Show me where in the constitution it says that the government should be setting up retirement funds for people. You can't; it's not there. Government does not exist to do for the people what the people are unwilling to do for themselves, though many people would like to (and seem to) think.
It is in the constitution: protect the general welfare. Though you may wish to debate the interpretation of that, I think its valid to argue that keeping elderly and disabled off the streets is promoting the general welfare. Note that You have the right to life, liberty, and the *pursuit* of happiness is not in the constitution.
I think Microsoft sells a license (non-Windows license) for wmv for 10 cents a decoder. So even if they Turbo Linux bought all of Microsofts codecs I doubt it would run them more than a $1 for the IP.
And the senate bill number is S-1078 (following the parent comments mention of H-0079).
The thing is, in the florida bills I don't see the language that Felten is complaining about. It just seems to expand the current cable laws for having/making/selling devices for stealing cable service to all communications service. There is no text about "conceal[ing] from a communication service provider... the existence or place of origin or destination of any communication".
See for yourself and tell me if I'm wrong. Here is a link to the text of the florida bill.
or maybe not... "VeriSign will continue to profit from.org as it owns a small interest in the company that will run the back end of the database for the Internet Society."
I don't know. If the CD player is feeding directly into the sound card if might not be bad. After all its output is optical (and I assume into his reciever). Done right, I think this could easily compete with high-end consumer CD-Players. And at $1500 it had better be "done right".
Carnegie Mellon came up with a pretty innovative solution for this problem that has sped up Dorm network connection setup and gets most students outlets activated and listings in DNS and DHCP servers within a couple hours.
What was setup was an MySQL database that users can sign onto (web interface) and activate outlets and add machines to DNS and DHCP. All the user pretty much has to do is know their outlet number (listed on the outlet and available through maps), their hardware address, and what they want to call their machine.
The rest is pretty simple. Kiosks are setup near all the major dorms with help staff available. The information goes in and the database takes care of activating the outlet (by automatically connecting with the switch) and takes care of adding DHCP and DNS entries (updated every 2 hours).
This system has saved many hours of technicians going around to the network closets to activate switches, not to mention end user support. You can probably get more information if your interesting by checking out this page or emailing the Andrew Advisor.
If we were really honest with ourselves we'd realize the truth. People use Napster (and Gnutella, and others) to steal music. More people use these programs to steal music then for any legitimate use. This is not a matter of Freedom of speech, this is a matter of ownership.
Thomas Jefferson's original draft of the declaration of independence said "life, liberty and property." This was changed to "life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness" to further expand what was implied by property. The artists who create music have the right to distribute that music however they want. If they make more money using companies represented by the RIAA, it makes sense for them to use it. So they will.
We, as consumers, have the right not to buy a product that we do not think it worth it. We do not have the right to steal that product to protest the price or the ethics of those who sell it. People who steal music in this way are committing an illlegal and unethical crime. If you don't like the music industry, don't buy from them. Otherwise deal.
The reasoning that songs you own should be allowed to be traded online is also ridiculus. If you own it, download some of the free software out there and rip it yourself. Even with the fastest bandwidth ripping is probably as fast as downloading.
People need to grow up and realized they don't have the right to have everything handed to them for free just because they happen to be American or believe in freedom. Freedom doesn't mean free in any sense of the word! There is a price for everything.
My first thought was... "Geez, some white guy from LA got his hands on a gat and held up NASA?" Probably not the obvious conclusion (nor the most politically correct), but cracker is a word with far too many conotations to be used without some adjective attached... (i.e. computer cracker, crip cracker, crunchie cracker...)
Blurp
Re:Spread the message, brothers
on
Copyrant
·
· Score: 1
I wonder if we could sue our government for malpractice if they actually allow all this. They are here to represent _our_ needs, right?
Sueing the goverment would be equivilent to sueing yourself. According to the constitution we are the government. I think people are missing the real point here. This is OUR fault. Not for piracy, but for failing to make our opinions known to the people who have the ability to effect change. Voting is great (though how many people really do that? Look at the last election numbers...it's frightening), but how many people participate in goverment beyond voting? How many people have even sent a letter to their Congressman?
Money talks, and is listened to, because no one else is talking. I doubt your congressman is reading slashdot, whining here won't fix anything.
And this isn't empty moralising, either (although that should be sufficient). There's a practical reason for all this: Advocating point-source solutions to an epidemic problem will never work. Prosecuting only the virus originators (and maybe a few knowing Typhoid Mellissas) doesn't reduce the attractiveness of the target--so new originators pop up. By prosecuting the victim (who is in turn a new originator) you can reduce the attractiveness of the target and thus the incidence of infection.
Of course, this way when I release a virus rather then me getting a fine and/or jail time all my victims get a fine and jail time. How many people wouldn't be tempted to release a virus say, within microsoft? Imagine every M$ employee fined $15,000 and sentenced to a couple years in jail... This will stop or slow virus creation only if they don't allow inmates access to computers. Though, I can see prison crowding becoming a BIG problem.
While your doctor chooses to work while he has a deadly disease and your driver chooses to drive under the influence, a person spreading a virus often doesn't even know he is infected until after it has spread. Take this example: If I'm walking around with a cold without knowing it, and I pass it to other people before coming down with symtoms, I'm not liable for the time they miss at work.
This is a ridiculus idea that completely contradcits the the idea (well, my idea) of what the internet is all about. I feel that the internet is a forum for the distribution of knowledge to all people. If we start limiting to those who have "a license" it is no longer an open forum and will become an elitist realm.
And how would one obtain such a license? To require some knowledge about the internet would be the obvious way, but isn't the best way to gain this knowledge through experience? As for the propagation of viruses and such...I look at it as a form of Darwinism. Those who have learned enough will not be scaved, while those affected will learn from their loses and in the future protect themselves (and therefore others) against these problems.
And no, I'm not advocating releasing viruses to purge the internet of those "not worthy."
Slashdot Mirror
The FCC is the sole authority when it comes to regulating and enforcing spectrum usage. For a good example of the FCC not taking kindly to someone else regulating spectrum, see:w ifi/story/0,10801,94124,00.html
http://www.computerworld.com/mobiletopics/mobile/
Show me where in the constitution it says that the government should be setting up retirement funds for people. You can't; it's not there. Government does not exist to do for the people what the people are unwilling to do for themselves, though many people would like to (and seem to) think.
It is in the constitution: protect the general welfare. Though you may wish to debate the interpretation of that, I think its valid to argue that keeping elderly and disabled off the streets is promoting the general welfare. Note that You have the right to life, liberty, and the *pursuit* of happiness is not in the constitution.
-Blurp
I think Microsoft sells a license (non-Windows license) for wmv for 10 cents a decoder. So even if they Turbo Linux bought all of Microsofts codecs I doubt it would run them more than a $1 for the IP.
-Blurp
The thing is, in the florida bills I don't see the language that Felten is complaining about. It just seems to expand the current cable laws for having/making/selling devices for stealing cable service to all communications service. There is no text about "conceal[ing] from a communication service provider ... the existence or place of origin or destination of any communication".
See for yourself and tell me if I'm wrong. Here is a link to the text of the florida bill.
-blurp
Maybe... .org!"
.org as it owns a small interest in the company that will run the back end of the database for the Internet Society."
"Whee, no more VeriSign in
or maybe not...
"VeriSign will continue to profit from
Not that I'm a pessimist or anything...
I don't know. If the CD player is feeding directly into the sound card if might not be bad. After all its output is optical (and I assume into his reciever). Done right, I think this could easily compete with high-end consumer CD-Players. And at $1500 it had better be "done right".
What was setup was an MySQL database that users can sign onto (web interface) and activate outlets and add machines to DNS and DHCP. All the user pretty much has to do is know their outlet number (listed on the outlet and available through maps), their hardware address, and what they want to call their machine.
The rest is pretty simple. Kiosks are setup near all the major dorms with help staff available. The information goes in and the database takes care of activating the outlet (by automatically connecting with the switch) and takes care of adding DHCP and DNS entries (updated every 2 hours).
This system has saved many hours of technicians going around to the network closets to activate switches, not to mention end user support. You can probably get more information if your interesting by checking out this page or emailing the Andrew Advisor.
Thomas Jefferson's original draft of the declaration of independence said "life, liberty and property." This was changed to "life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness" to further expand what was implied by property. The artists who create music have the right to distribute that music however they want. If they make more money using companies represented by the RIAA, it makes sense for them to use it. So they will.
We, as consumers, have the right not to buy a product that we do not think it worth it. We do not have the right to steal that product to protest the price or the ethics of those who sell it. People who steal music in this way are committing an illlegal and unethical crime. If you don't like the music industry, don't buy from them. Otherwise deal.
The reasoning that songs you own should be allowed to be traded online is also ridiculus. If you own it, download some of the free software out there and rip it yourself. Even with the fastest bandwidth ripping is probably as fast as downloading.
People need to grow up and realized they don't have the right to have everything handed to them for free just because they happen to be American or believe in freedom. Freedom doesn't mean free in any sense of the word! There is a price for everything.
Blurp
Sueing the goverment would be equivilent to sueing yourself. According to the constitution we are the government. I think people are missing the real point here. This is OUR fault. Not for piracy, but for failing to make our opinions known to the people who have the ability to effect change. Voting is great (though how many people really do that? Look at the last election numbers...it's frightening), but how many people participate in goverment beyond voting? How many people have even sent a letter to their Congressman?
Money talks, and is listened to, because no one else is talking. I doubt your congressman is reading slashdot, whining here won't fix anything.
Of course, this way when I release a virus rather then me getting a fine and/or jail time all my victims get a fine and jail time. How many people wouldn't be tempted to release a virus say, within microsoft? Imagine every M$ employee fined $15,000 and sentenced to a couple years in jail... This will stop or slow virus creation only if they don't allow inmates access to computers. Though, I can see prison crowding becoming a BIG problem.
While your doctor chooses to work while he has a deadly disease and your driver chooses to drive under the influence, a person spreading a virus often doesn't even know he is infected until after it has spread. Take this example: If I'm walking around with a cold without knowing it, and I pass it to other people before coming down with symtoms, I'm not liable for the time they miss at work.
Common sense is a cool tool...use it.
-Blurp
And how would one obtain such a license? To require some knowledge about the internet would be the obvious way, but isn't the best way to gain this knowledge through experience? As for the propagation of viruses and such...I look at it as a form of Darwinism. Those who have learned enough will not be scaved, while those affected will learn from their loses and in the future protect themselves (and therefore others) against these problems.
And no, I'm not advocating releasing viruses to purge the internet of those "not worthy."
-Blurp