hall at work and somebody offers me a free donut, there's a pretty good chance I'd take it even if it's not my favorite kind. But put that very same donut for sale at a typical donut price, then I'd be much less likely to purchase it because likely it's not the flavor I want and/or I don't really feel like a donut at that time, at least not enough to part with cash for it.

      But does eating that donut fill you up and make you decide to not buy a donut yourself when you otherwise would have? Then it's still a lost sale.

      --
      I feel sorry for people that don't drink, because when they get up in the morning, that's as good as they're gonna feel
    5. Re:1-to-1 loss, bad math by KitFox · · Score: 1

      The 8,000,000 copies it makes every day costs the record industry $10m/day in losses. ...

      This implies an 80-cents loss per copy,

      Given the title of the post, I hope the irony is not lost on anyone.

      (Though because I know it will be: Eight million copies creating ten million loss is $1.25 per copy. The order of the numbers is important in division.)

      --

      @Whee

    6. Re:1-to-1 loss, bad math by Tablizer · · Score: 1

      On the flip side, seeing the wrong kind of donut(s) may make somebody think about and crave the "correct" kind of donut and go buy it elsewhere.

      A "full cycle" simulation and/or study would be needed to really judge.

    7. Re:1-to-1 loss, bad math by Tablizer · · Score: 1

      You are correct. Thanks for pointing that out that slip. It doesn't change the general premise, however.

    8. Re:1-to-1 loss, bad math by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      This implies an 80-cents loss per copy, which probably makes the incorrect assumption that almost every copy prevents a legitimate sell...Industry lobbyists often make the 1-for-1 false assumption in loss claims. I don't know whether its ignorance or spin, but suspect the second.

      Isn't that the entire point of this though? He's not realistically trying to bankrupt the industry, he's just pointing out that by their own maths this tiny, low-powered machine can bankrupt the entire global industry in a matter of weeks, and therefore their logic is crap.

    9. Re:1-to-1 loss, bad math by KitFox · · Score: 2

      True. It does not change the general premise of the post.

      The entire premise behind the device is to protest the claim that was made and believed that sent him to jail and has him owing millions in debt. As TFA states: "The most important message, however, is that the millions of dollars in losses the industry claims from him and the other TPB founders are just as fictitious as the number displayed on the Kopimashin."

      It even goes so far as to say that the piracy is a net GAIN for the industry, and this could potentially make sense. Take the doughnut example:

      The friend offers ten doughnuts to ten people and three of them like the doughnut a lot, so end up each ordering a dozen doughnuts at the store at full price. Ten doughnuts loss, 36 doughnuts paid for. PROFIT! Loss leaders, free samples... all the same concept, and one that the industry is not understanding.

      A lot of words to say I agree with you. ;)

      --

      @Whee

    10. Re:1-to-1 loss, bad math by NormalVisual · · Score: 1

      and one that the industry is not understanding.

      They understand it perfectly. "Not understanding" isn't the same as "refusing to acknowledge what they know to be fact".

      --
      Please stand clear of the doors, por favor mantenganse alejado de las puertas
    11. Re:1-to-1 loss, bad math by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      ... deleting them even as they're created.

      If the copy doesn't really exist, it's not really piracy.

      ... make the 1-for-1 false assumption in loss claims.

      That's not the big problem. The big problem is the copyright industry claim all copyright piracy is a commercial transaction, allowing them to charge $250,000 per copy in damages. If they were limited to $5 x 80 songs, which most pirates are caught with, their lawyers wouldn't get out of bed in the morning. Even with this claim, suing single mums is unprofitable, so the lawyers are going to the second-closest cause of piracy; illegal distribution, as they should. (The closest cause being prices the market is unwilling to bear.) This is complicated by the fact that torrent clients tend to download a portion of 1 song from an illegal distributer, creating a legal grey area.

    12. Re:1-to-1 loss, bad math by jones_supa · · Score: 1

      But let's also realize in the flipside that the same machine could make the music industry a lot of money if a payment was asked for each copy.

    13. Re:1-to-1 loss, bad math by wassomeyob · · Score: 2

      Uh, you do realize this is exactly the point he is trying to make, right?

      Ya, like, whoosh. Merry Christmas, everyone.

    14. Re:1-to-1 loss, bad math by kheldan · · Score: 1

      You know, if they're so gods-be-damned upset about people getting their 'intellectual property' for FREE, then why do they allow it to be played on free, over-the-air broadcast radio? Sure, there's commercials, but I can turn down the volume or switch stations quickly enough that those don't even reach my ears, and sure, you can argue that FM radio quality is shitty compared to CD quality, but you can make the same argument about MP3 compression or any other kind of compression, too. My argument runs into trouble if you're talking somethign lossess like FLAC or Apple Lossless, but still, the RIAA's arguments have never made much sense to me.

      --
      Are YOU using the TOOL, or is the TOOL using YOU? Think about it!
    15. Re:1-to-1 loss, bad math by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      ya, the math is off considerably. at 8 million copies per day at a typical lawsuit claimed damages of $2500 per copy, it's more like $20 billion a day. i guess he can shut the project down now.......

    16. Re:1-to-1 loss, bad math by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Thank you captain obvious...

      Maybe you can have a crack at explaining the less objective contemporary art for us, or maybe you can release a book "the obvious thing explainer: for the slow to catch on".

    17. Re: 1-to-1 loss, bad math by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Does eating the donut make you say "Wow! This donut is actually really good! I'm full now, but where can I can one like it for my snack tomorrow?"

    18. Re:1-to-1 loss, bad math by Shados · · Score: 1

      That's always been the issue with this whole thing... On one hand, the record industry will spout numbers assuming almost every copy is a lost sale. On the other hand, content pirates will spout that exactly 0 illegal copy would ever have been a sale instead (which for some individuals is absolutely true, but definitely not all), and often that it benefits the record industry 100% of the time, always. The truth is somewhere in between the two extremes, but the discussion is so black and white and stupid, it's impossible to meaningfully fix the problem beyond token attempts.

    19. Re:1-to-1 loss, bad math by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Or could the illicit doughnut be the starting point/trigger for a life-long love of doughnuts? At the end of the day I want some evidence! At least a large(ish) scale, independent experiment.

    20. Re:1-to-1 loss, bad math by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      no it isn't - somebody paid for the donut just not the person who consumed it

    21. Re:1-to-1 loss, bad math by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I suspect the real lost-sales ratio for songs is more like 10-to-1.

      It's also possible that unauthorized distribution has been a net gain for the recording industry.

      All those millions of file sharers are performing a massive amount of free advertising for the industry's products.

      Yes, it's possible that a small fraction of that advertising resulted in lost sales, but the overall effect of the advertising could very well have been a net gain in sales.

      We can only make poor estimates of this effect. That's because the effect of advertising is very difficult to measure without conducting well-controlled trials, and of course the very nature of unauthorized distribution makes experimental control difficult.

  17. Re: Now explain that to the judge by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    "Can we subpoena Mr Dev Null?
    We should charge and arrest Dev Null. What? It's not a person? Is this terrorism related? We should outlaw it. Usage of dev null aids the enemy. It's unamerican to use dev null."

  18. Copying is not theft by JBMcB · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Relevant to the discussion :)

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?...

    --
    My Other Computer Is A Data General Nova III.
    1. Re:Copying is not theft by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      We have the right to copy it 8 million times a day?

    2. Re:Copying is not theft by Vasil16 · · Score: 0

      https://www.youtube.com/watch?...
      "We do file share like we don’t care
      throw music industry in despair"

  19. Re:Ron Burgundy: "That doesn't make sense" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
  20. Re:Ron Burgundy: "That doesn't make sense" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I'm sure the *IAAs can explain it to you.

  21. /dev/null is uber fast! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    That's why I write all my backups to it!

    1. Re:/dev/null is uber fast! by show+me+altoids · · Score: 2

      We would probably all be amazed (or maybe not...) by the number of people who effectively are doing this by never testing the "restore" part of the "backup" procedure.

      --
      I feel sorry for people that don't drink, because when they get up in the morning, that's as good as they're gonna feel
    2. Re:/dev/null is uber fast! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yes, but is it web scale?

  22. Re: Now explain that to the judge by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    Sure. You can send anything you want to him. I wouldn't count on a reply, however.

  23. Reductio ad Absurdum by QuietLagoon · · Score: 5, Informative

    The refutation of a proposition by demonstrating the inevitably absurd conclusion to which it would logically lead.

    1. Re:Reductio ad Absurdum by nickweller · · Score: 1

      I don't know what that means, but I like the way you say it.

    2. Re:Reductio ad Absurdum by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I guess you mean absurd in a more formal sense. As in physically impossible. Because imaginary property passed "absurd" a long time ago.

  24. Re:Ron Burgundy: "That doesn't make sense" by allquixotic · · Score: 2

    Simple.

    1. He has the original track on some kind of non-volatile storage (probably a microUSB card).
    2. He has a tight loop where he reads that file out of non-volatile storage into RAM, then writes it to /dev/null (which is a no-op kernel-side, but there may be another memory copy involved), then frees the buffer, reads it from non-volatile storage again...

    Because the implementation of /dev/null's "write" method is to return the number of bytes passed in as an argument, all you're really doing is copying it around to different regions of system memory. So, technically, you could just have a tight loop where you have a copy of the song in one buffer, then memcpy() it to the second buffer, free the second buffer, and repeat.

  25. Re: Now explain that to the judge by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Why this act of civil disobedience not also an act of contempt of the court.?

  26. Re: Now explain that to the judge by Opportunist · · Score: 3, Insightful

    It is actually very American to use /dev/null. Our economy depends on the destruction of goods.

    --
    We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
  27. The geek cuts his own throat. by westlake · · Score: 1

    Shows the nonsense of basing an economy on signals on a wire. It's time for a revolution.

    The geek is wholly a creation of an economy based on intangible property and near instantaneous communication and computation. Signals on a wire. Come the revolution who does he think will be first against the wall?

    1. Re:The geek cuts his own throat. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Really? There were no geeks in the 17th century? Wow.

    2. Re:The geek cuts his own throat. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      There were, but they bit the heads off of chickens (well ducks too, maybe).

  28. Re:Hahaha by Opportunist · · Score: 1

    It's about copyright. DUH.

    --
    We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
  29. In the UK... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ...the British government and the Police believe everybody stores their child pornography and terrorism related materials in /dev/null.

  30. Not good enough! by kheldan · · Score: 5, Insightful

    For maximum sarcasm, he needs to send each copy over the Internet, to another RPi -- which will store it in /dev/null. That ought to really frost them.

    --
    Are YOU using the TOOL, or is the TOOL using YOU? Think about it!
    1. Re:Not good enough! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What else could a two Pi-boards in an English art gallery for modern art do for fun?

  31. What's with these headlines lately? by SeaFox · · Score: 1, Insightful

    Editors, in case you never studied journalism, headlines are supposed to give a concise summary of the content and grab the reader's attention. They aren't supposed to blatantly mislead about the content of the story.

    We already had that dingbat headline about the guy hacking the celebrities like he was on a murder spree and there was another one a couple days ago.

    1. Re:What's with these headlines lately? by Bite+The+Pillow · · Score: 1

      Monetization of the web properties owned by Dice. Each complaint is another page view. Thanks for running up the numbers.

    2. Re:What's with these headlines lately? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It wasn't blatantly misleading unless you're a retard. The headline conveyed perfectly that the story is about something definitely unusual or absurd if the story in some sense can be paraphrased like that. It performed its function which was to make you read the story if you're interested in something like that. If not, it's obvious absurdity should also just make you not bother instead of bitch and moan about the headline.

    3. Re:What's with these headlines lately? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      To be fair, they haven't posted an article with a title that ends in a question mark since Monday that wasn't an Ask Slashdot, so they're learning....

  32. the Kopimashin is illegal in England by dmoen · · Score: 5, Informative

    The Kopimashin is illegal in England:
    http://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2015/jul/17/high-court-quashes-regulations-copy-cds-musicians

    It might be illegal in other jurisdictions as well? And that's kind of the point of building it.

    --
    I have written a truly remarkable program which this sig is too small to contain.
  33. Poor /dev/null... by gaiageek · · Score: 1

    Please forgive us for our transgressions.

  34. Flawed logic by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    It doesn't cost them anything if no one was going to buy it in the first place. Value doesn't actually exist without a buyer that exists, projections and actual sales are not equivalents. I get what he's doing is symbolic, but not everyone losing out to piracy is a mega corporation, this is pretty sophomoric and infantile.

    1. Re:Flawed logic by jones_supa · · Score: 1

      Finally someone in the thread understands it properly. :)

      Thank you.

    2. Re:Flawed logic by Falos · · Score: 1

      >projections and actual sales are not equivalents
      Are you a courtroom with recognized authority to declare formal precedent?
      Does your concession echo? That is, will the predatory MAFIAA lawyers admit this reality?
      Then print off another million, Petey, a million times seven and a million more.

  35. A million monkeys by kheldan · · Score: 1

    I guess the RIAA needs to exterminate all primates on the planet for potential copyright infringement, because we can take any million of them and have them poke away randomly at buttons marked '0' and '1', and eventually they'll re-create every song ever recorded, a clear violation of copyright law.

    --
    Are YOU using the TOOL, or is the TOOL using YOU? Think about it!
  36. Whoosh! by WD · · Score: 1, Insightful

    "Nobody is actually losing anything." Wait a minute... You don't think...

    I hope at least *some* people see what brokep did there.

  37. That beats Thunderf00t by AndyKron · · Score: 1

    That beats Thunderf00t burning 40,000 copies of the Koran on a hard drive.

  38. Re:Now explain that to the judge by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    It's Dave Null, thank you very much.

  39. Re: Now explain that to the judge by Megane · · Score: 1

    So is this why "breakage" is still a part of record contracts when selling music online?

    --
    #naabhaprzrag, #sverubfr-000, #agi-fcbafberq, negvpyr[pynff*=' negvpyr-ary-'] { qvfcynl: abar !vzcbegnag; }
  40. Re:Ron Burgundy: "That doesn't make sense" by Megane · · Score: 1

    If it's John Cage, maybe?

    --
    #naabhaprzrag, #sverubfr-000, #agi-fcbafberq, negvpyr[pynff*=' negvpyr-ary-'] { qvfcynl: abar !vzcbegnag; }
  41. Re:Now explain that to the judge by Catbeller · · Score: 4, Funny

    Or by the New Order's Planet Sun Cannon.

  42. Music Industry is fine, global economy collapses by MacTO · · Score: 2

    As others have noted, the music industry isn't losing money over this effort. What will actually happen is this:

    - The music industry will start lobbying to make the Raspberry Pi, LCD screens, Python, and /dev/null illegal since they are infringing devices.
    - Governments will pass legislation that reflects the interests of the music industry.
    - Huge swaths of economy will be stuck in the paper age until Unix systems can be patched to operate properly without /dev/null. A smaller segment of the economy will be stuck in paper age until programs incorporating Python itself or that are programmed in Python are replaced.
    - School children and electronics hobbyists will fill prisons and, upon release, find themselves unemployable because of their criminal records. The result is that there will be a lack of skilled labor to help the economy to recover in the years to come.
    - Microsoft and Apple will declare bankruptcy, as manufacturers find that they cannot produce enough CRTs in a timely manner and GUI-centric operating systems will be unable to adapt to consoles based upon LEDs and toggle switches fast enough.
    - On a positive note, the MPAA will collapse due to it's current dependence upon LCD technology to deliver its content to consumers.
    - On a negative note, the lack of competition will means the RIAA will take over.

  43. Needs to transfer as well by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    He should be doing this via a network.

  44. Python Hackery by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Yeah, not that hard to do. Oh, looks like he owes the music lots of money. He can pay me half and I'll settle it with the music industry for him.

  45. Add more injury by Jazoray · · Score: 0

    by putting the device outside playing each song on a speaker as fast as it's being copied. Then it's more damages as it's also a public performance of the song that requires royalities.

  46. Re: Now explain that to the judge by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Well, mostly because his trial was a farce to begin with.
    It might not actually be possible to have more contempt for that court.

  47. Bankruptcy.. Learn what it means by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    At no stage will this scheme cause the music industry to be unable to pay their debts. He is not bankrupting them.

    When he gets sued into oblivion however, that is likely to make him bankrupt.

  48. Re: Now explain that to the judge by mishehu · · Score: 4, Interesting

    In America we'd [the police] would just invoke Civil Forfeiture and sue /dev/null for piracy (no, 'copyright infringement' is nowhere near politically charged enough). Then let /dev/null prove his innocence...

  49. Re:Now explain that to the judge by unixisc · · Score: 1

    $ cp /dev/null/crazy.mp3 /usr/home/jdoe/music/

  50. Re: Now explain that to the judge by ClickOnThis · · Score: 1

    Our economy depends on the destruction of goods.

    Or not.

    --
    If it weren't for deadlines, nothing would be late.
  51. Re:Now explain that to the judge by ClickOnThis · · Score: 1

    cp: cannot stat ‘/dev/null/crazy.mp3’: Not a directory

    --
    If it weren't for deadlines, nothing would be late.
  52. that's "figuratively" bankrupt by swschrad · · Score: 3, Funny

    but hey, that's their measurements... bye, guys. sorta sucks having known ya. watching for my favorite artists to sell on their own websites...

    --
    if this is supposed to be a new economy, how come they still want my old fashioned money?
  53. "uh, I'd take you there, but that's a felony, too. by swschrad · · Score: 1

    "although I'd like it..."

    --
    if this is supposed to be a new economy, how come they still want my old fashioned money?
  54. go ahead, serve /dev/null by swschrad · · Score: 1

    serve process on it all you want.

    --
    if this is supposed to be a new economy, how come they still want my old fashioned money?
  55. Uh... not exactly. by mark-t · · Score: 1

    The 8,000,000 copies it makes every day costs the record industry $10m/day in losses

    Except it's not actually *making* any copies of the content... it is sending them to /dev/null, which means that the content is being ignored. It may be doing this through the invocation of a copy-like command, but that doesn't mean that copies are actually being *made*, because that would require that the copies actually exist after they had allegedly been made.

    1. Re:Uh... not exactly. by fluffernutter · · Score: 1

      You don't think there are a big portion of people out there who end up ignoring the files they download? Yet PirateBay is penalized for them just the same. That's kind of the point.

      --
      Laws are rules for the court, but merely a bottom bar to hit for life. Think beyond laws in your actions always.
    2. Re:Uh... not exactly. by mark-t · · Score: 1

      It's not just the fact the the copy is ignored, it's the fact that the copy isn't even being made in the first place.... While it's technically invoking copy-like instructions to accomplish the task, it's not actually *MAKING* a copy. At best, it is only *pretending* to make a copy by going through the motions of doing so. And while it can be the case that pretending to commit a crime can still be considered criminal, it is only actually such when there is no clear indication of pretense, and this person is not trying to hide the fact that he was "copying" to /dev/null, so the pretense is obvious. Therefore, no infringement is occurring.

    3. Re:Uh... not exactly. by fluffernutter · · Score: 1

      It's still going through the motions of making a copy. Just because all the bytes don't exist at the same time, the copy is still made.

      --
      Laws are rules for the court, but merely a bottom bar to hit for life. Think beyond laws in your actions always.
    4. Re:Uh... not exactly. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The RIAA has previously successfully argued that a copy's duration of existence does not have any bearing on its status as infringement, as part of their desire to sue people who had downloaded and later deleted content before being sued. Not to mention that their definition of copying is as follows :

      "‘[C]opying,’ for the purposes of copyright law, occurs when a computer program is transferred from a permanent storage device to a computer's random access memory. In this case, copies were made when the Sega game files were uploaded to or downloaded from [the defendant’s] BBS [Bulletin Board Service]."
      Sega Enterprises. v. Sabella, 1996 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 20470 (N.D. Cal. 1996).

      So yes, per their definition (which they have won legal actions on), he is copying the song as it goes to RAM before being sent to /dev/null.

    5. Re:Uh... not exactly. by mark-t · · Score: 1

      Going through the motions of committing a crime when you are also making it obvious that you are not actually committing a crime is not illegal. If it were, actors could be arrested when they portray a character who commits a crime as part of the story.

    6. Re:Uh... not exactly. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      >motions
      Copy's illegal, copy's made. Lawyers DGAF about fragmentation. The NFL is trying to suppress football GIFs.

    7. Re:Uh... not exactly. by fluffernutter · · Score: 1

      You still don't get it. Of course it isn't illegal. So that's what the commentary is.. Why was he prosecuted for it? If PirateBay presents an illegal download to someone, and they download it and never watch it then they have gone through the motions but not actually broken the law. So by your words, not illegal. Yet they were prosecuted for it just the same.

      --
      Laws are rules for the court, but merely a bottom bar to hit for life. Think beyond laws in your actions always.
    8. Re:Uh... not exactly. by mark-t · · Score: 1

      You misunderstand what I mean by "ignored". I don't just mean that it was ignored by people, I mean that it was ignored *ENTIRELY*, to the point that no copy was ever even made in the fase.

      Sending a so-called "copy" to /dev/null may involve going through all of the motions of making a copy, but is *not* actually making one.

      Again, it is *NOT* generally illegal to pretend to commit a crime when you are simultaneously making your pretense obvious.

    9. Re:Uh... not exactly. by mark-t · · Score: 1

      The RIAA has previously successfully argued that a copy's duration of existence....

      The duration of the existence of the copy may not matter, but that still requires that the copy actually get made in the first place. By "copying" to /dev/null, what he did was he went through the motions of making a copy, arguably just pretending to make one, but did not actually make any through that action. Further, he did not even try to hide the fact that this is what he was doing, so the pretense of the action was obvious.

      It is *NOT* illegal to pretend to commit a crime when the pretense is not only plainly admitted, but outwardly obvious to everyone.

    10. Re:Uh... not exactly. by fluffernutter · · Score: 1

      Well, if you don't think it is the same for a song to exist in a memory buffer and then be forgotten by the system (ie /dev/null), and for someone to download the song then delete it then you are really splitting hairs there.

      --
      Laws are rules for the court, but merely a bottom bar to hit for life. Think beyond laws in your actions always.
    11. Re:Uh... not exactly. by mark-t · · Score: 1

      Downloading the song and then deleting it still involves *MAKING* a copy, however brief its existence. no copy is made in the first place by "copying" to /dev/null. Doing so may go through the motions, but doesn't actually do the deed.

    12. Re:Uh... not exactly. by ihtoit · · Score: 1

      my ears and my brain form a recording system. I remember music. My wetware makes a copy of everything I hear.

      I must be the most prolific "pirate" going.

      --
      Political debates have me rolling my eyes so much I think I got optical whiplash. I should sue. - Foamy The Squirrel
    13. Re:Uh... not exactly. by fluffernutter · · Score: 1

      The copy exists in memory.. you don't consider that making a copy? What's your definition of a copy.. that it has to be written to a hard drive? That it has to be transferred across a network? My definition is that the copy exists somewhere.

      --
      Laws are rules for the court, but merely a bottom bar to hit for life. Think beyond laws in your actions always.
    14. Re:Uh... not exactly. by mark-t · · Score: 1

      As long as you can agree that copying a work to /dev/null does not constitute broadcasting or transmitting it, which represents one major branch of a type of copyright infringement copyright infringement, then the issue at hand would ordinarily only deal with any "fixed" copies that get made (a term from 17 U.S. Code, S101), and the Code further defines "fixed" (as it applies to such copies) to explicitly mean "sufficiently permanent or stable to permit it to be perceived".

  56. Re:Now explain that to the judge by dmbasso · · Score: 1

    Where is the mod for '+1, No Sense of Humor'?

    --
    `echo $[0x853204FA81]|tr 0-9 ionbsdeaml`@gmail.com
  57. Subpoena by Etherwalk · · Score: 1

    SUBPOENA DUCES TECUM

    You are HEREBY COMMANDED TO APPEAR and bring with you the CONTENTS OF /dev/null

  58. Re: Now explain that to the judge by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    That's the problem with it, just call it terrorism and imprison him. Just hope your never on that side of the fence.

    Corruption everywhere.

  59. hmmm by MakersDirector · · Score: 0

    Maybe I should try this same approach with every Star Wars movie that's been created since the Empire Strikes Back. Maybe they'll quit making them if they are losing that much money

  60. Re: Now explain that to the judge by CanadianMacFan · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Actually it seems lately that the economy depends on people buying more and more stuff and then renting self-storage lockers to store it in because they don't have enough room at home. I can't believe how many of the self-storage places are being built in my city.

    Mind you if people started buying their stuff in wood or bamboo it could be a great way to sequester carbon. Make whatever stuff people are going to buy and then have them store it in the lockers for ages.

  61. Re: Now explain that to the judge by Opportunist · · Score: 1

    That's not what I was referring to, but the fact that value adding only happens when a good is removed from the economy. Only when something is bought for consumption (and consumed, thus "destroyed") you actually generate true revenue. Everything bought for investment is required to 'pull its weight', so to speak, i.e. generate at least as much revenue in return.

    --
    We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
  62. Re: Now explain that to the judge by Opportunist · · Score: 2

    My guess is rather that people have to move into smaller places and need some place to stuff their surplus crap because in this economy you can't find anyone to buy it.

    --
    We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
  63. In the Immortal Words of Slappy Squirrel... by Scarletdown · · Score: 1
    --
    This space unintentionally left blank.
  64. Seriously? by robbiedo · · Score: 1

    What's the point? The "music industry" bogeyman doesn't even exist anymore in any real sense as the gateway for picking and choosing what music you listen to, and rewarding a handful of musicians and artists, or exploiting, as the case may be.

  65. Re: Now explain that to the judge by ClickOnThis · · Score: 1

    Thanks. I get you. But as you said, you meant "consumption" rather than "destruction." I was responding to the latter.

    Peace out.

    --
    If it weren't for deadlines, nothing would be late.
  66. Word by maseo126 · · Score: 1

    Now if we can take the same approach to the sports and political industry we could make some big moves forward:)

  67. Re: Now explain that to the judge by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Shhhh spoilers!

  68. Re: Now explain that to the judge by guruevi · · Score: 1

    It's while [ true ]; do cat song.mp3 > /dev/null; done

    And an incrementing variable that echoes it to /dev/ttyS0 or wherever the lcd hangs out. No Python necessary, it's pure overkill.

    --
    Custom electronics and digital signage for your business: www.evcircuits.com
  69. Fucking stupid by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Wasted my time reading this, (and further wasted commenting on it).
    I want my time back.

  70. While I am glad to praise... by Bartles · · Score: 1

    ...the creativity of the creator, the machine doesn't really do what it's designed to do. Now if it were to distribute copies of the music to customers who were considering purchasing the music already, he might have something. The problem is that he'd run out of "Crazy" customers in about 3 seconds.

    1. Re:While I am glad to praise... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      >customers who were considering purchasing the music already
      Nah, this isn't the metric used by sue-happy MAFIAA lawyers.

  71. Re: Now explain that to the judge by demented_hedgehog · · Score: 1

    I was just reading this page: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parable_of_the_broken_window .. interesting.

  72. Re: Now explain that to the judge by demented_hedgehog · · Score: 1

    Cause someone posted it below.. and I read it and went away and came back again. Beer is good .. that is all

  73. Re: Now explain that to the judge by Gumbercules!! · · Score: 1

    No because he's fast as hell and web-scale

  74. Re: Now explain that to the judge by Opportunist · · Score: 2

    Consumption IS destruction from a purely economic point of view. It has the same net effect: Something is gone and needs to be replaced. The main difference being that consumption is something the buyer places positive aspects on while replacing something broken has a negative associated aspect.

    Consumption also has a positive, non-monetary aspect to the one doing it. Consumption is necessary or enjoyable. Or even both. Replacing something broken is neither. So even though on the pure economic side they represent the same (buyer buys something with the intent to remove it from the economic circuit), the non-monetary aspects are vastly different.

    --
    We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
  75. The Simpsons made that point... by GPS+Pilot · · Score: 1

    Bart: [Looks at tape] Hootie and the Blowfish?

    Chief Wiggum: Yeah, it's cheaper than blank tape.

    --
    That that is is that that that that is not is not.
  76. ... but not illegal in at least the US by Theaetetus · · Score: 1

    The Kopimashin is illegal in England: http://www.theguardian.com/uk-...

    It might be illegal in other jurisdictions as well? And that's kind of the point of building it.

    It's certainly not illegal in the US, which is ironic considering that the music industry he's attacking is based in and uses US laws. 17 USC 117(a) includes a limitation on copyright of computer programs that says that it's not an act of infringement to make temporary copies during execution:

    (a)Making of Additional Copy or Adaptation by Owner of Copy.—Notwithstanding the provisions of section 106, it is not an infringement for the owner of a copy of a computer program to make or authorize the making of another copy or adaptation of that computer program provided: (1) that such a new copy or adaptation is created as an essential step in the utilization of the computer program in conjunction with a machine and that it is used in no other manner...

    Normally, that provision is used to exempt "copies" from a hard drive into RAM during execution, but "copies" from a drive to /dev/null would also qualify, since they're created as an essential step during execution of the Kopimashin, and are not used in any other manner (since they're immediately deleted).

    Plus, the UK probably has a similar exemption in their copyright law.

    1. Re:... but not illegal in at least the US by ihtoit · · Score: 1

      just to clarify: what the judge was basically saying is that now even if you have a copy of a certain piece of music on CD with a barcode on the label*, you would still have to pay for a digital copy.

      *which is really what this is about, PRS "inspectors" still don't generally give a fuck if you're playing back off a hard drive, as long as you can show paper barcodes as "proof" that you have a copy on CD they will generally accept that the digital copy is melodically identical - and if you're playing anything deemed of commercial value in a place where it can be heard by members of the public (even if it's a Top40 radio broadcast filtering through the white noise in the back of a shop), they will hit you for a £300 annual certificate which is pretty much nothing more than a permission slip to listen to Horlicks FM at work. Been there, showed the twat the KLF announcement that they had followed through their intention (at the Brits, of all events!) to delete their entire back catalogue just to spite Arista and deny them any more royalties (I was playing KLF) and he left red faced and ever so slightly embarrassed. No commission for him.

      --
      Political debates have me rolling my eyes so much I think I got optical whiplash. I should sue. - Foamy The Squirrel
  77. Market correction by RogueWarrior65 · · Score: 1

    What this tells me is that the music isn't worth the bits it's printed on. Further, people in the entertainment industry (actors, musicians, pompous directors) are so over paid that they have a severely distorted view of their own importance. They become misinformed after being uninformed. The end result are cases like the anti-vaxers. Here's hoping that bubble bursts sooner rather than later. Never equate popularity with knowledge and wisdom.

  78. 10 years ago - "The Big Hack" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I've often wondered this, and I think I even saw something 10-15 years ago, almost a thought experiment of sorts, which suggested something similar (I think it was called "The Big Hack" or something like this)

    What if I was to upload a 4MB file called "Definitely Not Song XYZ", a truly random 4MB file. Then another person uploaded a different 4MB file called "Also Definitely Not Song XYZ", also unplayable, un-renderable (as JPG), etc. Yet, magically, when I take the 2 files and XOR them byte-for-byte, I get Song XYZ.

    Now I can already see people lining up & talking about intent, etc. but the truth is if we start making it illegal to upload 4MB files that have no playable content, well then everyone who has ever written a 4MB Word Doc, a 4MB blog post (OK, bad example), etc. are in deep shit. You can take any file, and with the right XOR pattern, turn it into something else. Imagine addressing the jury and telling them that they each have potentially hundreds of infringing files. "No seriously, guys, it's true -- your file, by itself something else, is potentially a song, a high-res image, etc., so I'm going to have to declare you guilty (50% at least) of copyright infringement."

    And don't try to combat this by saying, "Well, the filenames indicate the real purpose." Because then smart people will say, "Hey file 4837374837483749837.bin and file 828367636346784638764.bin, when XOR'ed together, give you Song XYZ." Try prosecuting that. Maybe the first one is a JPEG, and the second file is "gibberish". Is it a crime to post a JPG of a cat hanging from a tree (file 1), and "this came out of my true random number generator (TRNG)" (file 2)? Slippery slope, recording industries, be careful here... juries aren't famously smart, but put the image of granny's little grandson in jail for posting a photo or a YouTube clip, she'll flip out and hang the jury.

    My point is that at a certain point, the Music And Film Industry Associations (MAFIA - aka RIAA & MPA) has to realize the cat is out of the bag, people will pay for good content, some people won't pay for anything anyway, and their safe, highly-profitable monopoly is crumbling. Scary, yes. Reality? Also yes. Bits want to be free.

    So when/how is this file-pair uploading scheme going to take off? Just wait, it will happen...

  79. Re: Now explain that to the judge by RockDoctor · · Score: 1

    I used to write to D(ave) Evnull on the letters/ help pages of ... one of the early (UK) PC magazines. This was about the time that I was considering whether to buy a copy of Xenix, or of Coherent's SVR4-a-like ... then some crazy Finnish dude came up with a variant on Minix with extensions to use the 80386-DX I'd recently invested 3 months wages in.

    --
    Birds are not dinosaur descendants;birds are dinosaurs, for all useful meanings of "birds", "are" and "dinosaurs"
  80. Troll Level: Epic by DiEx-15 · · Score: 1

    1) He mass produces this and puts it on sale.

    2) Everybody buys one.

    3) Watch as the RIAA shits themselves.

    4) ???

    5) PROFIT! (Except for the RIAA)

  81. last time I bought music? by ihtoit · · Score: 1

    Oh, wow, lemme think. It was last week at the last ever Spirytus gig. A quid in the donations jar and I am now the proud owner of a signed (Ryan, Danny and Ben, the other Ben skipped the minute the performance was over and Mike was busy packing down the equipment while the rest were busy killing beer) Fundamentals EP.

    Best. Unsigned. Band. Ever.

    Made all the more satisfying knowing that no major label gets to see a penny. And that's the only difference between being unsigned and being signed. Labels get royalties and they own the rights, not the signed artists, who still have to pay for studio time and production out of their (average) five percent cut on hard sales of current catalogues, and two percent and less on back catalogues. Ask Janis Ian, she'll tell you, labels not only rip off consumers, they rip off artists - royally.

    --
    Political debates have me rolling my eyes so much I think I got optical whiplash. I should sue. - Foamy The Squirrel
  82. Re: Now explain that to the judge by CanadianMacFan · · Score: 1

    Two reasons for some of the growth is businesses use it because renting a locker is much cheaper than finding a larger place with more storage and, possibly, people are using the storage when a relationship ends and they are transitioning between homes (for example living in an apartment before buying a new home).

    However from observations in my city and according to some articles about the a local self-storage company that is growing at an amazing rate the majority of the business at the self-storage business is people putting away stuff that they don't have room for anymore.

  83. Re: Now explain that to the judge by Opportunist · · Score: 1

    If you read the rest of the thread you would have noticed that someone already posted this and I already replied to it.

    --
    We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
  84. Kopimashin is Fair Use by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Kopimashin would actually qualify under fair use under the "temporal" clause. Since the "copies" are temporary in nature and not stored in a permanent state similar to cache. Sorry to ruin the parade.

  85. This is a person after my own heart. by Agripa · · Score: 1

    I refurbished an Intel OR840 and for years have had it generating random numbers using the dedicated hardware built into its chipset to deliberately create entropy and hasten the heat death of the universe.