Suppose your "p2p share" consists of a collection of obscure, out of print (and probably never to be reprinted) works that appeal to a subset of the population?
XNap, for instance, might be an ideal tool.
Or perhaps I've misunderstood. I didn't realize that p2p was only for downloading.
So if they go after ONE person, they also have to go after the other 700 million people downloading as well
Try telling that to the officer when you get a speeding ticket. "Well, I was going as fast as everyone else."
I think you misunderstand. Hope you don't learn the hard way.
They discover that your ip is offering this unauthorized copy of a copyrighted work. They investiate. Track you down. Some days later, you get served with legal process. (Or arrested?)
You are guilty of a crime. It doesn't matter that everyone else is also doing it. It doesn't matter if they don't even go after all the other people.
All they need to do is make a few very public examples. For this reason, I'm sure they'll sue you for $300 milliion, and then settle for $15,000. Just as the RIAA recently did with four students. This had the effect of completely stopping piracy of copyright works owned by RIAA member companies.
Running a p2p program such as Gnutella uses up lots of bandwidth, even if you transfer nothing at all.
Just the search traffic eats up huge bandwidth.
Running XNap, or other OpenNap client, does not keep your local broadband connection constantly busy. Only when you download a file, or someone else downloads one of your files.
When I used to run Gtk-Gnutella, I had constant network traffic. And lots of it.
XNap, my favorite, uses the OpenNap protocol. This is not a bandwidth hog. It also doesn't use a single centralized server. But it does use centralized servers that people run. (Maybe this is sort of like Kaaza's supernodes?)
There are ways to make p2p require less bandwidth, but the RIAA/MPAA will never let it happen because the ability to transfer packets over the net enables bad things such as piracy in addition to the "good" uses, such as consuming and viewing ads.
Yeah, we don't threaten with violence. Except, maybe, for Iraq. And Afghanistan. And Kosovo. And Somalia.
My point which is lost on the sarcasm impaired is that "serious consequences" is a euphemism for violence. We DO threaten with violence. But we couch it in euphemisms such as "face serious consequences".
we seem to screw up just about all our foreign forays in short order.
I disagree. But if you removed the words "just about" then I would agree.:-)
How about a video game that embarrassingly shows what is wrong with the USA government?
Your score is based on the number of laws, and how unconstitutional they are that you can manage to get through congress. Various weasel techniques are at your disposal. Closed door "sessions". Campaign contributions. PATRIOT.
I've watched in the last few years as games have gotten far more realistic (shockingly so, in many cases) and borderline subversive.
The video game makers should just use their free speech rights to make video games showing government abuse of the citizens, the laws, and the constitution.
Oh yeah, that would be subversive.
For each new law, the game should indicate which clauses of the constitution or amendments it violates.
Your goal: get elected president by a razor-thin margin, and not by popular vote. Roll back civil liberties to an unprecedented level. Start consolidating your power. Start a list of countries, each of which will experience "serious consequences" if they publicly flagrantly are insubordinate to your will. Each law you *successfully* get through congress earns you points based on how unconstitutional it is.
Or maybe another video game idea: The cops harass and beat the citizenry over insane laws that nobody wants. The War On Drugs. The War On Terrorism. The War on Freedom. The War on Piracy. Etc.
first of all the SS is considered evil, as they were a part of an evil regime.
Um... the Secret Service are just doing their job to protect the life of the president, bust counterfiters, and harass game software developers, confiscate their equipment for years and years, etc. (What was the name of that game developer? something Jackson?)
Use your free speech to build a video game depecting cops regularly beating and harrassing peaceful citizens. The object of the game is to remain hidden from the cops.
In this game, the cops have tools, such as PATRIOT to detain anyone for no reason, with no access to counsel, and without telling anyone of the detention.
Of course, the game would not depect any violence against law enforcement officers.
there have been serious discussion in who really is your friend (eg. the guy living in the States that you have never seen, but you know him by IRC, is he your friend?)
Anyone who sends an IP packet to my computer, in a friendly way, is my friend. Silly.
Spammers may move overseas, but if they collect money in the US, then it can be taxed here, and even siezed here.
I'm not proposing header tracking to enforce the tax. Only that legally taxed spammers must include a header with a key that prooves they've paid the tax. This has the dual purpose of making it easy to filter spam from those who have paid, and of making it more clear who to vigorously prosecute for tax evasion and asset seizure. Not only this, but also prision time. The spammers have to collect money somehow.
Back to the header. The header might have to be some private key function of an MD5 of the spam so that anyone can verify that this is not just a copied header from some "legitimate" spammer. In fact, spam tax evasion filters could be set up at major routing points. See an e-mail with a forged spam tax stamp? Serious prosecution. The major routing points may have a much better idea where this is comming from. Furthermore, you can stop it at the borders all automatically. This means that illegal spam will make sure to NOT put the header in place, in order make it more difficult to track down the origin.
If the amount of spam dwindles to almost zero, it may be easier to track down the tax-evading spam. Just follow the money.
I'm going to guess that you're an american. Americans tend to have this blind spot that extends from their borders and works outward.
You are correct.
I was implicitly making the assumption that if we tax spam in America, that no spammers will be based in America. Spammers from overseas will find themselves the targets of efforts to collect the tax or block the spam. Countries that don't do something about spam may find themselves cut off from at least the American part of the Internet. This might actually have some effect, even more so than the UDP which does not carry the force of law. The fact is, if the spammer collects money in the US, it can be taxed or even siezed here. This does not stop spam everywhere, but it might have a huge effect.
Another implicit assumption is that some other nations that have many of the same values as us, might do the same. Maybe I'm niave, but imho, this might really have some actual effect on spam.
You're right about another thing. As much as Congress might not like it, their laws, for some strange reason, only have effect within our borders. Since I can't affect what happens in your country, I will try to affect what happens in mine. And hopefully, the result might even have a positive effect for you also.
On the other hand, we have Dubya in power now, and so soon, especially if he survives a re-election, at least in his own mind, it may be academic about where America's borders begin and end.:-) Got to stop terrorism, you know.
Instead tax unsolicited commercial e-mail. Write a clear definition in the law of exactly what UCE is. Be sure to include any commercial e-mail sent to addresses on a list that was purchased, rented or leased.
Why bother everyone else with the administrative overhead of keeping track of how many e-mails they send? Just bother the spammers.
Require all spam to include a special message header with their spam-license in it. E-mail software or end users could check a government web site to make sure the license key is valid and that the spammer had paid their tax.
(nevermind the fact that such a special message header becomes a possible filtering criteria.)
I don't think you will realistically be able to wait that long to poo. It's just not medically possible.
Re:Bill Gates is fighting the good fight against A
on
Linus on DRM
·
· Score: 1
What he is doing with the Gates foundation is really a very, very good thing.
What he is doing helps a good cause. That is not the same thing.
I will agree however that more criminals should use a small fraction of their ill gotten gain to help good causes. This would help make the world a better place, irregardless of whether it successfully distracts from bad PR.
Re:terrorist
on
Linus on DRM
·
· Score: 5, Informative
Can you name one person who is actually on record arguing that open source software should not be permitted to exist?
They are not on record. And I won't actually name one of my co-workers. But Yes.
There are others who have been far more public however. There was one Jim Allchin a couple years ago. He didn't come right out and say it, but he dances around it and implies it quite well.
Microsoft Corp.'s Windows operating-system chief, Jim Allchin, says that freely distributed software code such as rival Linux could stifle innovation and that legislators need to understand the threat.
....
That, as well as programs such as music-sharing software from Napster Inc., means the world's largest software maker has to do a better job of talking to policymakers, he said.
....
''Open source is an intellectual-property destroyer,'' Allchin said. ''I can't imagine something that could be worse than this for the software business and the intellectual-property business.''
....
''I'm an American, I believe in the American Way,'' he said. ''I worry if the government encourages open source, and I don't think we've done enough education of policy makers to understand the threat.''
>>"It's the interface you know! It's the apps you know!"
>"It's as reliable as your desktop PC!"
And secure too! If your embedded product uses WinCE you can rest assured that you are getting the reliability and security andquality you have come to expect from the Microsoft name.
It has pretty graphics, so this proves that it is quality!
Indeed, I can imagine... and what's the point? Most of the cool casemods take up power. With neon tubes everywhere, you would probably cut your battery life by a factor of two or three, which would defeat most of the point of getting a laptop.
Someone obviously does not get the point of case mods. Completely oblivious.
The whole point is not to have a useful computer, useful battery life, etc. The whole point is: Wow see that 1337 d00d! Carrying a neon case mod laptop through the airport, for example. It's sort of like the case mods that other adolescents do to their cars. Totally impractical. In fact, often, just plain stupid. But they think it will increase the chances that their friends will believe that they got laid. Hance we see this phenomena happening with computers.
Slashdot Mirror
Hypothetical example.
Suppose your "p2p share" consists of a collection of obscure, out of print (and probably never to be reprinted) works that appeal to a subset of the population?
XNap, for instance, might be an ideal tool.
Or perhaps I've misunderstood. I didn't realize that p2p was only for downloading.
People will watch it in the cinema among their friends
But how would you get them all into the same cinema, let alone into the same city or country? How would you recognize their faces?
Movies like the Matrix, Lords of the Rings etc are social events.
What is this strange new word you use? Isn't this some kind of disease or something? I think I've heard this word before.
So if they go after ONE person, they also have to go after the other 700 million people downloading as well
Try telling that to the officer when you get a speeding ticket. "Well, I was going as fast as everyone else."
I think you misunderstand. Hope you don't learn the hard way.
They discover that your ip is offering this unauthorized copy of a copyrighted work. They investiate. Track you down. Some days later, you get served with legal process. (Or arrested?)
You are guilty of a crime. It doesn't matter that everyone else is also doing it. It doesn't matter if they don't even go after all the other people.
All they need to do is make a few very public examples. For this reason, I'm sure they'll sue you for $300 milliion, and then settle for $15,000. Just as the RIAA recently did with four students. This had the effect of completely stopping piracy of copyright works owned by RIAA member companies.
You miss my point.
Running a p2p program such as Gnutella uses up lots of bandwidth, even if you transfer nothing at all.
Just the search traffic eats up huge bandwidth.
Running XNap, or other OpenNap client, does not keep your local broadband connection constantly busy. Only when you download a file, or someone else downloads one of your files.
When I used to run Gtk-Gnutella, I had constant network traffic. And lots of it.
Watch for the penguin-stamped tinfoil hats.
Um, excuse me, but... that would be giving money to a commercial organization who produces said hats.
You need to RTFM and see the HOWTO on making your own tinfoil hat at home, requiring only the purchase of commodity hardware materials.
If you are unable to make your own tinfoil hat and wear it, then you should stick to Windows.
XNap, my favorite, uses the OpenNap protocol. This is not a bandwidth hog. It also doesn't use a single centralized server. But it does use centralized servers that people run. (Maybe this is sort of like Kaaza's supernodes?)
There are ways to make p2p require less bandwidth, but the RIAA/MPAA will never let it happen because the ability to transfer packets over the net enables bad things such as piracy in addition to the "good" uses, such as consuming and viewing ads.
Yeah, we don't threaten with violence. Except, maybe, for Iraq. And Afghanistan. And Kosovo. And Somalia.
:-)
My point which is lost on the sarcasm impaired is that "serious consequences" is a euphemism for violence. We DO threaten with violence. But we couch it in euphemisms such as "face serious consequences".
we seem to screw up just about all our foreign forays in short order.
I disagree. But if you removed the words "just about" then I would agree.
Yeah, what kind of country would .... threaten foreign nations with violence...
We do not threaten with violence. That is what sets us apart.
We are peaceful.
We merely suggest that there will be "serious consequences" if you snub your nose at our president's will.
DARPA isn't doing a damned thing to address Congress' concerns.
They did do something to address Congress' concerns. But we all know that some people will never be happy no matter what they do.
It is now called Terrorism Information Awareness.
They had to change both the splash screen and the about box.
How about a video game that embarrassingly shows what is wrong with the USA government?
Your score is based on the number of laws, and how unconstitutional they are that you can manage to get through congress. Various weasel techniques are at your disposal. Closed door "sessions". Campaign contributions. PATRIOT.
I've watched in the last few years as games have gotten far more realistic (shockingly so, in many cases) and borderline subversive.
The video game makers should just use their free speech rights to make video games showing government abuse of the citizens, the laws, and the constitution.
Oh yeah, that would be subversive.
For each new law, the game should indicate which clauses of the constitution or amendments it violates.
Your goal: get elected president by a razor-thin margin, and not by popular vote. Roll back civil liberties to an unprecedented level. Start consolidating your power. Start a list of countries, each of which will experience "serious consequences" if they publicly flagrantly are insubordinate to your will. Each law you *successfully* get through congress earns you points based on how unconstitutional it is.
Or maybe another video game idea: The cops harass and beat the citizenry over insane laws that nobody wants. The War On Drugs. The War On Terrorism. The War on Freedom. The War on Piracy. Etc.
first of all the SS is considered evil, as they were a part of an evil regime.
Um... the Secret Service are just doing their job to protect the life of the president, bust counterfiters, and harass game software developers, confiscate their equipment for years and years, etc. (What was the name of that game developer? something Jackson?)
Urm, this would effectively restrict the sale of Return to Castle Wolfenstien. After all, the SS are law enforcement officials too
I didn't know the Secret Service was featured in Castle Wolfenstien. But then, I've never played.
Use your free speech to build a video game depecting cops regularly beating and harrassing peaceful citizens. The object of the game is to remain hidden from the cops.
In this game, the cops have tools, such as PATRIOT to detain anyone for no reason, with no access to counsel, and without telling anyone of the detention.
Of course, the game would not depect any violence against law enforcement officers.
there have been serious discussion in who really is your friend (eg. the guy living in the States that you have never seen, but you know him by IRC, is he your friend?)
Anyone who sends an IP packet to my computer, in a friendly way, is my friend. Silly.
Spammers may move overseas, but if they collect money in the US, then it can be taxed here, and even siezed here.
I'm not proposing header tracking to enforce the tax. Only that legally taxed spammers must include a header with a key that prooves they've paid the tax. This has the dual purpose of making it easy to filter spam from those who have paid, and of making it more clear who to vigorously prosecute for tax evasion and asset seizure. Not only this, but also prision time. The spammers have to collect money somehow.
Back to the header. The header might have to be some private key function of an MD5 of the spam so that anyone can verify that this is not just a copied header from some "legitimate" spammer. In fact, spam tax evasion filters could be set up at major routing points. See an e-mail with a forged spam tax stamp? Serious prosecution. The major routing points may have a much better idea where this is comming from. Furthermore, you can stop it at the borders all automatically. This means that illegal spam will make sure to NOT put the header in place, in order make it more difficult to track down the origin.
If the amount of spam dwindles to almost zero, it may be easier to track down the tax-evading spam. Just follow the money.
I'm going to guess that you're an american. Americans tend to have this blind spot that extends from their borders and works outward.
:-) Got to stop terrorism, you know.
You are correct.
I was implicitly making the assumption that if we tax spam in America, that no spammers will be based in America. Spammers from overseas will find themselves the targets of efforts to collect the tax or block the spam. Countries that don't do something about spam may find themselves cut off from at least the American part of the Internet. This might actually have some effect, even more so than the UDP which does not carry the force of law. The fact is, if the spammer collects money in the US, it can be taxed or even siezed here. This does not stop spam everywhere, but it might have a huge effect.
Another implicit assumption is that some other nations that have many of the same values as us, might do the same. Maybe I'm niave, but imho, this might really have some actual effect on spam.
You're right about another thing. As much as Congress might not like it, their laws, for some strange reason, only have effect within our borders. Since I can't affect what happens in your country, I will try to affect what happens in mine. And hopefully, the result might even have a positive effect for you also.
On the other hand, we have Dubya in power now, and so soon, especially if he survives a re-election, at least in his own mind, it may be academic about where America's borders begin and end.
The tax would accelerate the development of a mail transfer protocol that does not lend itself to spamming.
The tax would accelerate the development of a mail transfer protocol that does not lend itself to taxing.
Taxing e-mail is the wrong way to go.
Instead tax unsolicited commercial e-mail. Write a clear definition in the law of exactly what UCE is. Be sure to include any commercial e-mail sent to addresses on a list that was purchased, rented or leased.
Why bother everyone else with the administrative overhead of keeping track of how many e-mails they send? Just bother the spammers.
Require all spam to include a special message header with their spam-license in it. E-mail software or end users could check a government web site to make sure the license key is valid and that the spammer had paid their tax.
(nevermind the fact that such a special message header becomes a possible filtering criteria.)
until i see a supreme court judgement
I don't think you will realistically be able to wait that long to poo. It's just not medically possible.
What he is doing with the Gates foundation is really a very, very good thing.
What he is doing helps a good cause. That is not the same thing.
I will agree however that more criminals should use a small fraction of their ill gotten gain to help good causes. This would help make the world a better place, irregardless of whether it successfully distracts from bad PR.
Can you name one person who is actually on record arguing that open source software should not be permitted to exist?
....
....
....
They are not on record. And I won't actually name one of my co-workers. But Yes.
There are others who have been far more public however. There was one Jim Allchin a couple years ago. He didn't come right out and say it, but he dances around it and implies it quite well.
From a cnet article here.
Microsoft Corp.'s Windows operating-system chief, Jim Allchin, says that freely distributed software code such as rival Linux could stifle innovation and that legislators need to understand the threat.
That, as well as programs such as music-sharing software from Napster Inc., means the world's largest software maker has to do a better job of talking to policymakers, he said.
''Open source is an intellectual-property destroyer,'' Allchin said. ''I can't imagine something that could be worse than this for the software business and the intellectual-property business.''
''I'm an American, I believe in the American Way,'' he said. ''I worry if the government encourages open source, and I don't think we've done enough education of policy makers to understand the threat.''
Don't limit yourself to MP3 players. Think about what a embedded tiny 1.5 GB drive would do for [....]
Think of what it could do for portable, easily concealed packet sniffers!
>>"It's the interface you know! It's the apps you know!"
>"It's as reliable as your desktop PC!"
And secure too! If your embedded product uses WinCE you can rest assured that you are getting the reliability and security andquality you have come to expect from the Microsoft name.
It has pretty graphics, so this proves that it is quality!
Indeed, I can imagine ... and what's the point? Most of the cool casemods take up power. With neon tubes everywhere, you would probably cut your battery life by a factor of two or three, which would defeat most of the point of getting a laptop.
Someone obviously does not get the point of case mods. Completely oblivious.
The whole point is not to have a useful computer, useful battery life, etc. The whole point is: Wow see that 1337 d00d! Carrying a neon case mod laptop through the airport, for example. It's sort of like the case mods that other adolescents do to their cars. Totally impractical. In fact, often, just plain stupid. But they think it will increase the chances that their friends will believe that they got laid. Hance we see this phenomena happening with computers.
+1 Insightful