I'm not suprised Napster lost this injunction hearing. They are most certainly going to lose their court case as well, because Napster is supporting piracy (not that charging $16 a CD isn't piracy either, but that's another story.) However, the music industry cannot simply make the "scourge" of MP3s disappear by defeating Napster. Both of them are in a tight spot.
Therefore, I feel that both parties will have to come to some middle ground. Napster will exist, but not as a free service. Rather, users will pay a fee, either by month ("Unlimited downloads for only $24.95/mo") or by song ("Today only: All of Metallica at 75 cents per tune!").
Going in such a route will enable Napster to not only survive, but flourish as well. With the backing of the recording industry, they'll be in the forefront of a musical revolution. While other alternatives will exist (ie: Gnutella, Opennap, et al) the financial backing of the music industry will enable Napster to be the preminent player in the MP3 music scene. The music industry then gets some control over something they've previously had no control over.
While I agree that hiding plaintext in a stenanographic message is a shoddy idea, I don't think hiding a securely encrypted one is. Here's why:
Say some agency notices that you're sending encrypted e-mails to certain people. Even though they don't know what you're saying, they can be reasonably sure that its something you don't want anyone else to know. Otherwise why would you encrypt it? Furthermore, judging by the size of it they can reasonably deduce how much data you're sending. Anyways, just by keeping track of whom your encrypted mail goes to, such an agency can build a very interesting picture of your activities.
However if your message is stenangraphicly encoded, its just another layer of protection. Specifically it protects against the above scenario.
This Garfinkle guy has had no career since he split up with Paul Simon. Personally I think him trying to ban FTP and Telnet is just his way to trying to get back in the limelight.
Recently I sent e-mail to the folks of Fugazi asking them their opinions on this MP3 thing. Fugazi has spent years not only producing some of the best music in the indie-punk world. They also run the very successful Discord Records label. I think Fugazi is an example of the way bands should run themselves. More proof that Metallica and Dr Dre just care about squeezing every dime from their fans than music, IMHO. Anyways, these are their brief answers to my two questions:
1) With the rise of MP3 sharing programs like Napster and Gnutella, labels and bands are worried about losing control of their music. Metallica and Dr Dre are the two most prominent critics. Others, like Limp Bizkit and Chuck D are very much in favor of Napster and its ilk. I was wondering how the members of Fugazi felt about the rise of MP3 music. Do you support the trading of songs? Any reservations about it?
1.re: napster, MP3's etc. ---we don't have any real strong feelings about it mainly because we are kind of low tech - as far as i'm concerned, i'm glad people have access to the music. to me its like radio freed from the dictatorship of the programmers - as far as trading files, to us its just like trading tapes - as long as people aren't trying to profit off it its totally cool with us.
Having read numerous articles on the subject, I see repeated that many bands and labels claim that CDs cost $16 because running a record label is very expensive. I believe Lars Ulrich of Metallica stated, "For every one successful band, you have nine that flop and cost the record company a lot of money." Yet bands like Fugazi and the Dischord label can sell CDs for less than $10, and are apparently very successful. What makes Dischord able to sell a Fugazi CD so inexpensively, when I have to shell out $16 for the latest pop album? Are the labels lying to conceal a huge profit-making machine, or are the dynamics different between a small indie label and a larger corporate one.
majors are into profit maximization - that is not our primary concern. we want to make our music accessible to as many people as possible, thus the low price. making a CD costs about $2 so you can do the math to figure out the degree to which the majors are gouging people to pay off all their bloated CEOs, promotion budgets, and inflated production costs.
You Too Can Get Married the Hemos Way
on
Hemos Gets Hitched
·
· Score: 1
Thousands of attractive women from exotic places such as Russia, the Philipines and China are eager to meet you. You too can have the same success Hemos and other/. admins have achieved by choosing your bride-to-be from our catalogue!
Some might think this is desirable, but I believe it could be dangerous. This goes back to that whole "Doom made me such an efficient killer" arguemnt. I'm not sure what the result of something like this would be, but it could be something we're not expecting.
I concur. I think the last thing we need are a bunch of kids darting thru highschool hallways, plastic lightsabers in hand, whacking each other. I can already hear the moans of the dying entwined with the ridiculous lightsaber noises people make with their mouths.
Excuse my ignorance, but what exactly is a flywheel? I've seen the term mentioned a lot. Yet any article discussing them never explains what they are; its kind of assumed the reader knows this.
DVD's are evil! Lucasfilm is evil because they won't release Star Wars on DVD! Double fricking standards here. Half the people I know who bought DeCSS t-shirts also went out and bought new DVDs the same day.
Well now...lets assume that *everyone* on Slashdot boycotted DVDs to support DeCSS. Do you think that would make a difference? Would the DeCSS lawsuits be dropped? Of course not! The entire membership of Slashdot would be a mere drop in the ocean compared to the amount of people buying DVDs.
Since boycotting DVDs won't change anything, why suffer needlessly? Obviously you feel that anyone who buys a DVD is supporting an evil organization. But not everyone has such fantacism about it. Rather than chasting fellow/.'ers about not boycotting DVDs, perhaps you should make aware more realistic and effective options.
For example, Slashdotters could donate money to Epic.org or EFF.org. Write a letter to the editor of your local newspaper or a periodical. Some TV stations will let community members appear on their newsshows to give feedback. Has anyone considered doing this (in an educational, polite, non-flaming way, of course.)
There are a lot more effective ways to help bring about the end of this ridiculous lawsuit than boycotting DVDs.
Say that this person does ignore trademarks and court-orders. Further suppose that he's able to do this w/o adverse consequences. Could, say, Microsoft successfully sue the person(s) who register microsoft.god?
I have a big problem with Metallica and Dr Dre's actions against Napster. While I can understand and appreciate them wanting to "protect their property", doesn't it seem to fiercly contrast with their image of rebels?
It seems that when it comes right down to it, both of these artists are more interested in the money than anything else. Of course, this comes as no suprise; anyone who thought that either Metallica or Dr Dre were anything but corporate sycophants would do well to listen to some albums by Crass.
And while I always thought that Limp Bizkit was clearly a producer's invention to make some quick cash off the popularity of Korn, I've been impressed by their support of Napster and MP3s, which includes having the beleagured Napster sponsor a free tour. I guess even in the heart of corporate rock, you can still find a little soul.
I would not be at all suprised if this website was run by the spammers, to collect legit e-mail addresses. Does anyone know anything about the background of the operators of this site?
Sorry, but it doesn't work that way. The neighboring county that has the highest level of private gun ownership also has the lowest level of crime.
Draw your own conclusions.
The two may very well have nothing to do with each other. To use an example from the Simpsons: I have a rock in my yard. As long as that rock has been there, no tigers have come into my yard. Therefore, this rock wards off tigers!
Equating gun ownership with a low level of crime is foolish without other evidence to support it.
Of course, if you'd like to buy my magic rock, I'd be happy to sell it to you!;)
You simply cannot have a little gunfree oasis surrounded by a world where guns are commonplace. It simply won't work.
Actually, you can. Look at countries like Britian, Germany and the Netherlands. They have pretty low crime rates. Suprisingly, they exist in a world where guns are commonplace!
I beg to differ regarding the implied lack of effectiveness of gunlaws in DC. Yes, DC is a rather violent place. However, to say that gun laws do not work because of the crime in DC is poor logic.
You simply cannot have a little gunfree oasis surrounded by a country where guns are commonplace. It simply won't work.
Therefore, DC anti-gun laws are useless without national gun laws.
I will leave it for another posting the pros and cons of gun laws, however.
Let me begin by saying I have gained some lost respect for Metallica by agreeing to answer questions from the Slashdot readers. My question for Metallica is this: What do you lose by me downloading an album that I would never buy in the first place. That is, were it not for MP3s I would never own any of your music. Since it didn't cost your band anything to distribute the MP3, and you're not losing money for a lost album sale, what are you really losing?
I think that from a legal standpoint, Metallica is justified in its actions. However, otherwise I don't think they're doing the right thing.
Its clear to me that Metallica is a band fading away and is trying to grab every last penny they can before they devolve completely into Van Halen. Having not put out a decent album in almost a decade, Metallica is desperately trying to squeeze cash from the slack-jawed mouth-breathers who think Metallica (make the Sign Of The Horns with your fingers as you say it) "Roolz, d00d!"
Metallica has completely missed the point of MP3s. On my hard drive I have over 5 gigs of MP3s. All of these are from albums I already either own, or don't wouldn't buy in the first place ("Oh hey! Twisted Sister!") Since I'm not using MP3s in place of purchasing the album, and since Metallica spent no money in the creation or distribution of the MP3, I fail to see how this over-the-hill band is losing any money.
Ultimately, Metallica will shoot themselves in the foot with this. They have revealed themselves to be the corporate apologists and sycophants that they once rebelled against. I guess the ultimate moral from this whole Metallica debacle is to be careful of what you hate, because you may just become it.
Slashdot Mirror
Therefore, I feel that both parties will have to come to some middle ground. Napster will exist, but not as a free service. Rather, users will pay a fee, either by month ("Unlimited downloads for only $24.95/mo") or by song ("Today only: All of Metallica at 75 cents per tune!").
Going in such a route will enable Napster to not only survive, but flourish as well. With the backing of the recording industry, they'll be in the forefront of a musical revolution. While other alternatives will exist (ie: Gnutella, Opennap, et al) the financial backing of the music industry will enable Napster to be the preminent player in the MP3 music scene. The music industry then gets some control over something they've previously had no control over.
Say some agency notices that you're sending encrypted e-mails to certain people. Even though they don't know what you're saying, they can be reasonably sure that its something you don't want anyone else to know. Otherwise why would you encrypt it? Furthermore, judging by the size of it they can reasonably deduce how much data you're sending. Anyways, just by keeping track of whom your encrypted mail goes to, such an agency can build a very interesting picture of your activities.
However if your message is stenangraphicly encoded, its just another layer of protection. Specifically it protects against the above scenario.
And then later:
Being a rather large Marine...
Ah, that explains why you don't know how to spell "Forum". :)
This Garfinkle guy has had no career since he split up with Paul Simon. Personally I think him trying to ban FTP and Telnet is just his way to trying to get back in the limelight.
1) With the rise of MP3 sharing programs like Napster and Gnutella, labels and bands are worried about losing control of their music. Metallica and Dr Dre are the two most prominent critics. Others, like Limp Bizkit and Chuck D are very much in favor of Napster and its ilk. I was wondering how the members of Fugazi felt about the rise of MP3 music. Do you support the trading of songs? Any reservations about it?
1.re: napster, MP3's etc. ---we don't have any real strong feelings about it mainly because we are kind of low tech - as far as i'm concerned, i'm glad people have access to the music. to me its like radio freed from the dictatorship of the programmers - as far as trading files, to us its just like trading tapes - as long as people aren't trying to profit off it its totally cool with us.
Having read numerous articles on the subject, I see repeated that many bands and labels claim that CDs cost $16 because running a record label is very expensive. I believe Lars Ulrich of Metallica stated, "For every one successful band, you have nine that flop and cost the record company a lot of money." Yet bands like Fugazi and the Dischord label can sell CDs for less than $10, and are apparently very successful. What makes Dischord able to sell a Fugazi CD so inexpensively, when I have to shell out $16 for the latest pop album? Are the labels lying to conceal a huge profit-making machine, or are the dynamics different between a small indie label and a larger corporate one.
majors are into profit maximization - that is not our primary concern. we want to make our music accessible to as many people as possible, thus the low price. making a CD costs about $2 so you can do the math to figure out the degree to which the majors are gouging people to pay off all their bloated CEOs, promotion budgets, and inflated production costs.
Act now and be the envy of your Geek Clique! :)
Heh. This was actually really funny. A little too funny, which is why it didn't get moderated up!
And for $300K? The only thing I'd pay that much for would be the Yamoto and its Wave Particle Gun.
If a deaf, dumb and blind kid can sure play a mean pinball...why, I think its obvious that the game is dying! :)
CNN is running an article explaining how scientists finally understand how geckos can walk up glass walls and such. Check it out.
I concur. I think the last thing we need are a bunch of kids darting thru highschool hallways, plastic lightsabers in hand, whacking each other. I can already hear the moans of the dying entwined with the ridiculous lightsaber noises people make with their mouths.
Maybe this machine could be used to terraform the atmosphere around Los Angeles, thereby rendering its atmosphere breathable?
This is the first link in a long chain of events that will eventually result in Douglas Quaid having to free the slowly suffocating mutants.
"You wouldn't know her. She lives in Niagra Falls."
Does it creep out anyone else that your wireless provider is going to be able to track you as you go about your daily business?
Any illumination on the subject is appreciated!
Britt
Well now...lets assume that *everyone* on Slashdot boycotted DVDs to support DeCSS. Do you think that would make a difference? Would the DeCSS lawsuits be dropped? Of course not! The entire membership of Slashdot would be a mere drop in the ocean compared to the amount of people buying DVDs.
Since boycotting DVDs won't change anything, why suffer needlessly? Obviously you feel that anyone who buys a DVD is supporting an evil organization. But not everyone has such fantacism about it. Rather than chasting fellow /.'ers about not boycotting DVDs, perhaps you should make aware more realistic and effective options.
For example, Slashdotters could donate money to Epic.org or EFF.org. Write a letter to the editor of your local newspaper or a periodical. Some TV stations will let community members appear on their newsshows to give feedback. Has anyone considered doing this (in an educational, polite, non-flaming way, of course.)
There are a lot more effective ways to help bring about the end of this ridiculous lawsuit than boycotting DVDs.
I'll get off my soapbox now! =)
Say that this person does ignore trademarks and court-orders. Further suppose that he's able to do this w/o adverse consequences. Could, say, Microsoft successfully sue the person(s) who register microsoft.god?
It seems that when it comes right down to it, both of these artists are more interested in the money than anything else. Of course, this comes as no suprise; anyone who thought that either Metallica or Dr Dre were anything but corporate sycophants would do well to listen to some albums by Crass.
And while I always thought that Limp Bizkit was clearly a producer's invention to make some quick cash off the popularity of Korn, I've been impressed by their support of Napster and MP3s, which includes having the beleagured Napster sponsor a free tour. I guess even in the heart of corporate rock, you can still find a little soul.
I would not be at all suprised if this website was run by the spammers, to collect legit e-mail addresses. Does anyone know anything about the background of the operators of this site?
Draw your own conclusions.
The two may very well have nothing to do with each other. To use an example from the Simpsons: I have a rock in my yard. As long as that rock has been there, no tigers have come into my yard. Therefore, this rock wards off tigers!
Equating gun ownership with a low level of crime is foolish without other evidence to support it.
Of course, if you'd like to buy my magic rock, I'd be happy to sell it to you! ;)
Actually, you can. Look at countries like Britian, Germany and the Netherlands. They have pretty low crime rates. Suprisingly, they exist in a world where guns are commonplace!
You simply cannot have a little gunfree oasis surrounded by a country where guns are commonplace. It simply won't work.
Therefore, DC anti-gun laws are useless without national gun laws.
I will leave it for another posting the pros and cons of gun laws, however.
Thanks!
Britt
Its clear to me that Metallica is a band fading away and is trying to grab every last penny they can before they devolve completely into Van Halen. Having not put out a decent album in almost a decade, Metallica is desperately trying to squeeze cash from the slack-jawed mouth-breathers who think Metallica (make the Sign Of The Horns with your fingers as you say it) "Roolz, d00d!"
Metallica has completely missed the point of MP3s. On my hard drive I have over 5 gigs of MP3s. All of these are from albums I already either own, or don't wouldn't buy in the first place ("Oh hey! Twisted Sister!") Since I'm not using MP3s in place of purchasing the album, and since Metallica spent no money in the creation or distribution of the MP3, I fail to see how this over-the-hill band is losing any money.
Ultimately, Metallica will shoot themselves in the foot with this. They have revealed themselves to be the corporate apologists and sycophants that they once rebelled against. I guess the ultimate moral from this whole Metallica debacle is to be careful of what you hate, because you may just become it.
Britt