There is a very easy solution to this. Consumers have the power but don't take it. This should be heavily advertised and the a BOYCOTT of buying CD's should take place. One month of not buying CD's. That should hit them hard.
Proof: Look at the French fishermen and Lorry drivers. 2 weeks ago the fishermen blocked up the French ports protesting at fuel prices (compared to US they are EXTREME, just over a dollar per LITRE, UK even worse). 3-4 days people were blocked in their cars, 10 cars every 15minutes were allowed through.
When that was finished it was the time of the lorry drivers, they blocked petrol refineries and distribution points. Petrol distribution in France became non-existant. Now the French have asked the European Union to do something about petrol prices.
See what boycotts can do? Come on someone, arrange a boycott, that's the way to go.
Sorry, but by RIAA's own admission, they have no case against napster
Napster doesn't upload or download the recording. We do! They provide the contact between me and the other guy. The data goes through their servers, but it is just binary, there is no "sound" as such. The forth article is
"Online piracy is the unauthorized uploading of a copyrighted sound recording and making it available to the public, or downloading a sound recording from an Internet site, even if the recording isn't resold."
Notice "copyrighted sound recording". They don't make the sound available to the public, they make the link and pass the binary digits. Now, they can argue that at any one point in the chain that their server has only a few IP packets on their server, not a specific sound track, and nothing that the RIAA can lay claims to (how many bits of a song do you need before you become a copyright infringer? one? wow, everyone must be copyrighting.) Napster doesn't make it available to the public, we do. They just aid the distribution.
Now don't flame me until you have read everything...
I am a guy geek (boo hiss)that finds many women unable and unwilling to listen when trying to explain something to them about computers. This ISN'T their fault though, many of them have been steered away from technology and even science (although the latter is changing rapidly, thankfully), prefering to go down the roots of languages. This is what happened to my girlfriend, who has just finished her degree in translation (French, English, German). The question now is who is more intelligent? I personally don't like labeling people better than someone else, no matter what they do, whether farmer or director because:
No farmer=no food=no director.
If I were to answer the question, I would say that she is more intelligent. Reasons? I know C++, C, Pascal, VC++ etc. I can program quite happily in them. Learning a computer language has a lot of similarities with learning languages, but she can go from one to the other, mid-sentence. She translates one to the other on-the-fly. Not many geeks can say that they can convert a C++ code into Pascal on-the-fly. We have to examine the code, she just spits it out as though it is completely natural.
Women are very adept to languages because they have been forced to progress and specialise in that direction more than technological. I have no doubt that a women with the same education and years of experience of a computer language would probably out-code a lot of males.
What a lot of teachers and males don't realise is that by introducing more women into the field of computers not only re-balances the subject, but gives a different approach to the subject, thereby increasing the possibility of finding unthought of possibilities. For proof just look at some of the work that women have brought to the medical and scientific community. Amazing. I can't say that I haven't had my fair share of digs at women for following computing in my early years, but now that I have experienced working with female colleages, I have nothing but respect for them, they have had to work twice as hard to get to the same position as me, and I truly believe that that is wrong.
Sort of explains the Americain society doesn't it! Keep them fit and healthy, able to shoot a gun, but don't give them too much information. That way they can't undermine the state and they can be used as shields when needed. c0rarc
I can confirm that Compaq DeskPro's are a load of junk. While working in my previous company I made an order for about 8 of these machines (the company used them before I arrived). On testing I found them to be unreliable, easily crashable, and caused greater financial loss per week in lost man hours than the cost of the system. Steer Clear. c0rarc
While it is useful to have powers to remove web names or force the release of a web name, this isn't a case. It seems, from what is written, that if I wanted to close down or own a site written by anyone in their backroom (and there are quite a few of you out there), all I have to do is start a legitimate company with the name, then sue. Business over personal? Is this yet another example of people creating something and large organisations taking it over to exploit it by waving a few dollars around? We need to draw the line, and fast, before it is too late and we have lost all our liberties on the web. I can't even browse for 5 minutes before some company has pop-up windows and massive advertising. I don't mind a few banners, but come one, enough is enough.
I guess if you were working on an underwater oil rig or scouring the floor of the ocean, then ok, it could be used for communication with family and friends and work colleagues.
But that isn't what submarines are designed for. They are supposed to be silent attackers. They're not fast, they have a high payload and are therefore very heavy and have slow manouverability. Their only advantage being silence. That they can creep up and send a rocket up your bow before you even realise it is there. What is the point of having a submarine letting out waves from its bow? It's like giving the enemy your exact co-ordinates.
Sorry, there is no point in a military submarine for this technology. If someone puts it in there, it can be abused. You can't even run round the submarine in high alert, the shell would make to much noise, let alone a radio or e-mail water waves, which a detector could easily be developed.
Yet another example of the inferior coding by Micro$oft!
I can't believe that such a simple little (HA HA, you should see the RAM hit for this guy) window can pose too much of a security risk, unless it is badly coded by M$ of course!
Q: When will M$ stop producing naff code and write something decent? A: The day it joins the OpenSource revolution!
Come on Microsoft, remove that stick from your anus and join the revolution, it can only do you good.
Out of curiosity, whether the posts are owned by the writer or/. isn't M$ infringing the copyright by including details of posts in their own e-mail?
What I mean is that if I took text from someones post, included it in an e-mail to a friend, am I not breaching the copyright of that person?
Should M$ have sought the permission to do so before sending the e-mail and what rights do the posters have in sueing M$ for breach of their copyright?
'Your playing with the big boys now', Prince of Egypt, Dreamworks (c)?
You are all right, it is Carbon Dioxide, I know. Not enough sleep is really effecting me. Anyway, in response to that, Carbon Dioxide is the gas which is helping The Greenhouse Effect, whereby the rays from the sun cannot escape the earth as they are reflected by the gas. This increases the overall earth temperature and will eventually melt the poles, raising sea levels, destroying sea-side cities.
Just to put an idea on things, did you know that America uses 1/4 of the worlds energy? That is incredible, and Americans should be ashamed of themselves.
You are an igonorant idiot. No, so far as we can tell, trees do not have any rights that can be measured. This does not remove any rights they have. Your house doesn't have any conscious thought, does that give me (who does) the right to destroy it? Why? (Think hard about this one, I know it is hard).
You say that killing trees will do almost nothing. This makes you rather ignorant. If you want to live life wearing an oxygen mask, go ahead, lumber those trees. Not only will Carbon Monoxide (a gas which humans don't take too well to) increase, but oxygen will decrease. To enlighten your ignorance, this is due to the fact that trees breath carbon monoxide and expel oxygen. Without trees and forage, humans are as good as extinct.
Maybe you do have a reason when you say "Trees have no rights they don't think", because obviously you don't think about what you post. By your own words, you should have no rights.
The idea is good. There are, however, some things that would make it excellent. You still have to remove the car box, take it indoors and plug it in (or use the infra-red communications port) to the computer. What about adding a radio wave module which, when parked in you garage or within 100 metres of your house, you can upload the music to your car. That would be cool. Sitting in your car, getting ready to go out and saying "Computer, download playlist 4, 5 and 6". Wait a few minutes (ok, with radio this may be impratically slow I know, but hey, something could do it. Microwaves maybe?) How about a server on a satelite that your home PC (or a centrally located database somewher) could send data to rapidly and it then streams it to your car using GSM. If phone copanies can send data round on phones, why can't it be sound. Ok, bandwidth would need to be greater, but it can be done.
Being a curren GeForce DDR owner, I feel that there are a few concerns that must be made clear.
The biggest problem, of which no-one has actually mentioned, is that nVidia is working so hard on getting new silicon out the door every six months that they just don't have the people to work on the drivers. This leaves the people with current GeForce cards a little annoyed after shelling out over 200 quid for the card. Agreed, the card performs well and I am happy with it, but the card has functionality that isn't even implemented in the drivers yet! Why do hardware houses insist on releasing their products before their driver has the capability to exploit the hardware built into the card?
My next card will probably not be another nVidia, unless, of course, they're support and drivers are improved drastically. This is exactely the problem ATI faced, luckily they had a large OEM base that supported them.
To make my point more valid, I used to work for the company behind the SuperFX chip for the Super Nintendo (used of Starfox and a few others), which progressed onto a core for the old Cyrix chip (the one with the graphics built into the chip). I know that when the silicon is being designed, the old drivers are nowhere near as supported due to the fact that people are working on the software for the new silicon.
c0rarc
What needs to really happen...
on
Microsoft Loses
·
· Score: 2
I'm not an advocate of Microsoft software and especially not of their business practices. After experiencing their push of their products onto the computers here at work (European Commission), I understand fully the impact of their intentions. I'll give you the background:
As to not be dependant on a single business for our software in the commission, it was decided to use netscape as the standard browser, and the microsoft browser was hidden in the depths of our configuration so that the user couldn't use it. While still using an old e-mail (Route400)it was decided to move to an Exchange/Outlook configuration. To do so requires the installation of Internet Explorer 5.01, Outlook AND outlook express (outlook uses some of the code from express for its POP handling). As we needed to install completely IE5 there was no choice but to make IE5 the standard here, thereby knocking netscape for six.
This is exactly the reason why microsoft has tied the 3 softwares together originally, and why they tied them with the OS. They achieved their goal of stifling the competitor.
Now, what needs to be done is not to split the company up willy nilly, but in a useful way:
Section 1: OS family of products including Windows 95/98 and Windows 2000 and any updates. Interface documentation (API's) being freely accessible to anyone who wishes to develop using them. Source code available for the OS (but not with a licence to compile into usable OS) so that it can be examined and scrutanized (to check for hidden functionality).
Section 2: Office suite of programs plus other software (games, autoroute, encarta etc), not including outlook and online tools. Interaction with OS being employed using the freely available API's.
Section 3: Internet accessing applications. Internet Explorer, media player, msn messenger etc. ALL should be freely accesible source code, freely available for modification as long as licence held to use application. This means the user can personlize his/her version if he/she desires. I believe that the internet should be a free speech/free expression area and as such accessing software should also be in the same vain.
Section 4: Mail tools and other servers. Outlook, outlook express, Exchange server and other servers (IIS, FTP, TELNET, etc.)
This would make four companies which do not have much need to stay together. Each domain could advance in their technology before the other catches on. Competitors will have a much smaller mountain to climb as they do not have to compete against a whole OS with all the trimmings such as Windows is.
"Because most of you are a bunch of fucking communists who haven't any real ideas about the way the world works..."
Hardly democratic that viewpoint. Your attack on communism in this way shows that you know nothing about it, only what the US Government spoon feeds you. If you want to know a little more about what you flame then maybe you should get a copy of the Communist Manifesto by Karl Marx and Frederick Engels (available free online). You may not agree with what they say but you may find that you actually learn something about how countries work, society and how the so called democratic society everyone is bantering on about has never been acheived anywhere in the world. If you look at the details you shall see that the US, the governing power of democracy, is only a capitalistic society. Guess what happens when you attain a pure capitalistic society? That's right, you have a dictatorship (not to be confused with communism and especially marxism). Think about it.
Now you've thought about it I shall explain. The power is not in the hands of the government anymore. If you look at recent history you will find that the power lies in International Organizations. Not only do they have a law in their own right (they are answerable to their founding countries laws and International law) but they also buy politicians, I quote from your mail:
"Microsoft donated millions of dollars to the Democrats over the years - and what did it get them? An anti-trust suit."
Why do you think Microsoft wanted the Democrats in power? Do you really believe that it is because they believe in Democracy? If you do then you are naive. I think you will find that it has more to do with the fact that the Democratic party either turned a blind eye to the business practice of MS (remember it wasn't the government which started the anti-trust case, it was a number of states which lobbied for it) or that MS benefited in another way. Bill Gates does not do anything for nothing, we have seen that, we can prove that. His donations to charity only occur when he's in trouble with the government. Coincidence? I think not.
In this day and age there are more and more people thinking that life would be better if we worked for each other than for ourselves. I have seen people earning extremely high salaries and be extremely unhappy, and seen volunteer help workers with a roof over their head and enough food in their stomach that are extremely happy. Don't fool yourself into believing that money (or so-called democracy) is good. It isn't. The open-source movement is a goal that I hope will be achieved as I believe it is a step in the right direction, where information is free, something else the US and UK government are trying to stop.
Yes you heard right. Why do you think that the US doesn't allow more than 128bit encryption out of the US (only recently happened)? If I choose to write some information (freedom of speech and everything) than shouldn't I be able to present it in any form I like, even encrypted? The NSA listen in on most of the US telephone calls, the Information Bill in the UK gives police the right to request encryption keys without a warrant, on failure you get a 2 year sentence, even if you have legitemely forgotten your keys. When will people wake up and realize that Government in the western world are taking away your freedom not giving it. So much for your constitution.
Oh dear, let me point you in the direction of purity.
If you are willing to allow a small number of people (governments) to control what we can and cannot do, including expression of speech, then you might as well cross out your Christian faith and put the Bible on the censored list. I mean if anything is brainwashing our young into violence it must be that. To put the point really across, are you suggesting that the Christian Faith (along with all it's siblings) is not race-hate? Numerous times within the Bible you will find coloured people referred to as animals among other things. Now if this isn't race hate I don't know what is. What about the crusades, violence in the vain attempt to bring (read force here) more people to the religion? What about the hanging of witches and strange poeple? Spanish Inquisition? God, the list goes on. Don't slam someone because they wish to be able to live in a society that is free. If anything, the church is attempting to change the world into a militaristic society (what with popes, bishops, clergy men, priests etc.) Let us not forget the history of the church either, it isn't pretty. c0rarc
There are two key points that make me a little suspicious of this post. Firstly, if the console will run a 1GHz processor (probably of the shelf) for $149 it will come in cheaper than the processor itself. That said, it would indicate people could buy the console and rip out the processor and use them in a PC (assuming that it will be an Intel/AMD chip, but I can't see any other manufacturer producing a 1GHz chip in time). I just bought a GeForce, it cost me $350. Do you really think that it will be under $50 for it by the end of the year? I think not.
Secondly, why use the name X-Box? It seems as though they are trying to confuse people about Linux. What better way to do so than by creating something with a name like X-Box, when Linux and X-Windows is stamping out Microsoft machines left-right and centre?
I don't care what anyone says, Jon Johansen and iCraveTV are being made a scapegoat. The MPAA know damn well that if Jon or iCrave didn't do it, someone else would. They attack the weak and make a misery out of their live in an attempt to "put off" other people trying. They fear the loss of vast amounts of money because they have become accustomed to big houses, big cars, dumb blonde bimbo chicks with silicone implants and lobster dinners.
What I want to know is the bonus on offer to Jack Velenti to pull this off. I mean he can hardly sit there having done some 40 odd flights in the desperate attempt to free us from slavery and communism to slap us on the face after a couple of generations telling us to behave and do as we are told.
We need to end this trend to believe that more is good, go back to roots (and I don't mean go and live in a cave), enjoy living instead of fighting over something that nobody is quite sure of who owns, if anyone, something. Jack Valenti should step down and let some younger talent into the picture, to bring some fresh meat as it were, to the argument. Maybe then we may see a change in attitude of "what is mine is mine, and what is yours is mine".
Sorry, let me get this right. The license to play at home requires you to use the player they tell you to use? I can't even write my OWN player? Isn't this a restriction of my liberty? I buy the license to PLAY the disk, NOT to dictate HOW I should play the disk. c0rarc
Don't be naive. This isn't about reverse engineering to provide an illegal piece of software. The kind of reverse engineering we are all fighting for is to right (which is granted to us all) to legally make back-up copies for archival purposes. Additionally, when we purchase media (software, DVD, etc) we should (and do) have the right to play it on anything our little hearts desire.
The reasoning behind this is simple. If the MPAA feel the necessity to provide software that will only run on certain OS's or players, don't you think that this comes under using a monopolistic position to push other software (e.g. Microsoft Windows, Philips, Sony etc.) into the forefront as a monopolistic company? If this was the case then I think you'll find the result would be that there would be one company (or a selected few) which would control everything (a la communism). Is this what you would prefer. Don't get me wrong, communism is not (as in Marxist communism) a bad idea in a lot of areas, but it does have some serious problems.
Additionally, again, when you buy media it gives you a licence to run the software, not to enforce what you can run it on. If the major suppliers of software don't feel as though the development of software for a minority system is profitable enough, your stuffed. This is large conglomerates forceing people into a channel without any choice. Where is your sense of consumerism?
Unlike the large corporations we are not forcing them to opensource everything. If they decide to opensource then so be it, we do not demand it, all we ask is that the ability to allow the lesser people a chance to use a product which, in essence, you have paid your dues.
Besides which, if you look at copyright law for software (and patents for that matter), you cannot copyright mathematical equations and functions, only ideas and concepts. This means that DeCSS in itself is copyright (except the mathematical section of the decryption) to whomever has written it and as such is quite capable of countersuing for damages. It was wrong to bring this case up in the first place and hence wrong to have taken (i think stolen is a better word) Jon Johansens machine. Apparently he didn't even write it! c0rarc
This kind of article will hold no weight for the poor Norwegian family. Maybe your free time would be more fruitfully applied to searching out copyright law on the web. I am sure, and I am searching now, that the software DeCSS must be copyright material in itself, and thus the Association is contravening the very law that it is trying to enforce. Maybe the best way to hit back is to countersue the Associationg rather than write hypothetical titbits.
Also, is there no European Law to provide safety from American capitalism? Maybe a European Court hearing is in order? Ooops, that costs money, er, another way to stop independant people from fighting back?
Does anyone actually know of a site that is actively (lawfully) doing anything about this? If there isn't maybe it is worth considering making a group to actively attack the association. I am willing to do my part, are you? E-mail me with suggestions at c0rarc@hotmail.com. c0rarc
Good point. Obviously as you all spend your time writing useless remarks (specifically Katz) you don't actually get time to read books, you know those letters on PAPER, kinda stuck together with glue sort of thing. If any of you have read "Brave New World" by Aldous Huxley you'd have a little understanding of the real implications here. Spend the time to read this book, it is worth it.
Slashdot Mirror
Proof: Look at the French fishermen and Lorry drivers. 2 weeks ago the fishermen blocked up the French ports protesting at fuel prices (compared to US they are EXTREME, just over a dollar per LITRE, UK even worse). 3-4 days people were blocked in their cars, 10 cars every 15minutes were allowed through.
When that was finished it was the time of the lorry drivers, they blocked petrol refineries and distribution points. Petrol distribution in France became non-existant. Now the French have asked the European Union to do something about petrol prices.
See what boycotts can do? Come on someone, arrange a boycott, that's the way to go.
c0rarc
Napster doesn't upload or download the recording. We do! They provide the contact between me and the other guy. The data goes through their servers, but it is just binary, there is no "sound" as such. The forth article is
"Online piracy is the unauthorized uploading of a copyrighted sound recording and making it available to the public, or downloading a sound recording from an Internet site, even if the recording isn't resold."
Notice "copyrighted sound recording". They don't make the sound available to the public, they make the link and pass the binary digits. Now, they can argue that at any one point in the chain that their server has only a few IP packets on their server, not a specific sound track, and nothing that the RIAA can lay claims to (how many bits of a song do you need before you become a copyright infringer? one? wow, everyone must be copyrighting.) Napster doesn't make it available to the public, we do. They just aid the distribution.
Oh, and their server is not an "Internet site."
c0rarc
Just get a software that can clock sites and block the Akamai servers. It's easy. Don't know what all the fuss is about.
Just expensive for non-US customers, phone bills and all :(
c0rarc
I am a guy geek (boo hiss)that finds many women unable and unwilling to listen when trying to explain something to them about computers. This ISN'T their fault though, many of them have been steered away from technology and even science (although the latter is changing rapidly, thankfully), prefering to go down the roots of languages. This is what happened to my girlfriend, who has just finished her degree in translation (French, English, German). The question now is who is more intelligent? I personally don't like labeling people better than someone else, no matter what they do, whether farmer or director because:
No farmer=no food=no director.
If I were to answer the question, I would say that she is more intelligent. Reasons? I know C++, C, Pascal, VC++ etc. I can program quite happily in them. Learning a computer language has a lot of similarities with learning languages, but she can go from one to the other, mid-sentence. She translates one to the other on-the-fly. Not many geeks can say that they can convert a C++ code into Pascal on-the-fly. We have to examine the code, she just spits it out as though it is completely natural.
Women are very adept to languages because they have been forced to progress and specialise in that direction more than technological. I have no doubt that a women with the same education and years of experience of a computer language would probably out-code a lot of males.
What a lot of teachers and males don't realise is that by introducing more women into the field of computers not only re-balances the subject, but gives a different approach to the subject, thereby increasing the possibility of finding unthought of possibilities. For proof just look at some of the work that women have brought to the medical and scientific community. Amazing. I can't say that I haven't had my fair share of digs at women for following computing in my early years, but now that I have experienced working with female colleages, I have nothing but respect for them, they have had to work twice as hard to get to the same position as me, and I truly believe that that is wrong.
c0rarc
Sort of explains the Americain society doesn't it! Keep them fit and healthy, able to shoot a gun, but don't give them too much information. That way they can't undermine the state and they can be used as shields when needed. c0rarc
I can confirm that Compaq DeskPro's are a load of junk. While working in my previous company I made an order for about 8 of these machines (the company used them before I arrived). On testing I found them to be unreliable, easily crashable, and caused greater financial loss per week in lost man hours than the cost of the system. Steer Clear. c0rarc
c0rarc
But that isn't what submarines are designed for. They are supposed to be silent attackers. They're not fast, they have a high payload and are therefore very heavy and have slow manouverability. Their only advantage being silence. That they can creep up and send a rocket up your bow before you even realise it is there. What is the point of having a submarine letting out waves from its bow? It's like giving the enemy your exact co-ordinates.
Sorry, there is no point in a military submarine for this technology. If someone puts it in there, it can be abused. You can't even run round the submarine in high alert, the shell would make to much noise, let alone a radio or e-mail water waves, which a detector could easily be developed.
c0rarc
I can't believe that such a simple little (HA HA, you should see the RAM hit for this guy) window can pose too much of a security risk, unless it is badly coded by M$ of course!
Q: When will M$ stop producing naff code and write something decent? A: The day it joins the OpenSource revolution!
Come on Microsoft, remove that stick from your anus and join the revolution, it can only do you good.
corarc
What I mean is that if I took text from someones post, included it in an e-mail to a friend, am I not breaching the copyright of that person?
Should M$ have sought the permission to do so before sending the e-mail and what rights do the posters have in sueing M$ for breach of their copyright?
'Your playing with the big boys now', Prince of Egypt, Dreamworks (c)?
c0rarc
Just to put an idea on things, did you know that America uses 1/4 of the worlds energy? That is incredible, and Americans should be ashamed of themselves.
c0rarc
You say that killing trees will do almost nothing. This makes you rather ignorant. If you want to live life wearing an oxygen mask, go ahead, lumber those trees. Not only will Carbon Monoxide (a gas which humans don't take too well to) increase, but oxygen will decrease. To enlighten your ignorance, this is due to the fact that trees breath carbon monoxide and expel oxygen. Without trees and forage, humans are as good as extinct.
Maybe you do have a reason when you say "Trees have no rights they don't think", because obviously you don't think about what you post. By your own words, you should have no rights.
c0rarc
c0rarc
The biggest problem, of which no-one has actually mentioned, is that nVidia is working so hard on getting new silicon out the door every six months that they just don't have the people to work on the drivers. This leaves the people with current GeForce cards a little annoyed after shelling out over 200 quid for the card. Agreed, the card performs well and I am happy with it, but the card has functionality that isn't even implemented in the drivers yet! Why do hardware houses insist on releasing their products before their driver has the capability to exploit the hardware built into the card?
My next card will probably not be another nVidia, unless, of course, they're support and drivers are improved drastically. This is exactely the problem ATI faced, luckily they had a large OEM base that supported them.
To make my point more valid, I used to work for the company behind the SuperFX chip for the Super Nintendo (used of Starfox and a few others), which progressed onto a core for the old Cyrix chip (the one with the graphics built into the chip). I know that when the silicon is being designed, the old drivers are nowhere near as supported due to the fact that people are working on the software for the new silicon.
c0rarc
As to not be dependant on a single business for our software in the commission, it was decided to use netscape as the standard browser, and the microsoft browser was hidden in the depths of our configuration so that the user couldn't use it. While still using an old e-mail (Route400)it was decided to move to an Exchange/Outlook configuration. To do so requires the installation of Internet Explorer 5.01, Outlook AND outlook express (outlook uses some of the code from express for its POP handling). As we needed to install completely IE5 there was no choice but to make IE5 the standard here, thereby knocking netscape for six.
This is exactly the reason why microsoft has tied the 3 softwares together originally, and why they tied them with the OS. They achieved their goal of stifling the competitor.
Now, what needs to be done is not to split the company up willy nilly, but in a useful way:
Section 1: OS family of products including Windows 95/98 and Windows 2000 and any updates. Interface documentation (API's) being freely accessible to anyone who wishes to develop using them. Source code available for the OS (but not with a licence to compile into usable OS) so that it can be examined and scrutanized (to check for hidden functionality).
Section 2: Office suite of programs plus other software (games, autoroute, encarta etc), not including outlook and online tools. Interaction with OS being employed using the freely available API's.
Section 3: Internet accessing applications. Internet Explorer, media player, msn messenger etc. ALL should be freely accesible source code, freely available for modification as long as licence held to use application. This means the user can personlize his/her version if he/she desires. I believe that the internet should be a free speech/free expression area and as such accessing software should also be in the same vain.
Section 4: Mail tools and other servers. Outlook, outlook express, Exchange server and other servers (IIS, FTP, TELNET, etc.)
This would make four companies which do not have much need to stay together. Each domain could advance in their technology before the other catches on. Competitors will have a much smaller mountain to climb as they do not have to compete against a whole OS with all the trimmings such as Windows is.
Just my two pennies worth,
c0rarc
"Because most of you are a bunch of fucking communists who haven't any real ideas about the way the world works..."
Hardly democratic that viewpoint. Your attack on communism in this way shows that you know nothing about it, only what the US Government spoon feeds you. If you want to know a little more about what you flame then maybe you should get a copy of the Communist Manifesto by Karl Marx and Frederick Engels (available free online). You may not agree with what they say but you may find that you actually learn something about how countries work, society and how the so called democratic society everyone is bantering on about has never been acheived anywhere in the world. If you look at the details you shall see that the US, the governing power of democracy, is only a capitalistic society. Guess what happens when you attain a pure capitalistic society? That's right, you have a dictatorship (not to be confused with communism and especially marxism). Think about it.
Now you've thought about it I shall explain. The power is not in the hands of the government anymore. If you look at recent history you will find that the power lies in International Organizations. Not only do they have a law in their own right (they are answerable to their founding countries laws and International law) but they also buy politicians, I quote from your mail:
"Microsoft donated millions of dollars to the Democrats over the years - and what did it get them? An anti-trust suit."
Why do you think Microsoft wanted the Democrats in power? Do you really believe that it is because they believe in Democracy? If you do then you are naive. I think you will find that it has more to do with the fact that the Democratic party either turned a blind eye to the business practice of MS (remember it wasn't the government which started the anti-trust case, it was a number of states which lobbied for it) or that MS benefited in another way. Bill Gates does not do anything for nothing, we have seen that, we can prove that. His donations to charity only occur when he's in trouble with the government. Coincidence? I think not.
In this day and age there are more and more people thinking that life would be better if we worked for each other than for ourselves. I have seen people earning extremely high salaries and be extremely unhappy, and seen volunteer help workers with a roof over their head and enough food in their stomach that are extremely happy. Don't fool yourself into believing that money (or so-called democracy) is good. It isn't. The open-source movement is a goal that I hope will be achieved as I believe it is a step in the right direction, where information is free, something else the US and UK government are trying to stop.
Yes you heard right. Why do you think that the US doesn't allow more than 128bit encryption out of the US (only recently happened)? If I choose to write some information (freedom of speech and everything) than shouldn't I be able to present it in any form I like, even encrypted? The NSA listen in on most of the US telephone calls, the Information Bill in the UK gives police the right to request encryption keys without a warrant, on failure you get a 2 year sentence, even if you have legitemely forgotten your keys. When will people wake up and realize that Government in the western world are taking away your freedom not giving it. So much for your constitution.
c0rard
If you are willing to allow a small number of people (governments) to control what we can and cannot do, including expression of speech, then you might as well cross out your Christian faith and put the Bible on the censored list. I mean if anything is brainwashing our young into violence it must be that. To put the point really across, are you suggesting that the Christian Faith (along with all it's siblings) is not race-hate? Numerous times within the Bible you will find coloured people referred to as animals among other things. Now if this isn't race hate I don't know what is. What about the crusades, violence in the vain attempt to bring (read force here) more people to the religion? What about the hanging of witches and strange poeple? Spanish Inquisition? God, the list goes on. Don't slam someone because they wish to be able to live in a society that is free. If anything, the church is attempting to change the world into a militaristic society (what with popes, bishops, clergy men, priests etc.) Let us not forget the history of the church either, it isn't pretty. c0rarc
Secondly, why use the name X-Box? It seems as though they are trying to confuse people about Linux. What better way to do so than by creating something with a name like X-Box, when Linux and X-Windows is stamping out Microsoft machines left-right and centre?
That's all,
c0rarc
What I want to know is the bonus on offer to Jack Velenti to pull this off. I mean he can hardly sit there having done some 40 odd flights in the desperate attempt to free us from slavery and communism to slap us on the face after a couple of generations telling us to behave and do as we are told.
We need to end this trend to believe that more is good, go back to roots (and I don't mean go and live in a cave), enjoy living instead of fighting over something that nobody is quite sure of who owns, if anyone, something. Jack Valenti should step down and let some younger talent into the picture, to bring some fresh meat as it were, to the argument. Maybe then we may see a change in attitude of "what is mine is mine, and what is yours is mine".
c0rarc
Sorry, let me get this right. The license to play at home requires you to use the player they tell you to use? I can't even write my OWN player? Isn't this a restriction of my liberty? I buy the license to PLAY the disk, NOT to dictate HOW I should play the disk. c0rarc
Welcome to capitalism, I hope you enyoy the ride, because you're not getting off until the fat man sings. Democracy my arse. c0rarc
The reasoning behind this is simple. If the MPAA feel the necessity to provide software that will only run on certain OS's or players, don't you think that this comes under using a monopolistic position to push other software (e.g. Microsoft Windows, Philips, Sony etc.) into the forefront as a monopolistic company? If this was the case then I think you'll find the result would be that there would be one company (or a selected few) which would control everything (a la communism). Is this what you would prefer. Don't get me wrong, communism is not (as in Marxist communism) a bad idea in a lot of areas, but it does have some serious problems.
Additionally, again, when you buy media it gives you a licence to run the software, not to enforce what you can run it on. If the major suppliers of software don't feel as though the development of software for a minority system is profitable enough, your stuffed. This is large conglomerates forceing people into a channel without any choice. Where is your sense of consumerism?
Unlike the large corporations we are not forcing them to opensource everything. If they decide to opensource then so be it, we do not demand it, all we ask is that the ability to allow the lesser people a chance to use a product which, in essence, you have paid your dues.
Besides which, if you look at copyright law for software (and patents for that matter), you cannot copyright mathematical equations and functions, only ideas and concepts. This means that DeCSS in itself is copyright (except the mathematical section of the decryption) to whomever has written it and as such is quite capable of countersuing for damages. It was wrong to bring this case up in the first place and hence wrong to have taken (i think stolen is a better word) Jon Johansens machine. Apparently he didn't even write it! c0rarc
Also, is there no European Law to provide safety from American capitalism? Maybe a European Court hearing is in order? Ooops, that costs money, er, another way to stop independant people from fighting back?
Does anyone actually know of a site that is actively (lawfully) doing anything about this? If there isn't maybe it is worth considering making a group to actively attack the association. I am willing to do my part, are you? E-mail me with suggestions at c0rarc@hotmail.com. c0rarc
Good point. Obviously as you all spend your time writing useless remarks (specifically Katz) you don't actually get time to read books, you know those letters on PAPER, kinda stuck together with glue sort of thing. If any of you have read "Brave New World" by Aldous Huxley you'd have a little understanding of the real implications here. Spend the time to read this book, it is worth it.