Its not the same thing. This is trying to say that you have freedom of speech as long as everybody else agrees with it.
Real freedom of speech (which is truly rare) means you can say what you want, even if it makes people mad, is an affont to their dignity, and generally is insulting.
That is scary to most people and is why its generally not allowed.
Maybe people now understand what rebels the US founding fathers really were. They were for guns, free speech, government had no power over individuals conduct.
Maybe for playstation and N64, but RDRAM based PC's are routinely slower than their DDR counterparts.
I wonder if PS2 were being designed today if they would still use RDRAM? Probably not. It was fashionable when it was designed, but now its an evolutionary dead-end.
When you add in their higher price and lower performance, RDRAM's time has come and gone.
"If I create something, as the creator I have the right to do what I like with it"
This is simply not true in the sense you mean it.
Copyright law doesn't give you unlimited power of distribution over your works, it is a limited license that gives not only you, but the consumer a specific set of rights as well (i.e. fair use being one of those rights).
That's what's wrong with DMCA; its essentially an end run around copyright law by giving license owners complete control over their work.
Understand that as a license owner, you are free to encrypt and put whatever restrictions you want on your work, but don't ask the government, an instrument of the people, to enforce your restrictions.
Re:CSS if not a copyright enforcement device
on
DVD Case Follow-Up
·
· Score: 1
Thank you for stating this again.
CSS seems to be a way to enforce localization of the disks, and it prevents unlicensed players from being produced.
CSS doesn't prevent the user from making copies to tape, that's the purpose of macrovision. And since there is no cheap, reliable way of copying DVDs in a home setting, you quickly conclude that CSS has nothing to do with the protection of content.
The larger question that no one want to talk about is why the US government is the collection agent and protection racket for record and movie companies. There's more than a whiff of corruption about the entire thing.
Isn't the point of this announcement to try to freeze the X-Box and Nintendo's Cube?
Microsoft's got the money and guts to stay in it for the long haul, and Nintendo owns its own software development and characters.
And finally, where's the killer games for PS2, never mind the PS3?
1) In the amount of time you took to write this article you could've deleted 200-300 spam emails.
2) Don't you think throwing people in jail for spam is a LITTLE bit extreme?
3) Do you really want to register email addresses with the government?
I get 150 emails a day, perhaps 5 of them are spam, they get deleted so quickly I can't remember doing it. Do you really get that much spam a day that its worth throwing out the 1st amendment?
Aren't there serious issues to discuss? Like say, the French taxing CD-R's?
"Brian Milburn, president of Cybersitter, says that one of the worst things about this job is stumbling upon sites featuring photos of severed body parts. Gross. "The Internet is a big toilet," Milburn says. "If we had kids at home, I wouldn't let them use it." "
-------
Now you don't have to wonder why blocking software product are so screwed up.
Within the past 12 months, MS started enforcing a little noticed portion of their OEM license: effectively, you had to use the machine in the configuratino delivered, or the MS license was no longer valid.
Large corporations were typically buying a name brand PC, and then ghosting a new image onto it so it met a corporate standard desktop. No problem, since the customer just bought an OEM license, right?
Wrong.
MS makes customers pay twice for the same OS in this situation.
My guess is this is an electronic way of enformcing this with corporations that don't agree with this interpretation of their license agreement.
The fight will come in over how you define a new PC I suppose. And yes, my guess is a hack will be discovered within 2 weeks.
On the other hand, if Win2K adoption is slow and problematic, imagine how the adoption of a copy-protected OS is going to be...
In all seriousness, I have 100's of CD's. I'd be glad to dump my 50+ CD stereo jukebox. Press the "xmas playlist" button and I could sleep through the entire holidays.
...have the record companies considering lowering the cost of CD's?
By my calculation, CD's should cost about $8 at retail based on music prices of about 25 years ago.
Software manufacturers went down this path about piracy prevention about 15 years ago and in the end Borland showed everybody that if you reduce prices, the market grows larger, everybody is happier, and you don't need copy protection.
it's with the impicit understanding that if you want to own a copy of that song you will buy the CD
The important question is "What can I do with the copy of the song I own". What are my right now that I "own" a CD.
I can play it for myself.
I can play it for my girlfriend.
I can make a copy for myself.
Can I loan it to my girlfriend?
Can my girlfriend make a copy for herself?
What if its some random person I meet. Can I loan them my copy? Can they make a copy?
The existence of Napster has raised all these questions. On the internet the act of listening to music is physically equivalent to copying music.
The trouble is, there ain't no way to get around it ("Its over Johnny, Its over!"). The question now isn't whether its right or moral, the question is "how do I make money under the new rules?".
I have a sneaking suspicion that the RIAA would like to change things so you have to pay everytime you listen to a song.
Everything else from them is a delaying tactic until they figure out how do accomplish that.
I guess I'm too dense to see how you can make logical links to songs anywhere within a set.
When I create a new set and then copy songs into it, does it copy the song, or does it create a link? I'm looking at the software right now, and whats implied is that copying a song physically creates two copies of it.
""menu system feels kind of poorly done." Um, care to explain that? How would you do the menus?"
I don't know; I suck at user interfaces too.
But in some ways it feels like I'm missing one level of menus; in other ways, the hierarchy feels too rigid. Its almost as if I want variable levels of menus depending on the purpose.
Also, I want to be able to define sets of music. That is, I want to store music hierarchicially, but I want to define play lists that bear no realationship to the physical structure.
I'm trembling just thinking about typing this, because I know the development community is divided on this, and it verges on being off topic here. But software patents are just a bad idea on so many levels:
1) The patent office isn't qualified to judge what is an original idea in the field of software. Perhaps no one is.
2) Software patents are relatively new; there's no evidence they aid the state of the art or society in general. We have plenty of evidence to the contrary, however.
3) Software patents never help small developers. If a small developer gets an important software patent, a larger company will almost always show prior art and have the patent revoked. If a large developer gets a patent, then its used as a club.
4) Software is at its core the representation of an idea or algorithm. However, the idea of patenting a particular string of literal code doesn't make sense at all, so we're now in the business of granting patents to ideas.
The reason for governments granting patents isn't to reward the inventor; it has to be balanced against other effects it has on society. In the case of software patents, I can't see any positive effect to come from it.
To those who insist on software patents; would it make more sense to limit both the scope and length of time? Perhaps a software patent should only be granted for 1 year.
"This came out about 3 months ago first...and what they don't tell you is the $800 cost, and the fact that you can't put any of your pre-existing MP3s on it. You MUST make new ones with the included software"
Sorry, this is not correct (and yes, I have done this).
I think I got one of the first...serial 327 or something like that.
Anyway, its a cool product; it feels beta, but I can live with it.
Here's the good parts:
a)The drive only comes on to fill the 12M buffer in the thing. That means about every ten minutes the drive comes on for 10 seconds.
b) It uses the franhaufer codec, which a lot of people (myself included) is the best.
c) It has a big LCD screen, so you can display a lot of info about the songs playing.
d) It uses USB
Here's the bad part:
1) It uses USB. That limits the xfer rate but more importantly means you can use it with Win98, period. Also, the xfer rate of USB is pitifully slow when you're talking M's of data.
2) No *nix support or even Mac support
3) The encoding takes place in the player itself.
4) You can put songs in, but you can't get them out. I understand this is to deal with various legal issues.
5) the codec encodes at a variety of rates, but not the one I consider optimal, 160. It does 128 and 192, so I have to choose either space or sound.
6) The menu system feels kind of poorly done.
7) It has no means of plugging a microphone directly into it. Thus, you can't use this as a way of capturing live music.
8) Battery life is reasonable, but all over the place. If you're moving a lot to different songs, the disk is going constantly, limiting batter life to 4 hours. If you listen to a lot of albums and songs straight through, you might get the full 10 hours from the rechargable LIon battery.
9) While playing a song, if you try to scroll through your list of songs, it will immediately jump to the song. That means you can't simultaneouly play a song and browse the 80+ hour music library. THIS IS A PAIN IN THE *SS!!!
Still, I consider this a landmark product. Its produced by a Korean company Hango. Its the coolest toy I own right now.
Slashdot Mirror
Right on the mark. This is a person who really gets it.
Its not the same thing. This is trying to say that you have freedom of speech as long as everybody else agrees with it.
Real freedom of speech (which is truly rare) means you can say what you want, even if it makes people mad, is an affont to their dignity, and generally is insulting.
That is scary to most people and is why its generally not allowed.
Maybe people now understand what rebels the US founding fathers really were. They were for guns, free speech, government had no power over individuals conduct.
Very scary stuff!
Read the article and all your questions are discussed and answered.
"RDRAM is certainly the way to go"
Maybe for playstation and N64, but RDRAM based PC's are routinely slower than their DDR counterparts.
I wonder if PS2 were being designed today if they would still use RDRAM? Probably not. It was fashionable when it was designed, but now its an evolutionary dead-end.
When you add in their higher price and lower performance, RDRAM's time has come and gone.
"If I create something, as the creator I have the right to do what I like with it"
This is simply not true in the sense you mean it.
Copyright law doesn't give you unlimited power of distribution over your works, it is a limited license that gives not only you, but the consumer a specific set of rights as well (i.e. fair use being one of those rights).
That's what's wrong with DMCA; its essentially an end run around copyright law by giving license owners complete control over their work.
Understand that as a license owner, you are free to encrypt and put whatever restrictions you want on your work, but don't ask the government, an instrument of the people, to enforce your restrictions.
Thank you for stating this again.
CSS seems to be a way to enforce localization of the disks, and it prevents unlicensed players from being produced.
CSS doesn't prevent the user from making copies to tape, that's the purpose of macrovision. And since there is no cheap, reliable way of copying DVDs in a home setting, you quickly conclude that CSS has nothing to do with the protection of content.
The larger question that no one want to talk about is why the US government is the collection agent and protection racket for record and movie companies. There's more than a whiff of corruption about the entire thing.
Isn't the point of this announcement to try to freeze the X-Box and Nintendo's Cube? Microsoft's got the money and guts to stay in it for the long haul, and Nintendo owns its own software development and characters. And finally, where's the killer games for PS2, never mind the PS3?
I'm struck by a couple things in this article:
1) In the amount of time you took to write this article you could've deleted 200-300 spam emails.
2) Don't you think throwing people in jail for spam is a LITTLE bit extreme?
3) Do you really want to register email addresses with the government?
I get 150 emails a day, perhaps 5 of them are spam, they get deleted so quickly I can't remember doing it. Do you really get that much spam a day that its worth throwing out the 1st amendment?
Aren't there serious issues to discuss? Like say, the French taxing CD-R's?
"Brian Milburn, president of Cybersitter, says that one of the worst things about this job is stumbling upon sites featuring photos of severed body parts. Gross. "The Internet is a big toilet," Milburn says. "If we had kids at home, I wouldn't let them use it." " ------- Now you don't have to wonder why blocking software product are so screwed up.
Perhaps you're right, since I have a Panasonic portable player that supports CD-R's and CD-RW. This is specifically mentioned in the manual.
Within the past 12 months, MS started enforcing a little noticed portion of their OEM license: effectively, you had to use the machine in the configuratino delivered, or the MS license was no longer valid.
Large corporations were typically buying a name brand PC, and then ghosting a new image onto it so it met a corporate standard desktop. No problem, since the customer just bought an OEM license, right?
Wrong.
MS makes customers pay twice for the same OS in this situation.
My guess is this is an electronic way of enformcing this with corporations that don't agree with this interpretation of their license agreement.
The fight will come in over how you define a new PC I suppose. And yes, my guess is a hack will be discovered within 2 weeks.
On the other hand, if Win2K adoption is slow and problematic, imagine how the adoption of a copy-protected OS is going to be...
How do I add a 20G HD to my PJB100?
In all seriousness, I have 100's of CD's. I'd be glad to dump my 50+ CD stereo jukebox. Press the "xmas playlist" button and I could sleep through the entire holidays.
Hey...its not our fault that someone tried to make money off that which is inherently not profitable.
No, seriously, as much as I like DejaNEWS, I believe it has as much to do with the downfall of usenet as the entire alt.binaries.sex hierarchy.
...have the record companies considering lowering the cost of CD's?
By my calculation, CD's should cost about $8 at retail based on music prices of about 25 years ago.
Software manufacturers went down this path about piracy prevention about 15 years ago and in the end Borland showed everybody that if you reduce prices, the market grows larger, everybody is happier, and you don't need copy protection.
Since when has Hotmail been "money-making"?
The important question is "What can I do with the copy of the song I own". What are my right now that I "own" a CD.
I can play it for myself.
I can play it for my girlfriend.
I can make a copy for myself.
Can I loan it to my girlfriend?
Can my girlfriend make a copy for herself?
What if its some random person I meet. Can I loan them my copy? Can they make a copy?
The existence of Napster has raised all these questions. On the internet the act of listening to music is physically equivalent to copying music.
The trouble is, there ain't no way to get around it ("Its over Johnny, Its over!"). The question now isn't whether its right or moral, the question is "how do I make money under the new rules?".
I have a sneaking suspicion that the RIAA would like to change things so you have to pay everytime you listen to a song.
Everything else from them is a delaying tactic until they figure out how do accomplish that.
It does do what I want.
I guess I'm too dense to see how you can make logical links to songs anywhere within a set.
When I create a new set and then copy songs into it, does it copy the song, or does it create a link? I'm looking at the software right now, and whats implied is that copying a song physically creates two copies of it.
""menu system feels kind of poorly done." Um, care to explain that? How would you do the menus?"
I don't know; I suck at user interfaces too.
But in some ways it feels like I'm missing one level of menus; in other ways, the hierarchy feels too rigid. Its almost as if I want variable levels of menus depending on the purpose.
Also, I want to be able to define sets of music. That is, I want to store music hierarchicially, but I want to define play lists that bear no realationship to the physical structure.
I'm trembling just thinking about typing this, because I know the development community is divided on this, and it verges on being off topic here. But software patents are just a bad idea on so many levels:
1) The patent office isn't qualified to judge what is an original idea in the field of software. Perhaps no one is.
2) Software patents are relatively new; there's no evidence they aid the state of the art or society in general. We have plenty of evidence to the contrary, however.
3) Software patents never help small developers. If a small developer gets an important software patent, a larger company will almost always show prior art and have the patent revoked. If a large developer gets a patent, then its used as a club.
4) Software is at its core the representation of an idea or algorithm. However, the idea of patenting a particular string of literal code doesn't make sense at all, so we're now in the business of granting patents to ideas.
The reason for governments granting patents isn't to reward the inventor; it has to be balanced against other effects it has on society. In the case of software patents, I can't see any positive effect to come from it.
To those who insist on software patents; would it make more sense to limit both the scope and length of time? Perhaps a software patent should only be granted for 1 year.
"This came out about 3 months ago first...and what they don't tell you is the $800 cost, and the fact that you can't put any of your pre-existing MP3s on it. You MUST make new ones with the included software"
Sorry, this is not correct (and yes, I have done this).
I think I got one of the first...serial 327 or something like that.
Anyway, its a cool product; it feels beta, but I can live with it.
Here's the good parts:
a)The drive only comes on to fill the 12M buffer in the thing. That means about every ten minutes the drive comes on for 10 seconds.
b) It uses the franhaufer codec, which a lot of people (myself included) is the best.
c) It has a big LCD screen, so you can display a lot of info about the songs playing.
d) It uses USB
Here's the bad part:
1) It uses USB. That limits the xfer rate but more importantly means you can use it with Win98, period. Also, the xfer rate of USB is pitifully slow when you're talking M's of data.
2) No *nix support or even Mac support
3) The encoding takes place in the player itself.
4) You can put songs in, but you can't get them out. I understand this is to deal with various legal issues.
5) the codec encodes at a variety of rates, but not the one I consider optimal, 160. It does 128 and 192, so I have to choose either space or sound.
6) The menu system feels kind of poorly done.
7) It has no means of plugging a microphone directly into it. Thus, you can't use this as a way of capturing live music.
8) Battery life is reasonable, but all over the place. If you're moving a lot to different songs, the disk is going constantly, limiting batter life to 4 hours. If you listen to a lot of albums and songs straight through, you might get the full 10 hours from the rechargable LIon battery.
9) While playing a song, if you try to scroll through your list of songs, it will immediately jump to the song. That means you can't simultaneouly play a song and browse the 80+ hour music library. THIS IS A PAIN IN THE *SS!!!
Still, I consider this a landmark product. Its produced by a Korean company Hango. Its the coolest toy I own right now.
This is the same analogy as MAPS RBL or other black hole lists. I configure my mail servers to adhere to the MAPS RBL list.
This means at certain times, various organizations are cut off from everyone adhering to MAPS RBL.
What's the legal right? Its my (organizations)server! We'll accept what we choose and reject what we choose.