Privacy will only prevent people like us from advertising to the families of cable company executives. We need 24/7 surveillance of all their activities, where their children go to school, what their wives buy on-line and in grocery stores. We can analyze that data on an open public website. Send out google vans to record their every movement, and inundate them with your advertising messages. Roll out billboard trucks to park in front of their houses.
Fight fire with fire. Fight the RIAA laws with laws. Fight invasions of privacy with invasions of privacy.
From the people that brought you the Ron Paul Blimp, introducing a new and improved advertising business model. For the low low basic price of $1.00 my business model will let you send whatever message you desire to VIP elite corporate executives and their family members. Whether they are on vacation in the Bahamas, or watching Juinor's first piano recital, or attending Church for a daughter's wedding, paparazzi ad men are standing by with bull horns, mobile advertising boards, whatever you need! Don't Delay, ACT NOW! We deliver the POP, pop-ups, pop-unders, pop in burning brown bags on door steps. Move your advertising needs into the 4th Dimension with highly targeted, extremely efficient gorilla broadcasting techniques.
Now you can show them your middle finger, whenever you want. Sirens, flashes, fireworks, bells and whistles cost extra. With are first Class A share offering we intend to hire the football "Gggggoooooooooooooaaaaaaalllllllll!" guy, and the "Let's get ready to rumble!" guy to appear in infomercials touting our services, and possibly as part of the available content advertising content. Ask your broker for a Prospectus today!
Your statement is equivalent to saying there really is a Santa Claus that climbs down every chimney to deliver presents to all the good children every Christmas Eve. It's wholly unscientific. Fortunately for science, it's *demonstrable* that such a claim is false, and that such a belief is a mass confusion delusion.
Trade only occurs because the exact same goods are valued *differently* by differently persons. That which is received, good 'A', is valued MORE than that which is given away in exchange, good 'B', for Person 1, and vice versa for Person 2. There would be no reason whatsoever to switch possession of differing goods, called *trade*, otherwise.
Less energy afforded and produced makes the world net poorer exactly the same way less food afforded and produced makes the world net poorer. Decreasing the supply of drinking water by half may make the price of that water double, but that means the world is twice as worse off by definition of having half as much water.
Increasing the costs of trade is just increasing the costs of the division of labor. Would you be better off if you to make everything you have completely by yourself? Grow and harvest your own food, make your own clothes, build your own house, manufacture and build your own computer? You wouldn't have enough time and skill to do it all by yourself and thus you would be much poorer operating as an isolated autocratic individual.
There's absolutely no such thing as a "trade imbalance" or a "trade deficit". Trade only occurs because that which is received is valued more than that which is given away in exchange. The exact same goods which exist before every trade exist after every trade. Using force to reverse or prevent those trades which are said to cause "trade imbalances" or "trade deficits" would only *cause* poverty, *cause* the world to be net less wealthier.
Those economists "addressing the issue" are flat earth sun revolving around the earth quacks, no matter what their academic degrees say. Nothing is ever undervalued or overvalued by definition of it exchanging for the exact value it exchanges for. The value of everything is non constant for everyone.
The only people being screwed are *everyone* by *every* government fiat currency, except the international bankers who create debt and collect interest (and real collateral assets by definition of it being impossible for everyone to pay back the interest by definition of the interest PLUS the money lent being more than all the money which exists at the time, unless debt money is increased to pay off the prior interest obligations). It's a giant international house of cards with no fiat currency whatsoever immune. This is why the printing presses run at ever accelerating speeds until they approach hyper inflation and collapse in value. It's the greatest swindle the world has ever seen. How'd you like to be authorized to be the monopoly distributor of "legal tender" monopoly money you can feed through the xerox machines whenever you wish?
Paying for breathing air might increase the GDP, but it would only be making the world net poorer. By definition of the consumer price index (CPI) being fraudulent data, so too is the GDP fraudulent data. Double the supply of money, ceteris paribus, the GDP doubles. Twice as much money trades for the exact same things. But in the real world inflation works it way through the economy discretely and unevenly, not universally evenly. People who get the new money and new credit first, spend more on specific things first. In the late 90s it was internet stocks, from 2000-2007 it was houses, and now it's commodities like oil. The poorest (last to receive the new credit and dollars) will suffer the worst for the longest time.
It's more that the price of dollars is low than that the price of oil is high. Turning every one dollar bill into a one million dollar bill won't cure world poverty either.
I'll wager we are in the midst of an advertising bubble that dwarfs the housing bubble (in percentage market value which will be vaporized for the respective industries). When all is said and done, housing will likely have lost, on average, 50% of peak price. I expect advertising to drop 80% from peak price. Blocking advertisements is the new growth industry, is the primary reason for the original mass exodus from newspapers, magazines, and television channels in the first place.
I even use the mute button liberally when watching live sporting events. It wouldn't surprise me if pharmaceutical advertisements accounted for 25% of the revenues of the big cable television channels. What's happened with newspapers and magazine is already starting to happen to broadcasting networks and cable channels.
Value for everything is always %100 subjective *speculation*. Those people claiming oil prices are a certain percentage due to the buying of speculators are the exact same people who would be saying the earth was flat 500 years ago.
Too bad it won't hold up in Appeals Court. Telecommunications companies will still be sued, and politicians will have burned political capital for no reason. If every individual telecommunications company customer were to file a pro se civil suit against them, it would end up costing them billions. Learn from the RIAA tactics, and use the strategy to drown opponents in the courts. You gotta get paid too.
This is why we need legal lawsuit template web sites, with videos, procedures, motions, and explanations cataloged according to type: RIAA defense, Telecom Civil, Class Action Negligence (for firms that gouge the class with attorneys' fees and reap the giant percentage of the award), etc.
Just filing the lawsuit in the proper court is going to have a 1:100 dollar attrition war advantage, as it costs them lawyer time, expense of flying to the court, staying in a hotel, making their motion to dismiss, etc. One hundred million people filing lawsuits should cost the Telecom Industry $100 billion MINIMUM. 'Course they would then try to defend the suits as a class, and everyone could file more motions upping the expenses.
Turn the Ron Paul political campaign donation model into the pro se civil law suit model, and now you're talking serious political power. Let's form a publicly traded NASDAQ Law Troll Firm to do the paperwork cheaply.
Encrypted traffic is the basis for pretty much all internet commerce. You forget the days when a mass of consumers were scared of buying stuff on the internet because of the perception it was not secure, and was like sending personal information to identity theft phishing scams. Banning encryption would bring that uncertainty right back, and the music industry will take a huge hit on iTunes sales while "piracy" continues unabated.
It won't be long before all the content ever created can fit on a key chain sized flash drive that can be plugged into any networked computer anywhere. At best, these laws are piling 6 foot wall sand bags on the beach as a 2,000 foot tsunami wave approaches. It's over. The genie ain't going back into the bottle. The cat ain't going back into the bag. The content industries are just going to turn more of the remaining customers willing to pay for content into bitter enemies who will never pay most people for content ever again.
The government won't be able to ban encrypted traffic either without violating fundamental free speech rights, just like the government won't be able to ban people from installing locks on their doors. 'Cause only "criminals" lock their safes, cars, bikes, strollers, homes, and password protect their computer accounts, right? Such proposals are not only DOA (dead on arrival), but political suicide. These are the last gasp hurrah ineffectual lobbying pay offs to the media content industries, and it's only going to cost their bottom lines even more than it has already, if it doesn't end up bankrupting them.
There is absolutely nothing which is not seen, heard, or downloaded, that is not copyrighted on the internet. Every page you visit, every file you look at, was *created* by a person. You would literally have to be omniscient to not accidentally download something that may be an unauthorized copyright infringement.
So if somebody posts a chapter of Harry Potter on a message board, you download that information by visiting the page, you have by definition downloaded copyrighted content. You download the what you assume is the public domain speech Obama.mp3 and lo, it's some Britney Spears copyrighted crap. You have downloaded copyrighted content. You have a party, and some person downloads copyrighted songs without your knowledge.
STRIKE THREE, YOU'RE OUT!
Except that, customers will massively counter sue, and the backlash toward abolishing imaginary property will right on schedule continue to grow.
The ISP will be "reading" every click you do, every file you access, every post you make. How many people would install home alarm systems that let let the alarm company peer into every room in your house to make sure only "safe" activity was occurring?
Nobody knows what lies on the other side of any hyperlink before they visit that link. For anything to be seen or heard on the internet, the information must by definition be copied from point A to point B. We don't drive little minis with Alice in Wonderland through the "intertubes" to visit the Amazon mall store. Listening to 30 second song samples on Amazon isn't going to look any different than downloading 30 second song samples from anywhere else. Listen to 100 30-second song samples, and you've equivalently downloaded 50 minutes of music. Listening to some guys free garage band album isn't going to look any different than downloading some music industry union album.
The government and content industry are living in pure fantasy enforcement land. The internet is just itching to pounce on "mistakes". And the citizens are going to demand that ISPs and Media Enforcement Watchdogs be subject to the same criminal and civil penalties. For the deterrent effect to be even remotely feasible, those groups are going to literally be risking their entire businesses.
They will either break a secure internet, killing any reason for people to trust legitimate on-line commerce is safe (people will stop ordering stuff), or a stronger more encrypted secure internet will evolve.
Do it on a country wide scale (say every/. reader in France) and bingo, law will either be thrown out or the economy will collapse. The ISP cannot monitor and check for copyright violations, either checking hashes or deep packet inspecting, without by definition copying the data into their analysis program. Pull the plug on the ISP when they download your copyrighted material. Do ISPs now have licenses to infringe?
ISPs checking for copyright violations is absolutely no different than you downloading any file on the internet and manually listening to that file to make sure it doesn't violate your own copyrights. Either force the ISP to pay a $0.99 fee (or whatever you choose to set as your market rate, your artistic family photos can be set at $1,000) for copying everyone one of your emails, IMs, message board posts, uploaded family pictures and videos, or sue them for maximum copyright infringement statutory damages. It becomes a fight crime by committing crime infinite loop.
WRONG! You are still a thief. Why don't you actually try producing some sort of original work and then try to sell it. Try to market it and make a living off of it. Then, when you find that people are stealing your product because they don't like who you are or how you run your business. Try posting your rants with original words you yourself created and invented. Otherwise, you are just copying the work of others, MORON.
"However," noted anonymous internet sources, "probing speculation of a possible Chinese antitrust probe were rumored to have been widespread on areas of the internet outside of the China Firewall." The Redland, Shenainiganghei based office confirmed that "plans are just that -- plans -- and not promises of updates, upgrades, releases, or official actions." US officials noted that this statement was delivered by a Chinese intellectual property rights "enforcer", and not the more common Western "Czar". Said the US official, "if China were to lay down it's 'enforcer' card, we would collect that card with our 'Czar' card, according to internationally established rules regarding the power and value of cards."
Don't physicists just call these macro examples of parallel universes? There must be some cross over platforms, such as through black holes, or dupe websites. But only pirate space craft can reach the FTL (faster than lawsuit) speed necessary to access the content.
Why isn't burning fossil fuels "part of the natural carbon cycle"? They would never otherwise burn or be released into the atmosphere? Why is that any more considered causing "pollution" than bees pollinating flowers? It seems to me just as arbitrary as regarding wild animal excrement as "fertilizer" rather than "pollution", or regarding volcano eruptions as "natural", or regarding lightning caused forest fires as "natural", but chopping down trees to build houses as "unnatural".
Human activity is party of earth ecology. Arbitrarily classifying only human activity as "pollution" seems arbitrary and unscientific. Why not regard the evolution of all life on a lifeless "pristine" planet as "pollution"? There is no ecological methodological scientific basis, merely a political ideological basis manifested in authoritarian control.
even the concept of "externalized costs" is demonstrably non-anthropomorphic. It's simply a matter of context. It's anthropomorphic to arbitrarily a priori define them as "costs" in those contexts. Global warming might be a free gift benefit making humanity net subjectively wealthier, not a "cost" (that's even assuming man's actions can significantly heat up the planet), at least for significant portions of the population. How much energy is spent on heating in cold climates versus how much energy is spent on cooling in warm climates?
So is there then a "free rider" benefit from coal plants externalizing carbon dioxide into the air? Maybe the coal plants should start suing residents of areas that have milder than average winters for the difference in the quantity of resources saved from heating costs, like the RIAA sues people who hear music without paying?
Oh the irony of thinking man can cause the planet to heat up, raising water levels, but man can't also with more theoretical ease evaporate those alleged man caused increasing water levels. There is a water scarcity problem, is there not? Maybe if less rainfall and snow cap melt reached the oceans, and was instead diverted to places like Arizona, that would alleviate the problem?
It's also demonstrably silly to single out "corporations" for environmental damage attack, rather than the specific actions of specific individuals. Governments, and regular old everyday neighbors, can cause just as much environmental damage as "corporations". But you don't hear environmentalists clamoring for an immediate end to the energy inefficient government ethanol subsidies.
But you when you start calling airplanes flying overhead, or new houses being built next door, "sight pollution" you're going to lose a lot of credibility for genuine environmentalist concerns, such as dumping pollution into rivers, by losing focus using scarce resources on areas of dubious scientific credibility, such as anthropogenic global warming.
P.S. I know this may hard for environmentalists and leftists to comprehend, but "global climate change" is a *natural* process that occurs independent of man actions. Changing weather is observed every single day. This means global climate is not static, ever, never has been, and never will be. And people can still see you even if you close your eyes and pretend they can't.
You should also be more open minded to using technology and economics to accomplish environmental goals, such as producing energy that is cheaper than digging up dirty coal. Then you don't need to use government force to command others; you can just make a *profit* by supplying cheaper energy, and putting the dirty, labor intensive energy producers out of business. You know, be more smart, less socialist ideological.
We need to factor the environmental impact into the price. Let's tax pollutants heavily and spend the income on energy efficiency research, energy source research, pollution cleanup and research. Get rid of the child tax welfare deductions then, and *CHARGE* taxes for each additional child born. Also, take away retiree benefits, as those are just subsidizing wasteful sloth. Let old people die so their carbon foot prints disappear. Institute an age tax on everything from food to healthcare, so that someone who is 80 years old pays four times the amount in taxes than someone who is 20 years old. How'd that be? Maybe brand the foreheads of people over 65 years of age with a 'P' for "Pollutant"?
Pure capitalism doesn't work well, here, because it's so easy to externalize your costs on the rest of society. In other words, burning coal seems cheap and great because you're probably not accounting for the cost of global warming, acid rain, etc. And how does exhaling carbon dioxide externalize "cost" onto the rest of society work for breathing? How does "cost" of feeling the warmth of the Sun work for the Sun's ever decreasing longevity? Maybe some human sacrifice blood should be paid to the Sun god to keep him from getting angry and putting our "accounts" into negative red ink with natural disasters? How about people and business be executed for murder for all the ants they step on and run over with their gasoline powered vehicles? Would that be more satisfactory for you?
Do environmentalists need to anthropomorphicize every thing and every word?
Good points. Notice that the No Teacher Left Behind Financially unions mirror the No Child Left Behind Act.
The educational system is primarily just a criminal money laundering welfare redistribution program designed to pay off the politically connected. The administrative costs literally rob children of teachers and education. And in the day and age of the internet, public school is going to become ever more irrelevant, is going to fall further and further behind the competition which is evolving on the internet.
Do you need to hire ten million amateur people to repeat what the news anchor person says to groups of 30-35 persons (or can 300 million people just all watch what the President says at the same time)? This is exactly the massive 90% plus inefficiency we get from the public school system. Everyone should learn as much as possible from the best 10%, and fire the other 90% of teachers and and administrators. That means universally accessible education programming available on-line that students can complete at their own pace, with ever more detailed examples, methodologies, and constant upgrading feed back. The faster they understand the lessons and demonstrate the proficiency the sooner they can go out to play, or just graduate earlier. I'd bet at least 50% of the time spent at school is pure waste even for the median capability student.
It's just beyond idiotic to teach numbers multiplication to children the same age in super expensive day care buildings in groups of 30 to 35 children, when video games, on-line lessons, can do that equally for all, allowing total fine tuning to individual learning pace. The internet is already starting to independently evolve to that path with things like the MIT open source project.
The public school brick and mortar education system is at a Stone Age technological level. And tax payers have already been bled far too much for worsening results.
I agree. DRM is crashing and burning all over the place. BluRay sales are pathetic, Vista sales suck, anti-copyright is one of the top issues all over the internet in just a few short years, imaginary property groups are starting to be smacked down harder and harder whether it's the RIAA or the Associated Press, video games encounter costly unforeseen support problems, the stock prices of heavy imaginary proponent companies are tanking hard from cable companies to music industry companies, and on and on.
If cable companies were to kill the DVR and make time shifting impossible, they would literally be assassinating anywhere from 25% to 75% of the monthly rate consumers would be willing to pay, and just feeding those diminishing viewers directly to torrents. It's already mostly shit with pharmaceutical commercials 90% of the time already. Less content and higher prices are only going to increase the damage. They've got monopolies as it is, and still their stock prices sink, evaporating billions after billions of previous net worth. They are in for a shock how irrelevant advertising and the main stream media channels have really become. After being isolated from their neighbors for decades, people finally get most of their entertainment from talking to their neighbors all over the world on the internet now.
The days of planning your evenings around a television schedule are going going gone. There's only 24 hours available each day forever limiting demand. And the supply of content competing for attention will just continue to explode. There's a lot more interesting stuff to talk about than what's on television. Just look at the exponential big bang explosion of individual user generated message board and blog posts on the internet. You can't read everything produced daily and fresh even in one tiny corner of the internet universe called slashdot.
Exactly, Microsoft (and Hollywood and the Pharmaceutical Industry) operates more like China than they care to admit. They are in favor of free trade for themselves, to outsource jobs and their products, but against free trade for consumers, by restricting the buying and selling and resourcing (re-importation) of their products.
They create a completely artificial non-free market arbitrage black market profit criminal and terrorist financing opportunity by selling their products for different prices in different places. Who creates these black markets like the War on Drugs? Governments and corporations who interfere with free trade. Notice how they also don't consider infringing on your right of free association and your right to freely and peaceably trade with whomever you want to whenever you want to an infringing violation of your property and person rights.
Also note that central banks are by far the biggest counterfeiters in the world. We should be sure to apply the forthcoming imaginary property penalty upgrades to the bankers ripping off the world with their illegal confiscatory money value debt and inflation taxation. Time to get Nuremberg ready to try the international bankers, and redistribute their assets in whole to the people they have robbed as reparations. No asylum for international central bankers, thank you ready made asset freezing laws.
P.S. The price for absolutely everything is %100 pure speculation. Consider that an economic fact of the day.
Slashdot Mirror
Privacy will only prevent people like us from advertising to the families of cable company executives. We need 24/7 surveillance of all their activities, where their children go to school, what their wives buy on-line and in grocery stores. We can analyze that data on an open public website. Send out google vans to record their every movement, and inundate them with your advertising messages. Roll out billboard trucks to park in front of their houses.
Fight fire with fire. Fight the RIAA laws with laws. Fight invasions of privacy with invasions of privacy.
From the people that brought you the Ron Paul Blimp, introducing a new and improved advertising business model. For the low low basic price of $1.00 my business model will let you send whatever message you desire to VIP elite corporate executives and their family members. Whether they are on vacation in the Bahamas, or watching Juinor's first piano recital, or attending Church for a daughter's wedding, paparazzi ad men are standing by with bull horns, mobile advertising boards, whatever you need! Don't Delay, ACT NOW! We deliver the POP, pop-ups, pop-unders, pop in burning brown bags on door steps. Move your advertising needs into the 4th Dimension with highly targeted, extremely efficient gorilla broadcasting techniques.
Now you can show them your middle finger, whenever you want. Sirens, flashes, fireworks, bells and whistles cost extra. With are first Class A share offering we intend to hire the football "Gggggoooooooooooooaaaaaaalllllllll!" guy, and the "Let's get ready to rumble!" guy to appear in infomercials touting our services, and possibly as part of the available content advertising content. Ask your broker for a Prospectus today!
Your statement is equivalent to saying there really is a Santa Claus that climbs down every chimney to deliver presents to all the good children every Christmas Eve. It's wholly unscientific. Fortunately for science, it's *demonstrable* that such a claim is false, and that such a belief is a mass confusion delusion.
Trade only occurs because the exact same goods are valued *differently* by differently persons. That which is received, good 'A', is valued MORE than that which is given away in exchange, good 'B', for Person 1, and vice versa for Person 2. There would be no reason whatsoever to switch possession of differing goods, called *trade*, otherwise.
Less energy afforded and produced makes the world net poorer exactly the same way less food afforded and produced makes the world net poorer. Decreasing the supply of drinking water by half may make the price of that water double, but that means the world is twice as worse off by definition of having half as much water.
Increasing the costs of trade is just increasing the costs of the division of labor. Would you be better off if you to make everything you have completely by yourself? Grow and harvest your own food, make your own clothes, build your own house, manufacture and build your own computer? You wouldn't have enough time and skill to do it all by yourself and thus you would be much poorer operating as an isolated autocratic individual.
There's absolutely no such thing as a "trade imbalance" or a "trade deficit". Trade only occurs because that which is received is valued more than that which is given away in exchange. The exact same goods which exist before every trade exist after every trade. Using force to reverse or prevent those trades which are said to cause "trade imbalances" or "trade deficits" would only *cause* poverty, *cause* the world to be net less wealthier.
Those economists "addressing the issue" are flat earth sun revolving around the earth quacks, no matter what their academic degrees say. Nothing is ever undervalued or overvalued by definition of it exchanging for the exact value it exchanges for. The value of everything is non constant for everyone.
The only people being screwed are *everyone* by *every* government fiat currency, except the international bankers who create debt and collect interest (and real collateral assets by definition of it being impossible for everyone to pay back the interest by definition of the interest PLUS the money lent being more than all the money which exists at the time, unless debt money is increased to pay off the prior interest obligations). It's a giant international house of cards with no fiat currency whatsoever immune. This is why the printing presses run at ever accelerating speeds until they approach hyper inflation and collapse in value. It's the greatest swindle the world has ever seen. How'd you like to be authorized to be the monopoly distributor of "legal tender" monopoly money you can feed through the xerox machines whenever you wish?
No, it's a lose-lose broken window fallacy.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parable_of_the_broken_window
Paying for breathing air might increase the GDP, but it would only be making the world net poorer. By definition of the consumer price index (CPI) being fraudulent data, so too is the GDP fraudulent data. Double the supply of money, ceteris paribus, the GDP doubles. Twice as much money trades for the exact same things. But in the real world inflation works it way through the economy discretely and unevenly, not universally evenly. People who get the new money and new credit first, spend more on specific things first. In the late 90s it was internet stocks, from 2000-2007 it was houses, and now it's commodities like oil. The poorest (last to receive the new credit and dollars) will suffer the worst for the longest time.
It's more that the price of dollars is low than that the price of oil is high. Turning every one dollar bill into a one million dollar bill won't cure world poverty either.
I'll wager we are in the midst of an advertising bubble that dwarfs the housing bubble (in percentage market value which will be vaporized for the respective industries). When all is said and done, housing will likely have lost, on average, 50% of peak price. I expect advertising to drop 80% from peak price. Blocking advertisements is the new growth industry, is the primary reason for the original mass exodus from newspapers, magazines, and television channels in the first place.
I even use the mute button liberally when watching live sporting events. It wouldn't surprise me if pharmaceutical advertisements accounted for 25% of the revenues of the big cable television channels. What's happened with newspapers and magazine is already starting to happen to broadcasting networks and cable channels.
Value for everything is always %100 subjective *speculation*. Those people claiming oil prices are a certain percentage due to the buying of speculators are the exact same people who would be saying the earth was flat 500 years ago.
CBS. We put the BS in news. What you C, is BS. CBS. News for the BS college graduate.
Too bad it won't hold up in Appeals Court. Telecommunications companies will still be sued, and politicians will have burned political capital for no reason. If every individual telecommunications company customer were to file a pro se civil suit against them, it would end up costing them billions. Learn from the RIAA tactics, and use the strategy to drown opponents in the courts. You gotta get paid too.
This is why we need legal lawsuit template web sites, with videos, procedures, motions, and explanations cataloged according to type: RIAA defense, Telecom Civil, Class Action Negligence (for firms that gouge the class with attorneys' fees and reap the giant percentage of the award), etc.
Just filing the lawsuit in the proper court is going to have a 1:100 dollar attrition war advantage, as it costs them lawyer time, expense of flying to the court, staying in a hotel, making their motion to dismiss, etc. One hundred million people filing lawsuits should cost the Telecom Industry $100 billion MINIMUM. 'Course they would then try to defend the suits as a class, and everyone could file more motions upping the expenses.
Turn the Ron Paul political campaign donation model into the pro se civil law suit model, and now you're talking serious political power. Let's form a publicly traded NASDAQ Law Troll Firm to do the paperwork cheaply.
Encrypted traffic is the basis for pretty much all internet commerce. You forget the days when a mass of consumers were scared of buying stuff on the internet because of the perception it was not secure, and was like sending personal information to identity theft phishing scams. Banning encryption would bring that uncertainty right back, and the music industry will take a huge hit on iTunes sales while "piracy" continues unabated.
It won't be long before all the content ever created can fit on a key chain sized flash drive that can be plugged into any networked computer anywhere. At best, these laws are piling 6 foot wall sand bags on the beach as a 2,000 foot tsunami wave approaches. It's over. The genie ain't going back into the bottle. The cat ain't going back into the bag. The content industries are just going to turn more of the remaining customers willing to pay for content into bitter enemies who will never pay most people for content ever again.
The government won't be able to ban encrypted traffic either without violating fundamental free speech rights, just like the government won't be able to ban people from installing locks on their doors. 'Cause only "criminals" lock their safes, cars, bikes, strollers, homes, and password protect their computer accounts, right? Such proposals are not only DOA (dead on arrival), but political suicide. These are the last gasp hurrah ineffectual lobbying pay offs to the media content industries, and it's only going to cost their bottom lines even more than it has already, if it doesn't end up bankrupting them.
There is absolutely nothing which is not seen, heard, or downloaded, that is not copyrighted on the internet. Every page you visit, every file you look at, was *created* by a person. You would literally have to be omniscient to not accidentally download something that may be an unauthorized copyright infringement.
So if somebody posts a chapter of Harry Potter on a message board, you download that information by visiting the page, you have by definition downloaded copyrighted content. You download the what you assume is the public domain speech Obama.mp3 and lo, it's some Britney Spears copyrighted crap. You have downloaded copyrighted content. You have a party, and some person downloads copyrighted songs without your knowledge.
STRIKE THREE, YOU'RE OUT!
Except that, customers will massively counter sue, and the backlash toward abolishing imaginary property will right on schedule continue to grow.
See prior art at
http://dictionary.reference.com/
Look up every single word you used. You didn't invent or create any one of them. You copied the creations of others.
The ISP will be "reading" every click you do, every file you access, every post you make. How many people would install home alarm systems that let let the alarm company peer into every room in your house to make sure only "safe" activity was occurring?
Nobody knows what lies on the other side of any hyperlink before they visit that link. For anything to be seen or heard on the internet, the information must by definition be copied from point A to point B. We don't drive little minis with Alice in Wonderland through the "intertubes" to visit the Amazon mall store. Listening to 30 second song samples on Amazon isn't going to look any different than downloading 30 second song samples from anywhere else. Listen to 100 30-second song samples, and you've equivalently downloaded 50 minutes of music. Listening to some guys free garage band album isn't going to look any different than downloading some music industry union album.
The government and content industry are living in pure fantasy enforcement land. The internet is just itching to pounce on "mistakes". And the citizens are going to demand that ISPs and Media Enforcement Watchdogs be subject to the same criminal and civil penalties. For the deterrent effect to be even remotely feasible, those groups are going to literally be risking their entire businesses.
They will either break a secure internet, killing any reason for people to trust legitimate on-line commerce is safe (people will stop ordering stuff), or a stronger more encrypted secure internet will evolve.
ISPs checking for copyright violations is absolutely no different than you downloading any file on the internet and manually listening to that file to make sure it doesn't violate your own copyrights. Either force the ISP to pay a $0.99 fee (or whatever you choose to set as your market rate, your artistic family photos can be set at $1,000) for copying everyone one of your emails, IMs, message board posts, uploaded family pictures and videos, or sue them for maximum copyright infringement statutory damages. It becomes a fight crime by committing crime infinite loop.
"However," noted anonymous internet sources, "probing speculation of a possible Chinese antitrust probe were rumored to have been widespread on areas of the internet outside of the China Firewall." The Redland, Shenainiganghei based office confirmed that "plans are just that -- plans -- and not promises of updates, upgrades, releases, or official actions." US officials noted that this statement was delivered by a Chinese intellectual property rights "enforcer", and not the more common Western "Czar". Said the US official, "if China were to lay down it's 'enforcer' card, we would collect that card with our 'Czar' card, according to internationally established rules regarding the power and value of cards."
Don't physicists just call these macro examples of parallel universes? There must be some cross over platforms, such as through black holes, or dupe websites. But only pirate space craft can reach the FTL (faster than lawsuit) speed necessary to access the content.
Why isn't burning fossil fuels "part of the natural carbon cycle"? They would never otherwise burn or be released into the atmosphere? Why is that any more considered causing "pollution" than bees pollinating flowers? It seems to me just as arbitrary as regarding wild animal excrement as "fertilizer" rather than "pollution", or regarding volcano eruptions as "natural", or regarding lightning caused forest fires as "natural", but chopping down trees to build houses as "unnatural".
Human activity is party of earth ecology. Arbitrarily classifying only human activity as "pollution" seems arbitrary and unscientific. Why not regard the evolution of all life on a lifeless "pristine" planet as "pollution"? There is no ecological methodological scientific basis, merely a political ideological basis manifested in authoritarian control.
So is there then a "free rider" benefit from coal plants externalizing carbon dioxide into the air? Maybe the coal plants should start suing residents of areas that have milder than average winters for the difference in the quantity of resources saved from heating costs, like the RIAA sues people who hear music without paying?
Oh the irony of thinking man can cause the planet to heat up, raising water levels, but man can't also with more theoretical ease evaporate those alleged man caused increasing water levels. There is a water scarcity problem, is there not? Maybe if less rainfall and snow cap melt reached the oceans, and was instead diverted to places like Arizona, that would alleviate the problem?
It's also demonstrably silly to single out "corporations" for environmental damage attack, rather than the specific actions of specific individuals. Governments, and regular old everyday neighbors, can cause just as much environmental damage as "corporations". But you don't hear environmentalists clamoring for an immediate end to the energy inefficient government ethanol subsidies.
But you when you start calling airplanes flying overhead, or new houses being built next door, "sight pollution" you're going to lose a lot of credibility for genuine environmentalist concerns, such as dumping pollution into rivers, by losing focus using scarce resources on areas of dubious scientific credibility, such as anthropogenic global warming.
P.S. I know this may hard for environmentalists and leftists to comprehend, but "global climate change" is a *natural* process that occurs independent of man actions. Changing weather is observed every single day. This means global climate is not static, ever, never has been, and never will be. And people can still see you even if you close your eyes and pretend they can't.
You should also be more open minded to using technology and economics to accomplish environmental goals, such as producing energy that is cheaper than digging up dirty coal. Then you don't need to use government force to command others; you can just make a *profit* by supplying cheaper energy, and putting the dirty, labor intensive energy producers out of business. You know, be more smart, less socialist ideological.
Do environmentalists need to anthropomorphicize every thing and every word?
Good points. Notice that the No Teacher Left Behind Financially unions mirror the No Child Left Behind Act.
The educational system is primarily just a criminal money laundering welfare redistribution program designed to pay off the politically connected. The administrative costs literally rob children of teachers and education. And in the day and age of the internet, public school is going to become ever more irrelevant, is going to fall further and further behind the competition which is evolving on the internet.
Do you need to hire ten million amateur people to repeat what the news anchor person says to groups of 30-35 persons (or can 300 million people just all watch what the President says at the same time)? This is exactly the massive 90% plus inefficiency we get from the public school system. Everyone should learn as much as possible from the best 10%, and fire the other 90% of teachers and and administrators. That means universally accessible education programming available on-line that students can complete at their own pace, with ever more detailed examples, methodologies, and constant upgrading feed back. The faster they understand the lessons and demonstrate the proficiency the sooner they can go out to play, or just graduate earlier. I'd bet at least 50% of the time spent at school is pure waste even for the median capability student.
It's just beyond idiotic to teach numbers multiplication to children the same age in super expensive day care buildings in groups of 30 to 35 children, when video games, on-line lessons, can do that equally for all, allowing total fine tuning to individual learning pace. The internet is already starting to independently evolve to that path with things like the MIT open source project.
The public school brick and mortar education system is at a Stone Age technological level. And tax payers have already been bled far too much for worsening results.
I agree. DRM is crashing and burning all over the place. BluRay sales are pathetic, Vista sales suck, anti-copyright is one of the top issues all over the internet in just a few short years, imaginary property groups are starting to be smacked down harder and harder whether it's the RIAA or the Associated Press, video games encounter costly unforeseen support problems, the stock prices of heavy imaginary proponent companies are tanking hard from cable companies to music industry companies, and on and on.
If cable companies were to kill the DVR and make time shifting impossible, they would literally be assassinating anywhere from 25% to 75% of the monthly rate consumers would be willing to pay, and just feeding those diminishing viewers directly to torrents. It's already mostly shit with pharmaceutical commercials 90% of the time already. Less content and higher prices are only going to increase the damage. They've got monopolies as it is, and still their stock prices sink, evaporating billions after billions of previous net worth. They are in for a shock how irrelevant advertising and the main stream media channels have really become. After being isolated from their neighbors for decades, people finally get most of their entertainment from talking to their neighbors all over the world on the internet now.
The days of planning your evenings around a television schedule are going going gone. There's only 24 hours available each day forever limiting demand. And the supply of content competing for attention will just continue to explode. There's a lot more interesting stuff to talk about than what's on television. Just look at the exponential big bang explosion of individual user generated message board and blog posts on the internet. You can't read everything produced daily and fresh even in one tiny corner of the internet universe called slashdot.
Exactly, Microsoft (and Hollywood and the Pharmaceutical Industry) operates more like China than they care to admit. They are in favor of free trade for themselves, to outsource jobs and their products, but against free trade for consumers, by restricting the buying and selling and resourcing (re-importation) of their products.
They create a completely artificial non-free market arbitrage black market profit criminal and terrorist financing opportunity by selling their products for different prices in different places. Who creates these black markets like the War on Drugs? Governments and corporations who interfere with free trade. Notice how they also don't consider infringing on your right of free association and your right to freely and peaceably trade with whomever you want to whenever you want to an infringing violation of your property and person rights.
Also note that central banks are by far the biggest counterfeiters in the world. We should be sure to apply the forthcoming imaginary property penalty upgrades to the bankers ripping off the world with their illegal confiscatory money value debt and inflation taxation. Time to get Nuremberg ready to try the international bankers, and redistribute their assets in whole to the people they have robbed as reparations. No asylum for international central bankers, thank you ready made asset freezing laws.
P.S. The price for absolutely everything is %100 pure speculation. Consider that an economic fact of the day.