He and his wife just got a kid. Microsoft could throw in a Barney for the little one. (see it as an attempt to convert him to Windows at young age):-)
But anyways, in my opinion Microsoft could reward him a bit more then the 35USD. In the end he was the one that ended their plight (probably way before they could have with the holidays and all.)
Why do people lock themselves up and be watched by cameras for fun? The Swedish had Robinson, a bunch of idiots on an island. The Dutch have Big Brother, 7 idiots in a house for 100 days, which is also viewable on the web 24/7. Now MTV again. Being locked in a room is no fun to me and certainly not if X million people are watching. I love my privacy, am I the only one?
From my U2 "The Best OF 1980-1990" cd: The copyright... owned by Polygram... WARNING: Unauthorised copying, reproduction, hiring, lending, public performance and broadcasting prohibited
IANAL but I get the strong idea that the FM-feature would be a violation of the copyright. Next to that, the cute JukeBox Sharing feature ofcourse allows unauthorised copying, hiring, lending etc. also a violation.
Remembering the Diamond Rio case, where one of the arguments of the judge, not to prohibit the sale, was that it was not possible to copy from it, I think these guys got a problem. (Yes I know the RIO was hacked) On top of that. What do you think will happen if you happen to turn the Jukebox sharing function on? RIAA will be on your doorstep.
BTW isn't it illegal to be broadcasting without a permit?
How to run a campusnetwork.
on
Copyright!
·
· Score: 1
I am not talking about putting MP3's on university servers. It is illegal and they should be deleted if they are freely accessible.
A campusnetwork is a different thing alltogether. At my university in Europe, we have the following arrangement. The University acts as a Telco provider (NOT as an ISP). They have handed all control of the network over to a student foundation. This foundation is only responsible for the network and support, not for what is on somebodies pc.
Through this arrangement it is impossible for a RIAA like organisation to demand that the university take action (or the foundation) for they have no control over the pc's. Just like AT&T cannot demand that AOL takes something of their servers.
This has worked perfectly for 4 years now. Whenever a student was identified to have done something illegal, the actions had to be directed against the student and the physical location of his PC. IANA(american)L. But maybe y'all could have your uni lawyers have a look at this setup and maybe it might just make life alot easier for you MP3 sharing peoples and uni sysadmins.
Just my two cents. BTW I am not naming my uni because it is better to let sleeping dogs lie.
I am too lazy to go and look it up myself, but PCmagazine had an article on the different DBMS's and they wanted to publish Benchmarks. I belief Oracle forbade them to benchmark it. Microsoft was ok with it. But you really should check the article.
What I have missed in most comments is a sense of the world as it will be in 10 years, because that is what is being decided. You're cell-phone will be IP-based. Basically anything could be connected to IP... look in Ask slashdot for that. But in the end we will see a host of appliances running over the Internet. Many of these appliances will be embedded in alot of different hardware.
Most of these appliances will offer no ability to install any extra encryption schemes. It is this data that the FBI is after. Espescially ofcourse the phonecalls, but anything extra is considered to be a nice bonus.
Now, just to be sure, don't think everything will be used against you. Heck, most of you are to insignificant to reckon with. Don't think that if the IETF will not go ahead with aiding the snoopers the battle is won. Just see it in the right perspective. A world filled with IP based appliances, which broadcast data that might be valuable to someone interested in it.
In my opinion there is another reason why it is very likely that the DOJ will follow the strategy outlined in the article and move up to the Supreme Court right away. It is time... The case against IBM was in the courts for 10 years. The DOJ realizes they just can't have Micro$oft stalling this indefinitely. If they move up the speed of the case, they might actually have a chance of ending this before the end of the world and having a ruling that actually has any relation to why they started with the case.
Beyond losing access to that potentially sympathetic court, Microsoft faces an even greater problem from the Expediting Act. It precludes a party from appealing until a "final judgment" is issued -- in other words, until Judge Jackson has his say not only on the law's application to his findings of fact, but on what remedies should apply to Microsoft's antitrust violations.
This would be a great thing for the DOJ, cause it keeps everything restricted to one court and lets their resources be concentrated on one place. This way Microsoft can't use divide and conquer. I am a bit worried about the position of the 19 states in this. Could somebody shine his or her light on this?
Allright, to add to the discussion I am going to play devils advocate.
The industry is right in feeling threatened and it is nothing more then logical that they take action. This is not about being able to watch DVD on Linux or not. This is about the possibility to make money of copyrighted data. For most of you downloading a dvd or vcd is not an option, but the moment that you can download a vcd in under 5 mins, you don't care anymore. This allready happened with MP3, but a better example is paper. How many of you have paid copyrights over the copies that you made of a book? (give me a percentage, if you can:-)) I am in Europe, but I watch Futurama, which is not broadcasted here. Thanks to the Internet. It has become to easy. (No I don't feel any remorse over this, great work Groenig)
Basically what we see here is an industry trying to put a stop to a tidal wave. It is almost impossible, but free codecs just like we have with MP3 would be a deathblow. Because of the impossibility in several countries to use strong encryption, they have to find other ways. It seems the only way they have at the moment is to attack this and see that it gets removed, we may not like this, but it is no reason to get angry over.
Information wants to be free, but it shouldn't allways be.
Being from a student in a country in Europe, this whole thread surprises me a great deal. At my university we have a campus network as well. (A nicer one one then Carnegie Mellon, but that is beside the point)Everybody here has shares. It is considered rude not to share. The only times our version of the RIAA have gone to the police was when somebody was stupid enough to advertise his warez for sale in national newsgroups. Otherwise it is almost impossible, because our laws require that they have a good reason before they get a warrant. What I really would like to know is the following.
1. What makes it so easy to violate the privacy of peoples rooms on campus? (here you need a search warrant)
2. Would the same construction as we have here, with students running it and acting as an ISP work in the States?
When hearing this story, it sounds like I am hearing the same story that I have heard way too often in the last 5 years, but now with Real's name in subject header. I really start to wonder the following things.
1. Why does everything have to be recorded with a GUID embedded in the program. If anything use cookies that are only sent back to the site they originate from. This way it will be a bit harder to cross referencing, but they are still useful for the purpose of figuring out what certain groups like.
2. Why does it seem that these things are always found by the same people. It doesn't sound too difficult to me to monitor what is going in and out of your machine.. (but I am not a techie, so shoot if I am wrong) Basically, why is there no group that are occupied with this? A concerted action might make that certain companies think twice before doing it.
3. Why do these things allways get called bugs and glitches. I have seen some pretty stupid coding in my life, but I have the faint idea that you don't get this by letting your cat walk over the keyboard. (Again, correct me if I am wrong). Somebody put them there for a reason and I get the idea that there are alot more then we know...
Well those are my two cents. I am waiting for the day my teachers call me and tell me that their data shows, that my reading of Slashdot is negatively affecting my grades:-)
Allright we've seen the CNET article and though it is amusing it is no where near to being a list of most 'subversive hacks'. I have allready seen some good hacks being cited here.
Instead of complaining, maybe we could show CNET what a good hack is supposed to look like. What I propose is that we compile a list, that is actually a list of best hacks. Together with some help from Slashdot editors this list could be build and through voting I think we could come up with a list that is a more accurate definition of the word hack.
I vote for Charles Babbage to be on this list. Doing all, that he did, mechanically was and is a great hack.
A data haven is basically nothing more then an FTP-server on which you can safely store and access your data. For this to be possible at an easy and low cost model I think you need to do the following things.
1. Client side encryption. This way you as the provider of the service can not be responsible for the contents, since you have no way of having knowledge of the contents.
2. Multiple locations. Governments change, with that policies change, though this is a good thing in a democracy it might adversely affect your business.
3. The possiblity for VPN so that people can make online changes.
4. The possibilty to store and make available huge amounts of tapes, since the bandwith of a truck loaded with tapes or disks is still unsurpassed.
Basically, this has been done for years by back-up companies. What they need to do is link their sites through a network and make sure that the locations are identical. This way it is almost impossible for a government or even a combination of governments to take over the system. (I thought I read about INTEL entering this market, but I couldn't find the URL on Wired. Anybody got the article on that for me?)
Slashdot Mirror
He and his wife just got a kid. Microsoft could throw in a Barney for the little one. (see it as an attempt to convert him to Windows at young age) :-)
But anyways, in my opinion Microsoft could reward him a bit more then the 35USD. In the end he was the one that ended their plight (probably way before they could have with the holidays and all.)
Why do people lock themselves up and be watched by cameras for fun? The Swedish had Robinson, a bunch of idiots on an island. The Dutch have Big Brother, 7 idiots in a house for 100 days, which is also viewable on the web 24/7. Now MTV again. Being locked in a room is no fun to me and certainly not if X million people are watching. I love my privacy, am I the only one?
From my U2 "The Best OF 1980-1990" cd:
The copyright... owned by Polygram... WARNING: Unauthorised copying, reproduction, hiring, lending, public performance and broadcasting prohibited
IANAL but I get the strong idea that the FM-feature would be a violation of the copyright. Next to that, the cute JukeBox Sharing feature ofcourse allows unauthorised copying, hiring, lending etc. also a violation.
Remembering the Diamond Rio case, where one of the arguments of the judge, not to prohibit the sale, was that it was not possible to copy from it, I think these guys got a problem. (Yes I know the RIO was hacked) On top of that. What do you think will happen if you happen to turn the Jukebox sharing function on? RIAA will be on your doorstep.
BTW isn't it illegal to be broadcasting without a permit?
I am not talking about putting MP3's on university servers. It is illegal and they should be deleted if they are freely accessible.
A campusnetwork is a different thing alltogether. At my university in Europe, we have the following arrangement. The University acts as a Telco provider (NOT as an ISP). They have handed all control of the network over to a student foundation. This foundation is only responsible for the network and support, not for what is on somebodies pc.
Through this arrangement it is impossible for a RIAA like organisation to demand that the university take action (or the foundation) for they have no control over the pc's. Just like AT&T cannot demand that AOL takes something of their servers.
This has worked perfectly for 4 years now. Whenever a student was identified to have done something illegal, the actions had to be directed against the student and the physical location of his PC. IANA(american)L. But maybe y'all could have your uni lawyers have a look at this setup and maybe it might just make life alot easier for you MP3 sharing peoples and uni sysadmins.
Just my two cents. BTW I am not naming my uni because it is better to let sleeping dogs lie.
I am too lazy to go and look it up myself, but PCmagazine had an article on the different DBMS's and they wanted to publish Benchmarks. I belief Oracle forbade them to benchmark it. Microsoft was ok with it. But you really should check the article.
What I have missed in most comments is a sense of the world as it will be in 10 years, because that is what is being decided. You're cell-phone will be IP-based. Basically anything could be connected to IP... look in Ask slashdot for that. But in the end we will see a host of appliances running over the Internet. Many of these appliances will be embedded in alot of different hardware.
Most of these appliances will offer no ability to install any extra encryption schemes. It is this data that the FBI is after. Espescially ofcourse the phonecalls, but anything extra is considered to be a nice bonus.
Now, just to be sure, don't think everything will be used against you. Heck, most of you are to insignificant to reckon with. Don't think that if the IETF will not go ahead with aiding the snoopers the battle is won. Just see it in the right perspective. A world filled with IP based appliances, which broadcast data that might be valuable to someone interested in it.
In my opinion there is another reason why it is very likely that the DOJ will follow the strategy outlined in the article and move up to the Supreme Court right away. It is time... The case against IBM was in the courts for 10 years. The DOJ realizes they just can't have Micro$oft stalling this indefinitely. If they move up the speed of the case, they might actually have a chance of ending this before the end of the world and having a ruling that actually has any relation to why they started with the case.
Beyond losing access to that potentially sympathetic court, Microsoft faces an even greater problem from the Expediting Act. It precludes a party from appealing until a "final judgment" is issued -- in other words, until Judge Jackson has his say not only on the law's application to his findings of fact, but on what remedies should apply to Microsoft's antitrust violations.
This would be a great thing for the DOJ, cause it keeps everything restricted to one court and lets their resources be concentrated on one place. This way Microsoft can't use divide and conquer. I am a bit worried about the position of the 19 states in this. Could somebody shine his or her light on this?
Allright, to add to the discussion I am going to play devils advocate.
:-)) I am in Europe, but I watch Futurama, which is not broadcasted here. Thanks to the Internet. It has become to easy. (No I don't feel any remorse over this, great work Groenig)
The industry is right in feeling threatened and it is nothing more then logical that they take action. This is not about being able to watch DVD on Linux or not. This is about the possibility to make money of copyrighted data. For most of you downloading a dvd or vcd is not an option, but the moment that you can download a vcd in under 5 mins, you don't care anymore. This allready happened with MP3, but a better example is paper. How many of you have paid copyrights over the copies that you made of a book? (give me a percentage, if you can
Basically what we see here is an industry trying to put a stop to a tidal wave. It is almost impossible, but free codecs just like we have with MP3 would be a deathblow. Because of the impossibility in several countries to use strong encryption, they have to find other ways. It seems the only way they have at the moment is to attack this and see that it gets removed, we may not like this, but it is no reason to get angry over.
Information wants to be free, but it shouldn't allways be.
Being from a student in a country in Europe, this whole thread surprises me a great deal. At my university we have a campus network as well. (A nicer one one then Carnegie Mellon, but that is beside the point)Everybody here has shares. It is considered rude not to share. The only times our version of the RIAA have gone to the police was when somebody was stupid enough to advertise his warez for sale in national newsgroups. Otherwise it is almost impossible, because our laws require that they have a good reason before they get a warrant. What I really would like to know is the following.
1. What makes it so easy to violate the privacy of peoples rooms on campus? (here you need a search warrant)
2. Would the same construction as we have here, with students running it and acting as an ISP work in the States?
When hearing this story, it sounds like I am hearing the same story that I have heard way too often in the last 5 years, but now with Real's name in subject header. I really start to wonder the following things.
:-)
1. Why does everything have to be recorded with a GUID embedded in the program. If anything use cookies that are only sent back to the site they originate from. This way it will be a bit harder to cross referencing, but they are still useful for the purpose of figuring out what certain groups like.
2. Why does it seem that these things are always found by the same people. It doesn't sound too difficult to me to monitor what is going in and out of your machine.. (but I am not a techie, so shoot if I am wrong) Basically, why is there no group that are occupied with this? A concerted action might make that certain companies think twice before doing it.
3. Why do these things allways get called bugs and glitches. I have seen some pretty stupid coding in my life, but I have the faint idea that you don't get this by letting your cat walk over the keyboard. (Again, correct me if I am wrong). Somebody put them there for a reason and I get the idea that there are alot more then we know...
Well those are my two cents. I am waiting for the day my teachers call me and tell me that their data shows, that my reading of Slashdot is negatively affecting my grades
-----------------
Allright we've seen the CNET article and though it is amusing it is no where near to being a list of most 'subversive hacks'. I have allready seen some good hacks being cited here.
Instead of complaining, maybe we could show CNET what a good hack is supposed to look like. What I propose is that we compile a list, that is actually a list of best hacks. Together with some help from Slashdot editors this list could be build and through voting I think we could come up with a list that is a more accurate definition of the word hack.
I vote for Charles Babbage to be on this list. Doing all, that he did, mechanically was and is a great hack.
----------------------
A data haven is basically nothing more then an FTP-server on which you can safely store and access your data. For this to be possible at an easy and low cost model I think you need to do the following things.
1. Client side encryption. This way you as the provider of the service can not be responsible for the contents, since you have no way of having knowledge of the contents.
2. Multiple locations. Governments change, with that policies change, though this is a good thing in a democracy it might adversely affect your business.
3. The possiblity for VPN so that people can make online changes.
4. The possibilty to store and make available huge amounts of tapes, since the bandwith of a truck loaded with tapes or disks is still unsurpassed.
Basically, this has been done for years by back-up companies. What they need to do is link their sites through a network and make sure that the locations are identical. This way it is almost impossible for a government or even a combination of governments to take over the system. (I thought I read about INTEL entering this market, but I couldn't find the URL on Wired. Anybody got the article on that for me?)