It could easily be to prevent someone from writing a script to add every number in the phone book to the list. They may have a flag get raised if for instance one ip address adds 100+ phone numbers
I dont know if being upside down or drinking beer will cause tumors, but if you did either for as long every day as people are subjected to wireless signals you'd fuck yourself up pretty badly.
you can buy albums for 11-12 dollars? dude hook us up! Last time I went to the store there were a few albums on SALE for 13-15$, and the rest were $17+.
You're analogy is a bad one. If someone comes by with roughly the same skills as an "unethical" intruder, and shows you that any of these unethical intruders will be able to get in, then he is doing a kind service to you. Sure you'll be embarassed and have to (omg!) put forth some effort to secure your network. But it's not his fault your network sucked. Your network already sucked, he just pointed it out to you.
It is a troll because the money for the supercomputer came from a NSF grant for that specific purpose. Furthermore the university expects to make a five-fold return, as have most universities in the top-x supercomputers.
Have you ever been to VT? We've got construction going on all over the place. The football stadium is about to get another "upgrade" after having received on just a year or two ago. We've got major construction going on in at least 3 different places, not to mention many smaller construction projects.
Meanwhile teachers are getting let go, classes that were taught in 30-person rooms 3 years ago when I started, are now taught in 400+ person lecture halls.
Does it suck? Certainly. However the money for the construction projects, football stadium, and supercomputer are all from grants, donations, and other means intended for a specific purpose. They can not legally take the money from a supercomputer grant or football stadium donation and use it to pay a teacher's salary.
We have uneducated rants in the school paper at least once a week saying "why are we upgrading the football stadium if we cant pay teachers!@#$"
Yeah, it does suck, but the university has no choice in the matter.
I've had two cards die on me. One TNT2 that was about 2-4 years old. One day during finals when I was trying to play Serious Sam I started seeing wireframes shooting through the scene all over the place. That would get worse and the comp would freeze/die within a minute or two. If I didn't use 3D it worked fine. I never figured out why that happened...and I believe I still have it lying around if anyone thinks they know a way to fix it.
After that I bought a asus geforce2 with TV-card. I got the card home and when I got around to playing with the TV programs I found out even though the box says "windows 2000" on the side, none of the TV features run in windows2k. fuck that. and the store wouldn't take it back. I was pretty pissed, that being a 200$ video card.
So I put the Geforce2 in my second computer (where it did get some use at lan parties) and bought an ATI Radeon All-In-Wonder. MUCH better TV programs, by a mile. But shortly after I got the radeon home it died. I'm pretty sure it got fried in a small thunderstorm. But since it was only about 2 days old I took it back to Best Buy and said "this didnt work" and got a new one:)
That said, i'm back to using the geforce2 at this point because WineX only really supported Nvidia cards. (havent used it in a while though so that might have changed).
As far as running native apps like Quake3 in linux, the Radeon and Geforce2 had basically identical framerates.
yeah, cause letting microsoft take over the instant messaging market (by packaging their client with windows, then closing off MSN users to others once it has dominate marketshare) would surely be in the public interest!
Thanks government! leave MS alone and go after AOL. After all, AOL is the one with an enormous monopoly that it is spreading to every other market possible...
oh yea, and of course this is just mindless nitpicking, i'm sure you didn't whip out a calculator and double check your work like we slashdot trolls make sure to do:)
First of all, Redhat doesn't *make* mozilla or mplayer. They are third-party products which are included in many distributions, and available for multiple operating systems. So Redhat isn't exactly extending their monopoly by promoting a product which is also included with its direct competitors(Suse, mandrake, gentoo, etc.) and available for use with its less direct competitors(Windows, Apple).
Furthermore, Redhat includes several competing products to Mozilla and mplayer within their own OS distribution. So redhat including mozilla and mplayer could hardly be called anti-competitive in *any* world.
But particularly not because unlike Microsoft, Redhat has not been found to have a monopoly and been warned not to abuse their monopoly. For instance by taking over other markets where companies are innovating and selling products, by raising the price of Windows and bundling MS Messenger, MS Media player, MS browser, MS anti-virus, MS e-mail, and MS Java with the monopoly OS. Microsoft is blatantly abusing their monopoly to kill off competitors.
"Now, I can download a performer's album, a year or more's work, in a matter of minutes."
You're making the bs assumption that someone downloading a few mp3s on kazza is equivalent to stealing (or even "not paying for") the product.
Do you tell people the same thing about the radio, that "by turning that dial you're stealing a year's worth of work in minutes"?
It's crap. Especially with low-quality radio and mp3s the primary purpose is to preview the music. People are still buying music. More of it than ever.
Even if the RIAA did go down a massive 1% in an economic recession, that decrease is easily compensated by the enormous increase in sales for non-RIAA music labels and bands who can finally get heard without the RIAA+ClearChannel pushing them, and sell their albums online without worrying about major-label-only record stores.
Of course when true broadband is around enough for people to be trading truly perfect digital rips of albums/dvds, THEN this argument might make sense.
But hopefully by then someone will get a clue and pass a law making it lawful to trade low-bitrate(ie:128 and lower) MP3s. This would be a perfect compromise in line with the Audio Home Recording Act. Who is gonna trade.wav files and risk a lawsuit when they can preview the music they're interested in at 128kbps?
there's diversity at your record store? Consider yourself lucky. All there is around me is Sam Goody and similar stores that have two sections, Rock and R&B. Maybe Country as well if you're lucky. And no albums for less than 18$, many 10-song CDs selling for $22+.
I bought maybe three albums in about 5 years until i met some friends who started making me compilation tapes (ie: "illegal immoral music sharing"). Now I have about 200 CDs, maybe 3 or 4 of which have ever been played on the radio in my area.
I guess you haven't been paying attention the many slashdot articles explaining how the RIAA has *halved* the number of albums they put out in recent years, while making more total money. They have no interest in diversity, consumer satisfaction, or even artist satisfaction, only in restricting the market place so they can make more money on less product (ie: less risk on their part, and more BMWs for the executives)
They're running a classic monopoly, including price fixing, lying and misleading the media, and throwing their lawyers around.
But guess what. They're still fucked. They can't fight forever, not with all the independent bands and labels on the internet making a killing with virtually no distribution or advertising costs.
How long before every name has been used by a celebrity at some point? I think there's a huge difference between a fictional character having a name of a *current* popular star, and the name or pseudonym of some mediocre person who was never very popular and has long since been forgotten.
Otherwise names we'd be losing probably a hundred names a year, which could never ever be used again. Maybe more. And that's not even considering the efforts of the musician Sting and Spike Lee to make all use of the words "sting" and "spike" illegal.
Yes i meant making a copy, and yes it is legal for non-commercial use, as per the Audio Home Recording Act of 1992. Ok, well here's a better description:
http://www.minidisc.org/ahra.html
But basically, yes: it is legal to make analog copies for personal use, including giving copies to friends.
The idea behind this was that audio copies are not perfect, and hence second or third generation copies would be far inferior to the original, and thereby not hurt music sales. This was essentially a bone given to the consumers while it was made illegal to make and share digital copies of digital works.
Of course it falters a bit here, as the digital copies going around now (mp3s and the like) are lossy, and probably lower quality than 3rd generation cassette tapes. So sharing these low-quality copies should be legal (or "protected from suit" if you prefer) just as tapes copies are.
Ideally someone would realize this and propse and pass a law saying "it shall be lawful to share lossy copies of songs as long as such copies shall not exceed 128kbps" or somethin like that, allowing for decreasing the bit rate as compression methods become better.
If this happened I'd be fine and dandy with the RIAA suing the pants off people trading perfect digital copies (when our bandwidth reaches that potential).
yep, all those home-made tapes my friends gave me has really victimized the record labels. same with all those mp3s i've downloaded. nevermind that after previewing this music, I bought albums from about 75% of the artists. And nevermind that 90% of the music on those tapes and mp3s was from artists not played on the radio in my area, and who I would *never* have heard of if not for tape/file sharing.
I bet those artists are feeling quite victimized now that i've spend 12-15$ for a bunch of their albums. My wallet is crying for them at this very moment.
Sharing audio tapes isn't illegal. So why is sharing (often) equally shitty quality mp3s illegal? It shouldn't be.
you know the RIAA *is* losing sales, but it isnt due to "piracy". It's due to choice. Non-RIAA record labels are selling far more albums than ever before.
And that is exactly what the RIAA is afraid of: losing their stranglehold on the music industry.
in Richmond, VA there is a a good band that is good enough to have just won the contest to play in tour with Jewel...the Susan Greenbaum band if you're wondering. None of the stations in richmond will play her. One station (b103.7) used to, i believe, until clearchannel bought them.
Want another example? Carbon Leaf. They won some big huge contest to determine the "best unsigned band in america". They dont get played on the radio stations at all.
Need another? Fighting Gravity. They used to be played on the radio, but that just as the others, clear channel or someone like it put a stop to it.
P2P has not hurt the major labels much if at all in sales, and yet it has boosted independent bands *tremendously*. That is what the RIAA is afraid of. Not their supposed 1.6% decline in sales (in the heyday of napster no less) during a recession.
firebird isnt mozilla 1.4, im pretty sure. firebird is "the next big thing", ie: mozilla no longer in one monolithic package, but instead with each component separate and (fairly) independent. firebird is much leaner than mozilla, and from what i hear its still very early in development. which could mean they're gonna cut a lot more code by the end, or could mean they're gonna add a lot more "features":)
"In fact, P2P is more disruptive than the printing press, since the means of production are much smaller, much cheaper, and much more widely distributed."
I disagree with this quite a bit, for a few reasons.
1) Most P2P files are lossy, badly encoded, mis-named, and otherwise low quality.
2) Speeds are slow, and you're never guaranteed to get the whole file. So in addition to the content quality being crappy, so is the service quality.
3) P2P provides exposure for artists who otherwise would receive none, and perhaps because of 1 and 2, those artists get sales from P2P exposure.
So, if you said "P2P could/will be more disruptive than the printing press", I would agree. P2P will be a serious problem when the software and networks are fast enough to be transferring lossless media quickly. We're still a ways away from that at the moment. So far P2P has only increased sales.
Ok, im not a TCP/IP expert or anything near it, but:
As a client, you somehow requested the file from server X. If you can communicate with server X, what's to stop you from doing the usual TCP packets with error correction and everything, perhaps tunneled through whatever means you first asked the server for the file?
Or more likely, you said "send file X" the first time, and got it hosed at you. After the file is "done" (or could be reasonably expected to be done judging from the rate packets were coming in and the file size), why not send another request, "send file X parts Y,Z,Q,R" to have only the dropped UDP packets re-sent?
Is any honeypot entrapment? Leaving unpatched software on a computer? If the DOJ has a server unpatched, can I hax0r it and say "no it's entrapment"? (serious question, not mocking anyone)
As for the file sharing servers, couldn't the server refuse to allow queries? But still pretend to be a server enough to receive your list of files, and go after you for that?
If necessary, having an RIAA stooge download them from you "with permission" to ensure they are indeed the material?
A lot of magazines do only have 20 or so interesting pages, especially if you're selective on what content you like. For instance you could go through PC Gamer and only find a couple hardware and game reviews that are worth looking at. Meanwhile the prices of magazines are somewhat exorbinant (5-8$? for that little content?).
I dont know why they have to cost so much, but the number of magazines that i've seen shut down seems to imply something isnt working..
That is a *terrible* idea. How many people's feet are anywhere near the same size? My feet are near twice the size of my mom's. the same goes for fingers or any other body part. You may as well say the height of a tree is a mile. Who cares that no two trees are the same height.
"My nine, that's nine milimeters, sounds cooler than my.2-something inches gun"
Slashdot Mirror
It could easily be to prevent someone from writing a script to add every number in the phone book to the list. They may have a flag get raised if for instance one ip address adds 100+ phone numbers
I dont know if being upside down or drinking beer will cause tumors, but if you did either for as long every day as people are subjected to wireless signals you'd fuck yourself up pretty badly.
you can buy albums for 11-12 dollars? dude hook us up! Last time I went to the store there were a few albums on SALE for 13-15$, and the rest were $17+.
You're analogy is a bad one. If someone comes by with roughly the same skills as an "unethical" intruder, and shows you that any of these unethical intruders will be able to get in, then he is doing a kind service to you. Sure you'll be embarassed and have to (omg!) put forth some effort to secure your network. But it's not his fault your network sucked. Your network already sucked, he just pointed it out to you.
It is a troll because the money for the supercomputer came from a NSF grant for that specific purpose. Furthermore the university expects to make a five-fold return, as have most universities in the top-x supercomputers.
Have you ever been to VT? We've got construction going on all over the place. The football stadium is about to get another "upgrade" after having received on just a year or two ago. We've got major construction going on in at least 3 different places, not to mention many smaller construction projects.
Meanwhile teachers are getting let go, classes that were taught in 30-person rooms 3 years ago when I started, are now taught in 400+ person lecture halls.
Does it suck? Certainly. However the money for the construction projects, football stadium, and supercomputer are all from grants, donations, and other means intended for a specific purpose. They can not legally take the money from a supercomputer grant or football stadium donation and use it to pay a teacher's salary.
We have uneducated rants in the school paper at least once a week saying "why are we upgrading the football stadium if we cant pay teachers!@#$"
Yeah, it does suck, but the university has no choice in the matter.
I've had two cards die on me. One TNT2 that was about 2-4 years old. One day during finals when I was trying to play Serious Sam I started seeing wireframes shooting through the scene all over the place. That would get worse and the comp would freeze/die within a minute or two. If I didn't use 3D it worked fine. I never figured out why that happened...and I believe I still have it lying around if anyone thinks they know a way to fix it.
:)
After that I bought a asus geforce2 with TV-card. I got the card home and when I got around to playing with the TV programs I found out even though the box says "windows 2000" on the side, none of the TV features run in windows2k. fuck that. and the store wouldn't take it back. I was pretty pissed, that being a 200$ video card.
So I put the Geforce2 in my second computer (where it did get some use at lan parties) and bought an ATI Radeon All-In-Wonder. MUCH better TV programs, by a mile. But shortly after I got the radeon home it died. I'm pretty sure it got fried in a small thunderstorm. But since it was only about 2 days old I took it back to Best Buy and said "this didnt work" and got a new one
That said, i'm back to using the geforce2 at this point because WineX only really supported Nvidia cards. (havent used it in a while though so that might have changed).
As far as running native apps like Quake3 in linux, the Radeon and Geforce2 had basically identical framerates.
yeah, cause letting microsoft take over the instant messaging market (by packaging their client with windows, then closing off MSN users to others once it has dominate marketshare) would surely be in the public interest!
Thanks government! leave MS alone and go after AOL. After all, AOL is the one with an enormous monopoly that it is spreading to every other market possible...
(in case you really couldn't tell)
oh yea, and of course this is just mindless nitpicking, i'm sure you didn't whip out a calculator and double check your work like we slashdot trolls make sure to do :)
Uhh...since when did 5m times 10k equal 500m?
500,000,000
/ 10,000
=
50,000
That's 50 thousand 10k$ bills, which makes sense being ten times the number of 100k bills as you said yourself it would take.
(ie:
50k * 10k == 5k * 100k
(10 * 5k) * 10k == 5k * (10k * 10)
10 * 5k * 10k == 10 * 5k * 10k
Ummm...this should be fairly obvious.
First of all, Redhat doesn't *make* mozilla or mplayer. They are third-party products which are included in many distributions, and available for multiple operating systems. So Redhat isn't exactly extending their monopoly by promoting a product which is also included with its direct competitors(Suse, mandrake, gentoo, etc.) and available for use with its less direct competitors(Windows, Apple).
Furthermore, Redhat includes several competing products to Mozilla and mplayer within their own OS distribution. So redhat including mozilla and mplayer could hardly be called anti-competitive in *any* world.
But particularly not because unlike Microsoft, Redhat has not been found to have a monopoly and been warned not to abuse their monopoly. For instance by taking over other markets where companies are innovating and selling products, by raising the price of Windows and bundling MS Messenger, MS Media player, MS browser, MS anti-virus, MS e-mail, and MS Java with the monopoly OS. Microsoft is blatantly abusing their monopoly to kill off competitors.
"Now, I can download a performer's album, a year or more's work, in a matter of minutes."
.wav files and risk a lawsuit when they can preview the music they're interested in at 128kbps?
You're making the bs assumption that someone downloading a few mp3s on kazza is equivalent to stealing (or even "not paying for") the product.
Do you tell people the same thing about the radio, that "by turning that dial you're stealing a year's worth of work in minutes"?
It's crap. Especially with low-quality radio and mp3s the primary purpose is to preview the music. People are still buying music. More of it than ever.
Even if the RIAA did go down a massive 1% in an economic recession, that decrease is easily compensated by the enormous increase in sales for non-RIAA music labels and bands who can finally get heard without the RIAA+ClearChannel pushing them, and sell their albums online without worrying about major-label-only record stores.
Of course when true broadband is around enough for people to be trading truly perfect digital rips of albums/dvds, THEN this argument might make sense.
But hopefully by then someone will get a clue and pass a law making it lawful to trade low-bitrate(ie:128 and lower) MP3s. This would be a perfect compromise in line with the Audio Home Recording Act. Who is gonna trade
there's diversity at your record store? Consider yourself lucky. All there is around me is Sam Goody and similar stores that have two sections, Rock and R&B. Maybe Country as well if you're lucky. And no albums for less than 18$, many 10-song CDs selling for $22+.
I bought maybe three albums in about 5 years until i met some friends who started making me compilation tapes (ie: "illegal immoral music sharing"). Now I have about 200 CDs, maybe 3 or 4 of which have ever been played on the radio in my area.
I guess you haven't been paying attention the many slashdot articles explaining how the RIAA has *halved* the number of albums they put out in recent years, while making more total money. They have no interest in diversity, consumer satisfaction, or even artist satisfaction, only in restricting the market place so they can make more money on less product (ie: less risk on their part, and more BMWs for the executives)
They're running a classic monopoly, including price fixing, lying and misleading the media, and throwing their lawyers around.
But guess what. They're still fucked. They can't fight forever, not with all the independent bands and labels on the internet making a killing with virtually no distribution or advertising costs.
How long before every name has been used by a celebrity at some point? I think there's a huge difference between a fictional character having a name of a *current* popular star, and the name or pseudonym of some mediocre person who was never very popular and has long since been forgotten.
Otherwise names we'd be losing probably a hundred names a year, which could never ever be used again. Maybe more. And that's not even considering the efforts of the musician Sting and Spike Lee to make all use of the words "sting" and "spike" illegal.
if the robots do all our jobs, we can sit back, get fat, and play everquest all day!
Yes i meant making a copy, and yes it is legal for non-commercial use, as per the Audio Home Recording Act of 1992. Ok, well here's a better description:
http://www.minidisc.org/ahra.html
But basically, yes: it is legal to make analog copies for personal use, including giving copies to friends.
The idea behind this was that audio copies are not perfect, and hence second or third generation copies would be far inferior to the original, and thereby not hurt music sales. This was essentially a bone given to the consumers while it was made illegal to make and share digital copies of digital works.
Of course it falters a bit here, as the digital copies going around now (mp3s and the like) are lossy, and probably lower quality than 3rd generation cassette tapes. So sharing these low-quality copies should be legal (or "protected from suit" if you prefer) just as tapes copies are.
Ideally someone would realize this and propse and pass a law saying "it shall be lawful to share lossy copies of songs as long as such copies shall not exceed 128kbps" or somethin like that, allowing for decreasing the bit rate as compression methods become better.
If this happened I'd be fine and dandy with the RIAA suing the pants off people trading perfect digital copies (when our bandwidth reaches that potential).
yep, all those home-made tapes my friends gave me has really victimized the record labels. same with all those mp3s i've downloaded. nevermind that after previewing this music, I bought albums from about 75% of the artists. And nevermind that 90% of the music on those tapes and mp3s was from artists not played on the radio in my area, and who I would *never* have heard of if not for tape/file sharing.
I bet those artists are feeling quite victimized now that i've spend 12-15$ for a bunch of their albums. My wallet is crying for them at this very moment.
Well just because something that shouldnt be illegal is, doesn't mean the victims of these bad laws "deserve" punishment.
But yea, you're right, they shouldnt be too surprised at it. I guess sharing music is civil disobedience at this point.
Sharing audio tapes isn't illegal. So why is sharing (often) equally shitty quality mp3s illegal? It shouldn't be.
you know the RIAA *is* losing sales, but it isnt due to "piracy". It's due to choice. Non-RIAA record labels are selling far more albums than ever before.
And that is exactly what the RIAA is afraid of: losing their stranglehold on the music industry.
in Richmond, VA there is a a good band that is good enough to have just won the contest to play in tour with Jewel...the Susan Greenbaum band if you're wondering. None of the stations in richmond will play her. One station (b103.7) used to, i believe, until clearchannel bought them.
Want another example? Carbon Leaf. They won some big huge contest to determine the "best unsigned band in america". They dont get played on the radio stations at all.
Need another? Fighting Gravity. They used to be played on the radio, but that just as the others, clear channel or someone like it put a stop to it.
P2P has not hurt the major labels much if at all in sales, and yet it has boosted independent bands *tremendously*. That is what the RIAA is afraid of. Not their supposed 1.6% decline in sales (in the heyday of napster no less) during a recession.
firebird isnt mozilla 1.4, im pretty sure. firebird is "the next big thing", ie: mozilla no longer in one monolithic package, but instead with each component separate and (fairly) independent. firebird is much leaner than mozilla, and from what i hear its still very early in development. which could mean they're gonna cut a lot more code by the end, or could mean they're gonna add a lot more "features" :)
"In fact, P2P is more disruptive than the printing press, since the means of production are much smaller, much cheaper, and much more widely distributed."
I disagree with this quite a bit, for a few reasons.
1) Most P2P files are lossy, badly encoded, mis-named, and otherwise low quality.
2) Speeds are slow, and you're never guaranteed to get the whole file. So in addition to the content quality being crappy, so is the service quality.
3) P2P provides exposure for artists who otherwise would receive none, and perhaps because of 1 and 2, those artists get sales from P2P exposure.
So, if you said "P2P could/will be more disruptive than the printing press", I would agree. P2P will be a serious problem when the software and networks are fast enough to be transferring lossless media quickly. We're still a ways away from that at the moment. So far P2P has only increased sales.
Ok, im not a TCP/IP expert or anything near it, but:
As a client, you somehow requested the file from server X. If you can communicate with server X, what's to stop you from doing the usual TCP packets with error correction and everything, perhaps tunneled through whatever means you first asked the server for the file?
Or more likely, you said "send file X" the first time, and got it hosed at you. After the file is "done" (or could be reasonably expected to be done judging from the rate packets were coming in and the file size), why not send another request, "send file X parts Y,Z,Q,R" to have only the dropped UDP packets re-sent?
Is any honeypot entrapment? Leaving unpatched software on a computer? If the DOJ has a server unpatched, can I hax0r it and say "no it's entrapment"? (serious question, not mocking anyone)
As for the file sharing servers, couldn't the server refuse to allow queries? But still pretend to be a server enough to receive your list of files, and go after you for that?
If necessary, having an RIAA stooge download them from you "with permission" to ensure they are indeed the material?
A lot of magazines do only have 20 or so interesting pages, especially if you're selective on what content you like. For instance you could go through PC Gamer and only find a couple hardware and game reviews that are worth looking at. Meanwhile the prices of magazines are somewhat exorbinant (5-8$? for that little content?).
I dont know why they have to cost so much, but the number of magazines that i've seen shut down seems to imply something isnt working..
That is a *terrible* idea. How many people's feet are anywhere near the same size? My feet are near twice the size of my mom's. the same goes for fingers or any other body part. You may as well say the height of a tree is a mile. Who cares that no two trees are the same height.
.2-something inches gun"
"My nine, that's nine milimeters, sounds cooler than my