If there are any of you out there preparing a protest for the RIAA's treatment of Napster, then you may want to read this one.
Personally, I think Napster is more on the illegal side than the legal side, though I think the court battle is a worthy one.
But my distaste for the RIAA stems from more than the Napster trial. What about what they did to MP3.com who had a much more sound business model? What about the price gouging? What about the trust-like bheaviors? What about the unfair treatment and slavery of the artists themselves? What about the RIAA's reluctance to move along with the times and embrace technology?
I think the anti-RIAA movement would do a lot better if the press (including Slashdot stories) focused on the big picture instead of only the popular picture. The Napster treatment is just another facet to the multi-faceted RIAA.
That is not a tech person's quoute
on
Selfish Society
·
· Score: 1
The tech culture is becoming a elitist society with no coherent political values, poorly prepared to deal with real politicians, who pass real laws like the DMCA. "How could they take my Napster away?" lamented one recent e-mailer...
OK, stop the presses. Anyone who would say "How could they take my Napster away" is not a tech-savvy person. What you have is what used to be obscure technology (i.e. computers & the Internet) becoming more mainstream as they also become easier to use. Thus, that quote is something a mainstream person, ignorant of copyright laws, bandwidth consumption, etc. would say.
So, if that is not a tech person's quote, then the whole subject of this story should be changed. It is not that tech people have become selfish, it's that mainstream people are as selfish and ignorant of underlying issues as they always have been.
I'm personally offended that JonKatz would try to confuse something like this.
Re:First Amendment vs. Instructions
on
NYT On DeCSS Case
·
· Score: 1
It's legal to publicly post instructions for shooting a gun, correct? You might be shooting the gun legally - for target practice or hunting. Or you might want to know how guns are shot for research purposes. But you might be shooting a person, which is illegal. Still, the instructions are legal. (I believe it is also legal to post instructions on how to build a bomb.)
Source code is a set of instructions. In the case of DeCSS, it's instructions for how to decrypt a movie. Again, you might be doing that for legal or illegal reasons.
You have avery good analogy there, but you failed to see one thing. The fact is that the DMCA made any circumvention code illegal. A gun is legal and can be used for illegal things as well. But in the law's eye, circumvention code is stricly illegal and has no legal use.
That is why one side sees it as speech and the other as a tool. I argue that speech is a tool.
You sound skeptical. Are you aaware this is the very method they used for the last rover they planted on mars? Parachute to slow you down, air bags to cushion you, once you've settled in, deflate and deploy.
Frankly, I'd rather see the probe landed like this and survive than their more traditional methods of rocket-slowed decent than has failed miserably lately.
I have to respectfully disagree with you. I think you are the exception to the rule.
As evidence, I submit that you are a slashdot reader. Slashdot readers, while many, are still a minority usually with high technical expertise and a sort of rebelisous attitude about some things if not all.
For every Napster user such as yourself, there are probably at least 10 others who use it for free music. They want the lastest Britney Spears album, or the latest NSync single. Unfortunately, I'm related to people like that. They could care less about the artist, the RIAA, copyright law, etc.
In a way, I'm glad Napster is being shutdown. At the very least it will stop these uneducated leaches from abusing a good thing. I hope, however, that some of them will be awakended by what has happened here and fight the good fight for the restoration of copyright spirit and anti-trust laws.
If Napster is found to be liable for the content it's users make available on their service, then shouldn't Microsoft be liable for what it's users share using Windows file sharing?
That is a poor argument. This statement is from the same sort of mindset that made the argument which the judge shot down.
As an analogy, should Sears be heald responsible for any murders I happen to commit with a Craftsman Chainsaw?
Windows, and its file sharing, we're invented for other purposes. Napster was invented with a much more narrow focus (namely, the sharing of MP3 files cataloged by name, etc.)
The only way out of this one is to argue that Napster was created with the intent of sharing songs which were not copyrighted, or which the copyright holders agreed to make available on Napster.
But as I see it, if we can find one case where someone used Napster soley as a mean for sharing legal music, then that should cast reasonable doubt, right?
Should peer to peer file sharing should be legal or not on the internet?
In general, yes, file sharing is as legal as sharing a screwdriver. The problem in this case is that the files being shared were copyrighted works of music. What's more, they weren't being shared as a book would (loan the book to someone else to read), but they were being copied.
Whether or not copyright is corrupt.... whether or not the RIAA is a trust... whether or not CDs are too expensive... "sharing" of music in the napster sense is illegal.
If you don't like that fact, start a grass roots effort to change the law. I, for one, would come on board!
I've been able to easily write programs for my PalmOS PDA (Handspring Visor Deluxe). I know there are developer kits for Windows CE and Pocket PC as well. Are you using EPOC? REX? Apple Newton? Pencil & Paper?
Why do we need a Linux-based PDA? All right, it can be Linux-based, but it had better be a PDA.
If they're just shrinking down a computer into a handheld format, then it's a handheld computer. Smaller screen, different input mechanism. But that doesn't make it a PDA.
Besides being small, durable and portable, a PDA should above all else be an assistant -- as in Personal Digital Assitant.
That means having software thats tailored to doing PDA-like things: checking off tasks, reading e-mail, looking up addresses, etc. It must be able to do all of these PDA-like things very quickly and easily.
As a veteran of many WinCE/PPC/PalmOS debates, it is still my opinion that Windows CE and PocketPC are designed to be handheld computers more than a PDA. Microsoft started moving in the right direction by simplifying the user interface, but the fact is, it remains built upon a non-PDA-oriented OS.
Is YOPY just going to be a Linux version of Windows CE? The most important thing about a PDA, the human interface, is said to be already emulating Windows CE, according to the author.
The set of encylcopedias that my father handed down to me (which he laboriously garnered from a grocery-store installment system in the 1950's) say otherwise. Jupiter has only 12 moons.
My understanding is that Pizza Hut was using this an a promotional event to gain recognition of their new corporate logo (not terribly different from the old one, if you ask me). But with all of those delays in launch, was their logo even new anymore when they launched?
A recent study, I think by the Gartner Group (I don't have the link handy), discovered that online transactions are charge, on average, $1 more per transaction than similar transactions in brick & mortars.
So, choose who you want, but you won't get a good deal.
Suppose the industry had developed more fuel-efficient engines. Maybe the oil-companies would just buy them and sit on them to keep them from being used. That way, they can continue to sell us gas for our old-fashioned gas guzzlers while they line their pockets.
It will take quite a powerful force to make the powers that be want more efficient engines.
I once came across a more-efficient design of an internal combustion engine, but I can't remember the URL to it.
Basically, it raved of 70% efficieny whereas typical ICBs are abotu 40% efficient.
The concept was sort of radical. Instead of inline, V, or even opposing cyclinder configurations, the cylinders were arranged radially and the whole configuration rotated on a sort of elliptical track. The main advantage I saw was the momentum of the spinning disk. It also promoted the use of say 12-24 cylinders for a much smoother power source.
At the time, I asked about investment opportunities. This sort of thing, when patented, could blow away the industry and every car manufacturer could easily adapt to this new design. They responded that they were only taking large, private investors I think I recall.
Anyways, the point is that even the traditional ICB designs aren't as efficient as they could be. Let's not turn everything upside down if we don't have to. Deisgns like this could make normal fuel last longer.
Over and over I hear people complain that the author would have us all restricted to the same UI. You want to be able to have the freedom to choose your window manager, widget set, etc.
I hate getting into a GM car and finding the cruise-control on a stick, much like the wipers and turn signals. Whenever I rent a car that happens to be a GM, I end up not using the cruise control because I don't want to time the time to figure out their back-asswords way of doing cruise-control.
The next time you whine about customizability, try and figure out what it is your really want to customize. Then, figure out how important it is.
Do you want an OS that has on/off switches instead of checkboxes? One master menu bar (a la old-style Mac System 7)? What is it that you are so worried you'll be tied into that a mainstream UI couldn't offer you?
And why isn't Microsoft implementing the rets of the standard. Is it really thatmuch more thna what they've already accomplished? Perhaps Big Daddy Gates is pushing the.NOT^H^H^HNET initiative too hard?
So what can we do about it? WSP has not worked thus far. Why should a big behemoth like Microsoft bow down to them? Can we sue Microsoft for one reason or another related to not supporting standards? If so, what does that say for every less-standardly-implemented browser out there?
I think I'll take up farming until this whole thing blows over.
Anyone, including ISPs, should always keep dry logs. The type of wood varies with personal preference. For example, Pine has a strong, well... piney odor -- especially when combusted.
To help keep their logs dry, they should purchase a log rack, or simply arrange the logs on top of a makeshift support system so that the logs do not directly contact the ground.
Moist logs tend to attract bugs and decompose much faster.
I think every programmer should at least take a course in assembler, operating systems and computer organization. The sort of insight actually can help a programmer.
Now when they can produce a version of Delphi (I love that environment/language) that will compile for Win32, Linux & OsX from a single source... then i will be impressed:)
Is it better to take advantage of the advantages of a non-platform-independent feature, or remain pure?
One the purity side, there is a lot to be said about violating that purity. The moment you start adding platform-dependent features, you must start providing platform-dependent documentation, support, etc. It opens up a whole new can of worms. And each of those works is one of the reasons platform-independence was chosen in the first place.
On the advantages side, the people who paid for the feature want to use it. And if use of the feature in a platform-dependent manner wouldn't damage the other platforms, why not take advantage of it?
I have a philosophy about using DHTML in websites. Currently, I say use it to dress things up, if you will, but don't put an functionality in it that can't be had elsehow.
I think the same philosophy should apply here. The mousewheel is a WONDERFUL innovation (heh, sorry, had to throw that word in there). Anyone who has learned to use almost can't live without it. There is some very simple JNI hooks that could be added to implement it. However, if someone didn't have a wheel mouse (or was on a platform that didn't support it), no functionality would be lost. You could still scroll your windows in the traditional manner. So, what's the harm?
As for the file-chooser, my understanding (which is not infallible) is that it is an issue on every platform. In which case, Borland could've provided a work-around for JBuilder solution and still been platform independent. Heck, the solution could've even been their own 100% Java File-Chooser dialog and they could still claim 100% Java.
Still, to be fair, in the case of the two features (multi-file choosing and mousewheel), these are both bugs in Sun's JDK, not in Borland's code. Hoepfully, Sun is working on these. I just think it's sad that Borland could've easily worked around these bugs and didn't.
In the past, Borland has been committed to 100% Java.
As an example, their latest incarnation of JBuilder (version 3.5), is written entirely in Java. The same code runs on Linux, Windows, etc.
However, there are drawbacks. The "Add File" dialog, which is a JFileChooser, won't let you add multiple files -- due to a bug in the JDK.
Also, the mousewheel doesn't work because Swing doesn't support it.
In both cases, Borland thought it was better to remain pure than provide workarounds -- especially a platform-specific workaround. Developers have been complaining insanely about more than just these two features at Borland's JBuilder Newsgroup.
I certainly hope their change in focus shift will resolve these problems and make JBuilder, and the rest of their line-up, better products.
OK,s o we could all encrypt our e-mail, right? Sure, thney might still be able to crack it, but it would take them longer to do so. If enough people did it, it would create a traffic jam in their system.
Inforum's l999 Survey from the MEDSTAT group, reports American Demographics, found that adults aged 35 and younger were the most stressed people in the population. Nearly seven in 10 said they were "somewhat" to "extremely" stressed, an astonishing contrast to adults over 65: 31 percent of them said they had almost no stress in their lives at all.
OK, most people over 65 are retired. Memories fade with time. Perhaps they simply don't remember feeling stressed? Or do you really think the WWI, depression, WWII, The Korean War, assasinated Kennedies, etc weren't stressful things to live through?
More than a third of adults under the age of 25 say they don't get enough sleep most or all of the time.
Yeah, my 4-week-old daughter tends to keep me up at nights.
Before the Net, cell phones and Palms, the lines between work and leisure time were markedly clearer.
Pssh! I've got that beat. I work out of my home-office. How's that for blurring lines?
So it's not surprising that a l998 General Social Survey conducted by the National Opinion Research Center at the University of Chicago found that more than 40 per cent of American workers say they come home from work exhausted, up from 36 per cent in l989.
Yeah, and unemployment is also less. Maybe the unemployed are now exhausted since they have jobs?
Even when work is stressful, the challenges can be rewarding. I work out of my home, so I tend to start work earlier and end later (if I ever end), but I can also stop for a break to eat lunch with my family, or take my kids to school.
Honestly, I have to say I enjoy my job. Perhaps I'm fortunate to enjoy programming for leisure as well as for work? Or did the article just miss the mark at understanding what people call their "leisure time"?
Slashdot Mirror
Personally, I think Napster is more on the illegal side than the legal side, though I think the court battle is a worthy one.
But my distaste for the RIAA stems from more than the Napster trial. What about what they did to MP3.com who had a much more sound business model? What about the price gouging? What about the trust-like bheaviors? What about the unfair treatment and slavery of the artists themselves? What about the RIAA's reluctance to move along with the times and embrace technology?
I think the anti-RIAA movement would do a lot better if the press (including Slashdot stories) focused on the big picture instead of only the popular picture. The Napster treatment is just another facet to the multi-faceted RIAA.
OK, stop the presses. Anyone who would say "How could they take my Napster away" is not a tech-savvy person. What you have is what used to be obscure technology (i.e. computers & the Internet) becoming more mainstream as they also become easier to use. Thus, that quote is something a mainstream person, ignorant of copyright laws, bandwidth consumption, etc. would say.
So, if that is not a tech person's quote, then the whole subject of this story should be changed. It is not that tech people have become selfish, it's that mainstream people are as selfish and ignorant of underlying issues as they always have been.
I'm personally offended that JonKatz would try to confuse something like this.
Source code is a set of instructions. In the case of DeCSS, it's instructions for how to decrypt a movie. Again, you might be doing that for legal or illegal reasons.
You have avery good analogy there, but you failed to see one thing. The fact is that the DMCA made any circumvention code illegal. A gun is legal and can be used for illegal things as well. But in the law's eye, circumvention code is stricly illegal and has no legal use.
That is why one side sees it as speech and the other as a tool. I argue that speech is a tool.
But how could you continue your analogy?
You sound skeptical. Are you aaware this is the very method they used for the last rover they planted on mars? Parachute to slow you down, air bags to cushion you, once you've settled in, deflate and deploy.
Frankly, I'd rather see the probe landed like this and survive than their more traditional methods of rocket-slowed decent than has failed miserably lately.
The author of that article is Scott Rosenberg. Now wouldn't it just be great if he were related to Hillary Rosenberg, the president of the RIAA?
As evidence, I submit that you are a slashdot reader. Slashdot readers, while many, are still a minority usually with high technical expertise and a sort of rebelisous attitude about some things if not all.
For every Napster user such as yourself, there are probably at least 10 others who use it for free music. They want the lastest Britney Spears album, or the latest NSync single. Unfortunately, I'm related to people like that. They could care less about the artist, the RIAA, copyright law, etc.
In a way, I'm glad Napster is being shutdown. At the very least it will stop these uneducated leaches from abusing a good thing. I hope, however, that some of them will be awakended by what has happened here and fight the good fight for the restoration of copyright spirit and anti-trust laws.
That is a poor argument. This statement is from the same sort of mindset that made the argument which the judge shot down.
As an analogy, should Sears be heald responsible for any murders I happen to commit with a Craftsman Chainsaw?
Windows, and its file sharing, we're invented for other purposes. Napster was invented with a much more narrow focus (namely, the sharing of MP3 files cataloged by name, etc.)
The only way out of this one is to argue that Napster was created with the intent of sharing songs which were not copyrighted, or which the copyright holders agreed to make available on Napster.
But as I see it, if we can find one case where someone used Napster soley as a mean for sharing legal music, then that should cast reasonable doubt, right?
In general, yes, file sharing is as legal as sharing a screwdriver. The problem in this case is that the files being shared were copyrighted works of music. What's more, they weren't being shared as a book would (loan the book to someone else to read), but they were being copied.
Whether or not copyright is corrupt.... whether or not the RIAA is a trust... whether or not CDs are too expensive... "sharing" of music in the napster sense is illegal.
If you don't like that fact, start a grass roots effort to change the law. I, for one, would come on board!
I've been able to easily write programs for my PalmOS PDA (Handspring Visor Deluxe). I know there are developer kits for Windows CE and Pocket PC as well. Are you using EPOC? REX? Apple Newton? Pencil & Paper?
If they're just shrinking down a computer into a handheld format, then it's a handheld computer. Smaller screen, different input mechanism. But that doesn't make it a PDA.
Besides being small, durable and portable, a PDA should above all else be an assistant -- as in Personal Digital Assitant.
That means having software thats tailored to doing PDA-like things: checking off tasks, reading e-mail, looking up addresses, etc. It must be able to do all of these PDA-like things very quickly and easily.
As a veteran of many WinCE/PPC/PalmOS debates, it is still my opinion that Windows CE and PocketPC are designed to be handheld computers more than a PDA. Microsoft started moving in the right direction by simplifying the user interface, but the fact is, it remains built upon a non-PDA-oriented OS.
Is YOPY just going to be a Linux version of Windows CE? The most important thing about a PDA, the human interface, is said to be already emulating Windows CE, according to the author.
The set of encylcopedias that my father handed down to me (which he laboriously garnered from a grocery-store installment system in the 1950's) say otherwise. Jupiter has only 12 moons.
My understanding is that Pizza Hut was using this an a promotional event to gain recognition of their new corporate logo (not terribly different from the old one, if you ask me). But with all of those delays in launch, was their logo even new anymore when they launched?
So, choose who you want, but you won't get a good deal.
It will take quite a powerful force to make the powers that be want more efficient engines.
Basically, it raved of 70% efficieny whereas typical ICBs are abotu 40% efficient.
The concept was sort of radical. Instead of inline, V, or even opposing cyclinder configurations, the cylinders were arranged radially and the whole configuration rotated on a sort of elliptical track. The main advantage I saw was the momentum of the spinning disk. It also promoted the use of say 12-24 cylinders for a much smoother power source.
At the time, I asked about investment opportunities. This sort of thing, when patented, could blow away the industry and every car manufacturer could easily adapt to this new design. They responded that they were only taking large, private investors I think I recall.
Anyways, the point is that even the traditional ICB designs aren't as efficient as they could be. Let's not turn everything upside down if we don't have to. Deisgns like this could make normal fuel last longer.
I hate getting into a GM car and finding the cruise-control on a stick, much like the wipers and turn signals. Whenever I rent a car that happens to be a GM, I end up not using the cruise control because I don't want to time the time to figure out their back-asswords way of doing cruise-control.
The next time you whine about customizability, try and figure out what it is your really want to customize. Then, figure out how important it is.
Do you want an OS that has on/off switches instead of checkboxes? One master menu bar (a la old-style Mac System 7)? What is it that you are so worried you'll be tied into that a mainstream UI couldn't offer you?
What happened with the /A>? They were petitioning Microsoft to support the rest of the standard before moving on. Have they failed (not that they haven't tried and tried hard)? Well, at least they're mad about it as well.
And why isn't Microsoft implementing the rets of the standard. Is it really thatmuch more thna what they've already accomplished? Perhaps Big Daddy Gates is pushing the .NOT^H^H^HNET initiative too hard?
So what can we do about it? WSP has not worked thus far. Why should a big behemoth like Microsoft bow down to them? Can we sue Microsoft for one reason or another related to not supporting standards? If so, what does that say for every less-standardly-implemented browser out there?
I think I'll take up farming until this whole thing blows over.
You're joking, right?
To help keep their logs dry, they should purchase a log rack, or simply arrange the logs on top of a makeshift support system so that the logs do not directly contact the ground.
Moist logs tend to attract bugs and decompose much faster.
I think every programmer should at least take a course in assembler, operating systems and computer organization. The sort of insight actually can help a programmer.
Isnt that why Microsoft gave us C#? :)
Is it better to take advantage of the advantages of a non-platform-independent feature, or remain pure?
One the purity side, there is a lot to be said about violating that purity. The moment you start adding platform-dependent features, you must start providing platform-dependent documentation, support, etc. It opens up a whole new can of worms. And each of those works is one of the reasons platform-independence was chosen in the first place.
On the advantages side, the people who paid for the feature want to use it. And if use of the feature in a platform-dependent manner wouldn't damage the other platforms, why not take advantage of it?
I have a philosophy about using DHTML in websites. Currently, I say use it to dress things up, if you will, but don't put an functionality in it that can't be had elsehow.
I think the same philosophy should apply here. The mousewheel is a WONDERFUL innovation (heh, sorry, had to throw that word in there). Anyone who has learned to use almost can't live without it. There is some very simple JNI hooks that could be added to implement it. However, if someone didn't have a wheel mouse (or was on a platform that didn't support it), no functionality would be lost. You could still scroll your windows in the traditional manner. So, what's the harm?
As for the file-chooser, my understanding (which is not infallible) is that it is an issue on every platform. In which case, Borland could've provided a work-around for JBuilder solution and still been platform independent. Heck, the solution could've even been their own 100% Java File-Chooser dialog and they could still claim 100% Java.
Still, to be fair, in the case of the two features (multi-file choosing and mousewheel), these are both bugs in Sun's JDK, not in Borland's code. Hoepfully, Sun is working on these. I just think it's sad that Borland could've easily worked around these bugs and didn't.
As an example, their latest incarnation of JBuilder (version 3.5), is written entirely in Java. The same code runs on Linux, Windows, etc.
However, there are drawbacks. The "Add File" dialog, which is a JFileChooser, won't let you add multiple files -- due to a bug in the JDK.
Also, the mousewheel doesn't work because Swing doesn't support it.
In both cases, Borland thought it was better to remain pure than provide workarounds -- especially a platform-specific workaround. Developers have been complaining insanely about more than just these two features at Borland's JBuilder Newsgroup.
I certainly hope their change in focus shift will resolve these problems and make JBuilder, and the rest of their line-up, better products.
OK,s o we could all encrypt our e-mail, right? Sure, thney might still be able to crack it, but it would take them longer to do so. If enough people did it, it would create a traffic jam in their system.
OK, most people over 65 are retired. Memories fade with time. Perhaps they simply don't remember feeling stressed? Or do you really think the WWI, depression, WWII, The Korean War, assasinated Kennedies, etc weren't stressful things to live through?
More than a third of adults under the age of 25 say they don't get enough sleep most or all of the time.
Yeah, my 4-week-old daughter tends to keep me up at nights.
Before the Net, cell phones and Palms, the lines between work and leisure time were markedly clearer.
Pssh! I've got that beat. I work out of my home-office. How's that for blurring lines?
So it's not surprising that a l998 General Social Survey conducted by the National Opinion Research Center at the University of Chicago found that more than 40 per cent of American workers say they come home from work exhausted, up from 36 per cent in l989.
Yeah, and unemployment is also less. Maybe the unemployed are now exhausted since they have jobs?
Even when work is stressful, the challenges can be rewarding. I work out of my home, so I tend to start work earlier and end later (if I ever end), but I can also stop for a break to eat lunch with my family, or take my kids to school.
Honestly, I have to say I enjoy my job. Perhaps I'm fortunate to enjoy programming for leisure as well as for work? Or did the article just miss the mark at understanding what people call their "leisure time"?