How is the net useful without corporations?
on
The Internet Power Grab
·
· Score: 4, Insightful
Who would provide hosting services to the majority of the people out there? Who would provide them with software that they can actually use? Sorry boys, but most free software is a POS for the average user. Mozilla and OpenOffice are the exceptions, not the rule. Who would provide the bandwidth? The hardware you use? Who would let you buy stuff online that you couldn't get locally?
The real question is, how far should corporations be protected? The answer is no more than they are offline. A DDoS should be treated with no more severity than throwing a brick through a window during peak hours. The existing copyright statutes were plenty for prosecuting infringers. It isn't illegal to teach someone how to make an explosive, it is to tell them how to use it if your goal is nefarious. Thus there is no logical, let alone ethical, reason to outlaw academic research on copy restriction systems. That research actually benefits copyright holders because it makes them more informed customers.
I will say right now and get it over with WE ARE NOT AT WAR WITH ALL OF CORPORATE AMERICA!!!! The enemy is each and every copyright cartel in the country and those that wield their patents against us. You want to worry about an economic issue (Americans) worry about Bush's hypocrisy. Subsidize American corporations to the tune of $100B a year then protect them from foreign subsidized corporations. We do it, they do it. Corporate protection is about securing votes, not good capitalism. Remember kids, your friends at the LP oppose the DMCA and while the EFF is nice and all, it isn't trying to get people elected to remove that kind of bullshit from the USC. If this kind of issue really bothers you all, vote for the LP. It isn't pissing in the wind if they don't get elected in the next few cycles. The longer they keep getting on the ballot, the more people will see their name. If you vote for a lesser evil, you are still voting for evil. Remember that in the next election cycle (which is IIRC 2 months from now for many of us).
Many doctors in the US will not take medicare patients from what I've read because the paper work to get any money out of the system is too complicated. In many instances the system won't pay up and the doctor has to pay for it. Fix it you say? Bullshit, that's what the Socialists have been telling us for years. "We can fix it this time, honest!" "It'll be different this time, we'll make it work this time!" Same old, same old. It does not work.
Why should a private hospital be forced to treat any loser that wants to be treated? There are free clinics for that. Why don't you start giving money to a local free clinic. There's one in my town that does a good job at treating those who cannot afford healthcare. Give money since you're presumably not licensed to be a nurse or doctor. That way the poor can actually get healthcare without having to wonder if next time the doctor is going to tell them to buzz off since medicare left him standing with the bill.
Medical care is the product of a doctor's labor. You have no right to tell a doctor what he or she can charge their clients and who they can accept or refuse. If you feel so strongly, go become a doctor and treat the poor at a margin barely enough to keep you off the street yourself.
I find it hard to believe that the majority of the white farmers are a bunch of martini-sipping aristocrats that sit around all day while black workers toil in the field. I bet you their quality of life is typically middle class at best.
Why do they not do a direct mp3.com sale where if you buy from their site they give the band half and they take half? Most people would love that! Buy from the major label directly, the major label gives half to the artist since it doesn't have to have a middleman for that sale. Of course Sam Goody, et al. would go ape shit over that!
I'm a student and I am saving up to build a cheap Linux box for various things. Why should I go with UnitedLinux, which doesn't have a binary distribution availible free for download, when I can get the ISOs for Debian or RedHat for free? What real benefits does UnitedLinux give me that outweigh the ability to use two of the most popular distributions without having to buy the binaries? Don't give me any of that standardization rubbish, I want to know just what exactly is so great about UnitedLinux that I should not go with the two established leaders that give away their binaries for free and have the lion share of marketshare already. Why should I go out and buy a distribution that I have no way of knowing how successful it will be to learn on when I can get used to two distributions which are already well established and I can get every update, binary and source, for free?
If your significant other walked in front of a window to close it while they were nude or in their underwear and I video taped it? Your significant other had no expectation of privacy because their window was open and I was able to see in.
On the same page there was an article saying something like "sexual tension between sharon and arafat reaches breaking point" and was about them kissing. Of course maybe I'm giving them way too much credit for intelligence
If AOLTW were to block its competitors from sending content to its users that would be a gross violation of anti-trust laws. I for one am becoming less libertarian and more conservative the more I contemplate posts like yours (which is a good thing, most conservatives do support anti-trust law).
You all should get out of your left wing biases for a second to realize that Nader isn't well respected in many circles. He is reviled as a Socialist nutcase by the Right and Libertarians at a minimum as a general rule consider him to be a clueless luddite (hmm isn't that being redundant?)
As much as you all don't want to hear it, Jerry Falwell would be taken more seriously by the current elected government if he proposed this. You need to send a messenger that will be respected by the recipient when dealing with politics. The best person actually to make the case for Linux is Robert Bork. He has come out against Microsoft (in support of the anti-trust case no less) and if he were to tell Bush that Star Office is better, Bush would probably listen.
Remember people, Bush and his people decide WHERE the money will be spent, Congress merely allocates it. If Bush wants to, he can tell the entire federal bureacracy to sign no new contracts and to not renew any contracts with companies like Microsoft and use only OpenOffice.
because copyrights last too long. I don't care what "rights" I have, if the copyright lasts 95 years then the system is not worth anything to me. Copyrights shouldn't last anymore than 25 years now. Software copyrights for no more than 5 years.
Copyrights are not property. They are a state-enforced monopoly and thus in order to be moral they have to have a limited scope and duration. This is one area where IMO where one individual's "good" cannot be put on even the same level with the sum total of all individuals' rights. Copyrighted goods can only exist with state-intervention into the market place. That intervention violates a lot of people's natural rights. They give them up with the expectation they will gain something useful and have property rights of some kind. The current system absolutely does none of that in any way, shape or form. Consumers don't own the software they buy, have no right to duplicate music or movies they buy for friends with their own materials and many scientific pursuits are now outlawed.
If your website is a member of an affiliate program, has advertising banners or accepts paypal payments from users that have bootlegged your IP but want to pay you for it, what are you classified as? How about I put in a message in a mass-mailing to users on a mailing list a site I administer runs saying "while you're there please buy something through the affiliate store or click on an ad?" AFAIAMC (As Far As I Am Concerned) politicians should be civilally and criminally liable if their bills are considered generally destructive and outside the bounds of the country's constitution. Yes, I believe the USSC should be allowed to summarily imprison members of Congress who voted for the DMCA for say... 1 year and that each state supreme court should have the equivalent power. When the state acts, it can act only through violence implicitly or explicitly. When members of the civil body politic fuck up, they hurt people. They should be held accountable on a level that ordinary people are not.
Had they made these demands 100 years ago, they would have been in imminent physical danger. Gun owning citizens 100 year ago were far more militant about protecting their civil rights than they are now.
Your argument is as ridiculous as saying that every single government on Earth is as genocidal as Nazi Germany, the Soviet Union, Maoist China or Pol Pot's Cambodia. The head of my CS department was a manager at IBM. He was paid from what I hear about $400,000/year. Based on the kinds of bonuses that he secured for his top subordinates, I would bet good money that he got a lot of innovation and hard work out of them. Bonuses that were frequently in the $17,000 ballpark. He got them bonuses that were higher than what some people make in 1 year in the US. You would have to be pretty foolish to think that people won't bust their asses for cash like that. Good corporations have regulations to make sure that people don't go off in every direction, so that there is a purpose to research. But good corporations will pay whatever they can to ensure that there is financial motivation to bring out the genius in every employee doing the R&D that they can.
Most pop culture dies off within a decade. It therefore has no apperciable economic value for about 9/10 of the copyright's duration. How many of our great grandkids are going to be listening to Jimmy Eat World, Korn, Britney Spears or even Nine Inch Nails?
Tell her to take the time to set up a paypal account and host mp3s on audiogalaxy and kazaa that have a small advertisement that says if they like her they can send money to a paypal account.
Proof for an old principle
on
California Hax0red
·
· Score: 5, Insightful
that has been true since the creation of the civil service if not longer. If you pay ~$15,000 to a worker to handle a $1.5B piece of equipment you need to reevaluate your spending priorities. Putting low paid workers in charge of such information considering the amount of civil and criminal liability the state now faces due to its incompetence is like putting guys with pocket knives as their only sidearm in charge of security at a nuclear power plant or the pentagon.
The CBDTPA is actually very good for the movement to bring about the death of legislation like the DMCA. I saw a review of the CBDTPA in a roanoke paper about 2 weeks ago and it was really cool seeing a common newspaper make a big feature in its op-ed section about the CBDTPA. People trust newspapers a lot more than they trust websites. Newspapers cost money to produce (so do websites), but websites don't in the eyes of John Q. Citizen. Anyone can make a website is the general view, even though hosting a major website requires an assload of money to pay for bandwidth, high end equipment and a full time staff. Using the Internet to propagandize is not as easy as people think.
What we need are Win32 and OS X open source or free as in beer cd/dvd rippers that make defeating copy restrictions as easy as installing a new plugin. We need to force the issue by making the cartels so desparate they call for the complete destruction of individual property rights as they pertain to IP. The CBDTPA wasn't quite that, we need to get them so desparate that they propose something that makes it a felony to own a computer that can copy music and movies. We need to make John Q. Citizen so scared of their proposals that he says, "listen asshole, you have two choices, protect my rights or their bottom line. You know where I'm voting now!!" to their representatives out of anger and sheer rage. Essentially we need to take demagoguery to a new level, if you support these industries you are supporting your child's inevitable felony prison sentence for making a custom workout mix cd.
What we can do are the following
Make easily read and intepretted brochures for distribution at elections that say in plain English what copyright laws do and would do if enacted.
Tell people where their representatives really stand. In those brochures show how they voted and again, say in plain English what the nastier parts of the law really do
Use as many controversial quotes by the RIAA and MPAA's executives whenever possible. Take away the image that they are hard working capitalists, and help make them look like lobbyists for corporate welfare babies.
Make these companies look like they have complete and utter contempt (which admittedly a lot of them actually do) for their customers not just as property owners, but as human beings. Make them look like they could give a damn less about individual rights and that they will not stop trying to use the government to violently crush competition until they themselves are crushed by either the government or (preferably) the marketplace.
Use industry statistics to show that most artists never get compensated anyway and show that copying cannot be stealing because it creates new property
and finally, tell the people that they can make a difference. They can buy music from local bands, buy cds used so they aren't funding their oppressors, allow others to access their mp3s if they have broadband.
We must make these people look like absolute monsters to the public. We must find ways to associate RIAA/MPAA with the same feelings that most people reserve for Fascists and Communists. The average person must start looking at it from this perspective, "he is not advocating compensating people for their work, he is advocating the annihilation of my property rights." Once we have achieved that, we can effectively dismantle modern copywrong law and get it back to being constitutional copyright law.
is that the BSA may audit them anyway as a form of punishment for switching over to Linux. If they find one copy of a shareware program that is expired on a Linux computer (let's say some kid got the root password, not too hard to imagine knowing how dumb some teachers can be) the BSA can take the school down for that. It reduces the threat, but doesn't eliminate it. The BSA is the primary problem. It isn't directly affiliated with software firms so it can safely be their rent-a-nazis. Put Microsoft in a position where the corporation directly has to go up against the school system and that will change a lot of it. Microsoft can say now "well we didn't authorize the raid, had we known we would have stopped them." Without the BSA, they have no excuse whatsoeverin the public's eyes.
Slashdot Mirror
Who would provide hosting services to the majority of the people out there? Who would provide them with software that they can actually use? Sorry boys, but most free software is a POS for the average user. Mozilla and OpenOffice are the exceptions, not the rule. Who would provide the bandwidth? The hardware you use? Who would let you buy stuff online that you couldn't get locally?
The real question is, how far should corporations be protected? The answer is no more than they are offline. A DDoS should be treated with no more severity than throwing a brick through a window during peak hours. The existing copyright statutes were plenty for prosecuting infringers. It isn't illegal to teach someone how to make an explosive, it is to tell them how to use it if your goal is nefarious. Thus there is no logical, let alone ethical, reason to outlaw academic research on copy restriction systems. That research actually benefits copyright holders because it makes them more informed customers.
I will say right now and get it over with WE ARE NOT AT WAR WITH ALL OF CORPORATE AMERICA!!!! The enemy is each and every copyright cartel in the country and those that wield their patents against us. You want to worry about an economic issue (Americans) worry about Bush's hypocrisy. Subsidize American corporations to the tune of $100B a year then protect them from foreign subsidized corporations. We do it, they do it. Corporate protection is about securing votes, not good capitalism. Remember kids, your friends at the LP oppose the DMCA and while the EFF is nice and all, it isn't trying to get people elected to remove that kind of bullshit from the USC. If this kind of issue really bothers you all, vote for the LP. It isn't pissing in the wind if they don't get elected in the next few cycles. The longer they keep getting on the ballot, the more people will see their name. If you vote for a lesser evil, you are still voting for evil. Remember that in the next election cycle (which is IIRC 2 months from now for many of us).
Many doctors in the US will not take medicare patients from what I've read because the paper work to get any money out of the system is too complicated. In many instances the system won't pay up and the doctor has to pay for it. Fix it you say? Bullshit, that's what the Socialists have been telling us for years. "We can fix it this time, honest!" "It'll be different this time, we'll make it work this time!" Same old, same old. It does not work.
Why should a private hospital be forced to treat any loser that wants to be treated? There are free clinics for that. Why don't you start giving money to a local free clinic. There's one in my town that does a good job at treating those who cannot afford healthcare. Give money since you're presumably not licensed to be a nurse or doctor. That way the poor can actually get healthcare without having to wonder if next time the doctor is going to tell them to buzz off since medicare left him standing with the bill.
Medical care is the product of a doctor's labor. You have no right to tell a doctor what he or she can charge their clients and who they can accept or refuse. If you feel so strongly, go become a doctor and treat the poor at a margin barely enough to keep you off the street yourself.
If 1.5-2.5M federal desktops switched it would be disasterous for Microsoft. Go write, now
It isn't public property, it's the state's property. If it were "public property" any American would have a legal right to link to the content.
With the exception of my online banking service, every website I visit with Mozilla renders and functions quite well.
I find it hard to believe that the majority of the white farmers are a bunch of martini-sipping aristocrats that sit around all day while black workers toil in the field. I bet you their quality of life is typically middle class at best.
Why do they not do a direct mp3.com sale where if you buy from their site they give the band half and they take half? Most people would love that! Buy from the major label directly, the major label gives half to the artist since it doesn't have to have a middleman for that sale. Of course Sam Goody, et al. would go ape shit over that!
I'm a student and I am saving up to build a cheap Linux box for various things. Why should I go with UnitedLinux, which doesn't have a binary distribution availible free for download, when I can get the ISOs for Debian or RedHat for free? What real benefits does UnitedLinux give me that outweigh the ability to use two of the most popular distributions without having to buy the binaries? Don't give me any of that standardization rubbish, I want to know just what exactly is so great about UnitedLinux that I should not go with the two established leaders that give away their binaries for free and have the lion share of marketshare already. Why should I go out and buy a distribution that I have no way of knowing how successful it will be to learn on when I can get used to two distributions which are already well established and I can get every update, binary and source, for free?
If your significant other walked in front of a window to close it while they were nude or in their underwear and I video taped it? Your significant other had no expectation of privacy because their window was open and I was able to see in.
On the same page there was an article saying something like "sexual tension between sharon and arafat reaches breaking point" and was about them kissing. Of course maybe I'm giving them way too much credit for intelligence
If AOLTW were to block its competitors from sending content to its users that would be a gross violation of anti-trust laws. I for one am becoming less libertarian and more conservative the more I contemplate posts like yours (which is a good thing, most conservatives do support anti-trust law).
You all should get out of your left wing biases for a second to realize that Nader isn't well respected in many circles. He is reviled as a Socialist nutcase by the Right and Libertarians at a minimum as a general rule consider him to be a clueless luddite (hmm isn't that being redundant?)
As much as you all don't want to hear it, Jerry Falwell would be taken more seriously by the current elected government if he proposed this. You need to send a messenger that will be respected by the recipient when dealing with politics. The best person actually to make the case for Linux is Robert Bork. He has come out against Microsoft (in support of the anti-trust case no less) and if he were to tell Bush that Star Office is better, Bush would probably listen.
Remember people, Bush and his people decide WHERE the money will be spent, Congress merely allocates it. If Bush wants to, he can tell the entire federal bureacracy to sign no new contracts and to not renew any contracts with companies like Microsoft and use only OpenOffice.
The US Government would stop letting NYS use Virginia as its garbage dumping grounds.....
The Individual Rights Foundation.
because copyrights last too long. I don't care what "rights" I have, if the copyright lasts 95 years then the system is not worth anything to me. Copyrights shouldn't last anymore than 25 years now. Software copyrights for no more than 5 years.
Copyrights are not property. They are a state-enforced monopoly and thus in order to be moral they have to have a limited scope and duration. This is one area where IMO where one individual's "good" cannot be put on even the same level with the sum total of all individuals' rights. Copyrighted goods can only exist with state-intervention into the market place. That intervention violates a lot of people's natural rights. They give them up with the expectation they will gain something useful and have property rights of some kind. The current system absolutely does none of that in any way, shape or form. Consumers don't own the software they buy, have no right to duplicate music or movies they buy for friends with their own materials and many scientific pursuits are now outlawed.
If your website is a member of an affiliate program, has advertising banners or accepts paypal payments from users that have bootlegged your IP but want to pay you for it, what are you classified as? How about I put in a message in a mass-mailing to users on a mailing list a site I administer runs saying "while you're there please buy something through the affiliate store or click on an ad?" AFAIAMC (As Far As I Am Concerned) politicians should be civilally and criminally liable if their bills are considered generally destructive and outside the bounds of the country's constitution. Yes, I believe the USSC should be allowed to summarily imprison members of Congress who voted for the DMCA for say... 1 year and that each state supreme court should have the equivalent power. When the state acts, it can act only through violence implicitly or explicitly. When members of the civil body politic fuck up, they hurt people. They should be held accountable on a level that ordinary people are not.
Had they made these demands 100 years ago, they would have been in imminent physical danger. Gun owning citizens 100 year ago were far more militant about protecting their civil rights than they are now.
Your argument is as ridiculous as saying that every single government on Earth is as genocidal as Nazi Germany, the Soviet Union, Maoist China or Pol Pot's Cambodia. The head of my CS department was a manager at IBM. He was paid from what I hear about $400,000/year. Based on the kinds of bonuses that he secured for his top subordinates, I would bet good money that he got a lot of innovation and hard work out of them. Bonuses that were frequently in the $17,000 ballpark. He got them bonuses that were higher than what some people make in 1 year in the US. You would have to be pretty foolish to think that people won't bust their asses for cash like that. Good corporations have regulations to make sure that people don't go off in every direction, so that there is a purpose to research. But good corporations will pay whatever they can to ensure that there is financial motivation to bring out the genius in every employee doing the R&D that they can.
or did kids not build the net, but rather government researchers?
Most pop culture dies off within a decade. It therefore has no apperciable economic value for about 9/10 of the copyright's duration. How many of our great grandkids are going to be listening to Jimmy Eat World, Korn, Britney Spears or even Nine Inch Nails?
They have the resources to release WordPerfect and OpenOffice copies.
Tell her to take the time to set up a paypal account and host mp3s on audiogalaxy and kazaa that have a small advertisement that says if they like her they can send money to a paypal account.
that has been true since the creation of the civil service if not longer. If you pay ~$15,000 to a worker to handle a $1.5B piece of equipment you need to reevaluate your spending priorities. Putting low paid workers in charge of such information considering the amount of civil and criminal liability the state now faces due to its incompetence is like putting guys with pocket knives as their only sidearm in charge of security at a nuclear power plant or the pentagon.
The CBDTPA is actually very good for the movement to bring about the death of legislation like the DMCA. I saw a review of the CBDTPA in a roanoke paper about 2 weeks ago and it was really cool seeing a common newspaper make a big feature in its op-ed section about the CBDTPA. People trust newspapers a lot more than they trust websites. Newspapers cost money to produce (so do websites), but websites don't in the eyes of John Q. Citizen. Anyone can make a website is the general view, even though hosting a major website requires an assload of money to pay for bandwidth, high end equipment and a full time staff. Using the Internet to propagandize is not as easy as people think.
What we need are Win32 and OS X open source or free as in beer cd/dvd rippers that make defeating copy restrictions as easy as installing a new plugin. We need to force the issue by making the cartels so desparate they call for the complete destruction of individual property rights as they pertain to IP. The CBDTPA wasn't quite that, we need to get them so desparate that they propose something that makes it a felony to own a computer that can copy music and movies. We need to make John Q. Citizen so scared of their proposals that he says, "listen asshole, you have two choices, protect my rights or their bottom line. You know where I'm voting now!!" to their representatives out of anger and sheer rage. Essentially we need to take demagoguery to a new level, if you support these industries you are supporting your child's inevitable felony prison sentence for making a custom workout mix cd.
What we can do are the following
We must make these people look like absolute monsters to the public. We must find ways to associate RIAA/MPAA with the same feelings that most people reserve for Fascists and Communists. The average person must start looking at it from this perspective, "he is not advocating compensating people for their work, he is advocating the annihilation of my property rights." Once we have achieved that, we can effectively dismantle modern copywrong law and get it back to being constitutional copyright law.
is that the BSA may audit them anyway as a form of punishment for switching over to Linux. If they find one copy of a shareware program that is expired on a Linux computer (let's say some kid got the root password, not too hard to imagine knowing how dumb some teachers can be) the BSA can take the school down for that. It reduces the threat, but doesn't eliminate it. The BSA is the primary problem. It isn't directly affiliated with software firms so it can safely be their rent-a-nazis. Put Microsoft in a position where the corporation directly has to go up against the school system and that will change a lot of it. Microsoft can say now "well we didn't authorize the raid, had we known we would have stopped them." Without the BSA, they have no excuse whatsoeverin the public's eyes.