Because your name and email address are so similar to your SSN and mother's maiden name. RTFA. And because there's such a huge demand for p2p sharing of lamps and desks.
(I don't consider watermarking files to be DRM.)
This is an incredible nitpick, but...
I consider DRM to be any digital tactic by which content owners can cut down on illegal copying. So far these tactics have consisted solely of ineffective encoding that reduces functionality and treats all customers like criminals. We're all familiar with these technologies and how they suck.
This will also allow content owners to cut down on illegal copying, by reducing security-through-obscurity measures, and reducing false positives like the RIAA gets. (Of course, the likelihood of the RIAA changing its tactics in light of this new tech is very low, but the RIAA is evil anyhow). That makes it DRM, just not the obnoxious and useless encoding kind.
If the spammer isn't going to make 1/4 cents per email sent, it's not worth it to sign up. This may lead to more targeted spam emails, as the cost of sending each email becomes nonzero. (Of course, 1/4 of a cent is miniscule, so the effect may be practically nonexistent too).
I don't see how this degrades it. What can't you do with these files, that you could without this information? You can make as many copies as you like, change it to any format you like, put them on any device you like, you can give them to friends or strangers over any type of network connection using any program...there is zero functionality loss.
IAWTC. Filesharing is illegal, and any DRM that doesn't reduce legal functionality is alright in my book. I can put these files on my ipod, computer, other computers...that's all I need.
Anyone who complains about this has revealed themselves as no advocate for freedom, but an advocate for theft.
It is a common rhetorical tactic to brand everyone holding particular opinions anti-religious, etc, especially in America. Declaring one's faith before arguing against a fellow believer's religious arguments is a way of precluding such allegations.
Can we tag all comments on both sides of the debate over filesharing morality redundant? This comment, and those that argue with it, have nothing that hasn't been in the last 400 such debates on here.
When I look to buy, I read the bad reviews. If they sound kooky, I buy; if they have valid complaints I don't. Under no circumstances do I put any weight on good reviews.
The vowels that are confusing in that way are the ones pronounced with a schwaa (the "uh") sound. English has it, but many languages don't. It would be interesting to create a new letter to signify the schwaa, but I think it'd be too much trouble.
And from studying Arabic, I assure you that keeping a diversity of vowel symbols is a very good thing.
Any technology that reduces anonymization could have this effect. It's a tradeoff--ease of mobiliy for dissidents vs eliminating obnoxious assholes.
So every time you have to suffer through a troll, you're protecting freedom-loving Chinese!
And what with startup costs, the initial unit of any complex technology will never be cheaper than the established alternatives.
If people had applied this reasoning to the first computers, which were hugely more expensive than typewriters, we'd never have gotten any of the subsequent ones.
It's really awesome that you managed to spell "Tungsten" three different ways in the first two lines of your comment.
It's OK, I'm not detail-oriented either, and the rest of your post is informative.
Slashdot Mirror
Because your name and email address are so similar to your SSN and mother's maiden name. RTFA. And because there's such a huge demand for p2p sharing of lamps and desks.
(I don't consider watermarking files to be DRM.) This is an incredible nitpick, but... I consider DRM to be any digital tactic by which content owners can cut down on illegal copying. So far these tactics have consisted solely of ineffective encoding that reduces functionality and treats all customers like criminals. We're all familiar with these technologies and how they suck. This will also allow content owners to cut down on illegal copying, by reducing security-through-obscurity measures, and reducing false positives like the RIAA gets. (Of course, the likelihood of the RIAA changing its tactics in light of this new tech is very low, but the RIAA is evil anyhow). That makes it DRM, just not the obnoxious and useless encoding kind.
If the spammer isn't going to make 1/4 cents per email sent, it's not worth it to sign up. This may lead to more targeted spam emails, as the cost of sending each email becomes nonzero. (Of course, 1/4 of a cent is miniscule, so the effect may be practically nonexistent too).
I don't see how this degrades it. What can't you do with these files, that you could without this information? You can make as many copies as you like, change it to any format you like, put them on any device you like, you can give them to friends or strangers over any type of network connection using any program...there is zero functionality loss.
I have nothing new to say concerning this issue, and neither do you.
IAWTC. Filesharing is illegal, and any DRM that doesn't reduce legal functionality is alright in my book. I can put these files on my ipod, computer, other computers...that's all I need. Anyone who complains about this has revealed themselves as no advocate for freedom, but an advocate for theft.
It is a common rhetorical tactic to brand everyone holding particular opinions anti-religious, etc, especially in America. Declaring one's faith before arguing against a fellow believer's religious arguments is a way of precluding such allegations.
Can we tag all comments on both sides of the debate over filesharing morality redundant? This comment, and those that argue with it, have nothing that hasn't been in the last 400 such debates on here.
A Graham Nash Equilibrium?
Grand Theft Auto: Sim City?
The entire House of Representatives is double-counted in your addition. They're up in 2006 and 2008.
Interesting, those tactics look like spammer tactics. Maybe in the end the spammers will be a force for good?
If I was making a program like this, I wouldn't name it after a famously bungling detective.
Analog Rights Management?
When I look to buy, I read the bad reviews. If they sound kooky, I buy; if they have valid complaints I don't. Under no circumstances do I put any weight on good reviews.
In Soviet Russia, floor shits on you!
The vowels that are confusing in that way are the ones pronounced with a schwaa (the "uh") sound. English has it, but many languages don't. It would be interesting to create a new letter to signify the schwaa, but I think it'd be too much trouble. And from studying Arabic, I assure you that keeping a diversity of vowel symbols is a very good thing.
-1 Pedentic.
Any technology that reduces anonymization could have this effect. It's a tradeoff--ease of mobiliy for dissidents vs eliminating obnoxious assholes. So every time you have to suffer through a troll, you're protecting freedom-loving Chinese!
And what with startup costs, the initial unit of any complex technology will never be cheaper than the established alternatives. If people had applied this reasoning to the first computers, which were hugely more expensive than typewriters, we'd never have gotten any of the subsequent ones.
No, it was the Great Green Arkleseizure who sneezed his branes out.
It's really awesome that you managed to spell "Tungsten" three different ways in the first two lines of your comment. It's OK, I'm not detail-oriented either, and the rest of your post is informative.
Demand that they be removed, then remove some of our own missiles from Turkey in exchange for them actually being removed?
dDos attack?
No, it was the Binary Commission.