Our service has two big fan groups: People who have never filed a request, and people who file a lot and would like help tracking. For either, if we can save them a half hour hunting for how to fill out the request, to remember to follow up, to sort out which documents went to which request, to figure out where to send the request, we think $4 is a fantastic value. If your time is worth less than that, hopefully we can serve as a good resource just for reference purposes.
Right now, we manually help people with the appeals process, and can recommend lawyers we've worked with in the past if it comes to a lawsuit. It's definitely the trickier part, but we recently launched a free question and answer tool (https://www.muckrock.com/questions/) in addition to our individual support. Hope that helps.
Processing all the requests and appeals across the federal government cost $412,647,829.53 in FY 2010:
http://www.justice.gov/oip/foiapost/fy-2011-annual-report-summary.pdf
We hope to reduce these costs by eliminating the need for duplicitous requests, since everything requested through MuckRock is eventually made public. The federal government also has a system for recouping fees from requesters.
Michael here from MuckRock. Nobody else does what we do in the US for free. We lick the stamps, send the envelopes, scan the documents when they come back, and help post them. Hundreds of our users and thousands of our visitors find this to be a valuable service, but if you don't want to use us,we make that easy to: We've got thousands of request templates you can copy and paste for your own use, and a public database of agency contacts that's much more comprehensive than anything else we've seen.
Any particular concerns we can address, please let me know. But for the record, over the past 3 years, we've spent about $30 on advertising, all on Google AdWords. Wasn't worth it.
Absolutely, and you've come up with a great point. If they are scanning and replacing ads, then sure (since as you point out they lose common carrier status) they can scan a) warez b) pirated music/movies c) illegal porn d) libelous material, at least at some levels.
By editing some material they substantially endanger their rights to distribute all material, per what I was taught in Intro to Internet Law (could be outdated by now) and ISP's won't have many customers if you can't download your mp3z.
Hard? No. Extremely unscalable, particularly at the ISP level? Absolutely, plus that's opening another whole can of worms that most ISPs (today) aren't willing to open (see above re: private banking information concerns, for example).
Of course, who would have thought they'd have the sheer chutzpah to replace other sites ads and, you know, threaten the very basis of much of the Internet economy? I sure didn't, even knowing it was technically possible.
Regardless as to how disgusting the photo may be, Congress has no authority to restrict speech - period. Trade secrets? Shouting fire in a crowded theater? Libel? Harassment?
Speech is RELATIVELY free here, and I'd argue that it is a lot freer than in most countries, but it is still, to a degree, regulated. You can't print random lies about people, for example.
And while I think there is a lot of dangerous ground here, what about the hypothetical of a child molester using GIMP to edit pictures of a real six-year-old performing sex acts on him and he then publishes it.
There are real damages done here, for example, to the six-year-old, and I think many (though not all) people would agree that kind of act should be clearly prohibited.
<quote>You can create a virtual entity that your friends work under</quote>
Multiple people working on software under one entity's name? Psh, the idea would never catch on. Everyone knows corporations were a failed experiment in 17th-century France, never able to be used for a practical purpose.
Such a system was also mentioned, decades before, in some of Heinlein's writing. The idea always appealed to me, but it has very interesting legal ramifications. Whose policing data leakage? How to authenticate, or how to price? The Knol model has all of that built right in: The more popular, the more money.
Right, but the risk of that investment is still relatively large and for it to pay off in a meaningful way, you have to be the only one or one a few people with that information. Having it credibly posted on a blog is likely to dampen the pre-announcement growth (like this year) and lessen the financial loss (I don't know if it was lower).
It's free and they don't spam you, and Ars Technica oversimplifies a lot of points or just plain misrepresents them. I won't get into how much the Slashdot summary distorts the Ars Technica coverage...
The report states that ODF files can't due all the things OOXML does, which means it won't meet the needs of most large, established enterprises. If you've ever worked on professional-looking reports, or worse imported reports, you'll realize this is pretty quickly obvious.
HOWEVER, the reports two takeaway points are: Both XML-based standards are a huge step in the right direction that allow capabilities for the enterprise impossible with proprietary formats that aren't easily readable.
The SECOND takeaway point is actually that Google docs and other SaaS might make this format war moot, which is anti-Microsoft if anything.
Can the press print copywrited material? Yes, with impunity if they follow fair use news-worthiness rules. Google it.
Can the press print libel? Yes. If they source it properly they can even print it without being sued, but unlike in Britain, America does not have prior restraint so they are free to print it... if they can afford the consequences.
Can the press advertise cigarettes? Yup. Read magazines much?
Can the press print a detailed how to make highly explosive material? Yup, and they do it all the time... anarchist rags, mostly, but during the cold war some papers/magazines printed details on making nukes.
Since LAME violates several mp3 patents, besides the obvious LGPL violations (if they are distributing LaME, which is disputed) Sony is violating several more people's rights. LAME is ONLY available for non-commercial, educational use. This would be a glaring violation (hence the reason that few distros ship (especially free ones) with mp3 support (legally)).
Bittorrent is NOT an itty-bitty part of the internet. It makes up (or for a while at least, made up) 35% of internet usage. The point is, DNS is more or less a centralized internet phonebook. You can do without the original yellowpages right? Why not let different companies host competing DNS services, and let the market decide?
Ok, I don't really think that is a good idea, but honestly, for all the heat the U.S. has been taking, Europe is a lot worse at allowing freedom of speach. The gov. has fully respected the system, tracking down owners of servers rather than shutting down the DNS listing. That is the only way to ensure this stuff stays free and open. We have absolutely no guarantee that political speach, no matter how odious to us, will remain protected under the U.N., and recent politics in Europe, Africa and ESPECIALLY Security Council China point to a censored net.
Alright, I know these don't really exist on slashdot, but somebody has to care about ethics and standards. First of all, the editorial blurb: "detailing how Blu-Ray drives for the Playstation 3" will cost Sony $100. Great, except the article has a) no sources b) no details. Fuad Abazovic is one of the register's better reporters, but that means he loosely bases his stories on reality. MS gets a 50% bulk discount on their DVD drives?
<p>Sorry buddy, that's really low discount. DVD-RW is $50 retail, so MS can probably buy them in bulk for a QUARTER of that price. Retail is typically a 100% plus markup already of what the individual store pays, so when MS buys in bulk for XBox, they typically pay a quarter of what stores pay. And why does Sony NOT get that discount, still having to pay full retail $100? Dunno, but that sure is odd considering Sony OWNS BLU RAY. <p>For emphasis: SONY OWNS BLU RAY. So for their own damn game system they pay cost, which is -- maybe, maybe 10%? At a high estimate? <p>Abazovic hears "$100" blu ray drive and runs with it. Fine, it's his job to sensationalize for a crappy e-zine. But you deserve the facts (ugh, that just sounded like MS' campaign...)
ZDNet didn't interview RMS. The Sydney Morning Herald did. Some ZDNet hack simply rewrote the article, stole the intellectual property from the SMH, and republished it. An Australian journalist got off his ass, tracked down RMS, asked him some questions that are far above the average reporter Linux literacy, and now Slashdot grants all the advertising revenue to ZDNet, while it could have encouraged the SMH to run more open source/Gnu/Linux Kernal news by showing that running such new makes them a profit. Instead, the reporter learns that your article is just going to get ripped off you if you put the time and energy into learning about open source, and instead focus on quilting guilds.
Of course, the SMH might also have just ripped off of an RMS press release, but then ZDNet is TWICE removed from the source, so why not just post the damn SMH link? It's non-reg? And it's a hell of a lot more independent media than ZDNet, which isn't really a news source, fellas. Thanks.
Interesting?! Modded interesting!??? Funny, maybe, troll, probably, but here's what drupal is: an online, open source, content management system. You can run newspapers from it (I do), blogs (most people), or getfirefox promotional webpages. But this comment is not "interesting," it's "nonsensical" (which I also happen to find "funny").
Right. Sorry, but you don't have much experience in publishing, do you? To make money, they have to charge that much (no, not for potter, but for 99 percent of the books out there on more limited release). It's not a damn DVD, which costs 10 cents ad infinum. If they were to drop the price on potter, it'd hurt the sales of other books. There's no book collusion cartel: anybody interested in cartel'ing wouldn't be in publishing. I'm not against buying used books (I've got 30 books currently checked out from the library), but to imply a a pricing scheme as you do is just ridiculous. Publishers are going out of business left and run. If they get a harry potter, it could mean the difference between a round of layoffs and a small christmas bonus. They do it because they love books, not for money.
I think the submitter wasn't seriously suggesting DRM, but rather trying to say that this was some sort of DRM. You're right, of course, that it isn't. Neither is an armored truck, nor a safe. They're all just plain security.
Course, tinfoil hat sells better on slashdot, especially when sprinked with crappy RMS sci-fi (no seriously, it's terrible writing. Terrible.).
One point to remember, however, is that this money on extra security isn't being wasted. First of all, it decreases the chance that a pirated copy will hit the net before the books hit shelves nationally. The ONLY way potter will lose sales is if an advance copy hits the internet a few days before its for sale, and eager readers read the entire thing online, and then no longer see a point in reading it. Otherwise, the convenience of a book far outweighs the extra cost, and people will just buy the book over reading it on their monitor, especially kids.
Secondly, the extra security has gotten Rawlings front page articles on CNN, NYT, BBC, etc. etc. building up the book hype. A SoHo Potter celebration wouldn't make all these news sources; but coupled with the extra security, all the other potter crap gets free press too as article fluff. Just gotta be savvy when playing the game.
From the Article: "Those services have yet to catch fire with the public, in part because the films are delivered over the Internet."
Which is why there is an incredibly low amount of movie pirating over the "internet." So low, that only 1/3 of the internet is used up by this "bittorrent" thing that most "movie pirates" use. Christ, journalism's in a sad, sad state when this crud gets past editors and printed as "fact." Films over the internet is inherently bad? No, slow transfers over the internet, yes. Big difference. Not that slashdot.org has better editing, but...
Umm. Right. Thank you for the +3 Insightful (+5 by the time I post this?) Socialist Diatrabe. However, most of us have jobs that require these "toys." Yes, yes, I know you too have some sort of job, where you require fax machines, where you are mercilessly spammed, poor baby. But many of us live a "mobile lifestyle" where connectivity isn't an option: it's necessity.
Verizon is the best national coverage, which could mean the difference between a sale and a customer lost. If this is what putting bread on the table requires, we don't really have a choice about refusing service for ideological reasons. And since we're forced to get a crippled product, hacking puts pressure on the manufacturer to improve their product (Don't believe me? Look at XBMC and the corporate media centers that came out shortly after). OK, so sue me, I live in Amerika, a capistali$t society, but quite frankly, I want a good product. You call it frivilous toys, I call being able to sync my ubuntu address book with my verizon phone a business advantage that will help me better serve my customers and myself.
And what the hell is wrong with reproduction? Move out of your parents basement for god's sake.
Actually, I would. <p>*Slaps self in the face with a salmon* <p> However, I'd also like to see more of that stuff put on the "specs" page rather than hidden somewhere. And what does crosstool cross-compiling support mean exactly? And will it, most importantly, sync with linux? Many linux devices aren't easily compatible with linux distros, which is annoying to users. Your device doesn't seemed targed at that type of user, which is fine. I wasn't meaning to rail on the device (ok, I was, because I think it's a bad idea), but the idea that it was a major breakthrough for linux as the brief implied seemed a bit simple. I'm starting up my own business repackaging open source product to non-techies, so I understand, but the over-vagueness on details generally portends: linux users are SOL.
Slashdot Mirror
Did you read the piece? She was beaten repeatedly, and the digital component is what kept her trapped in the relationship.
Right now, we manually help people with the appeals process, and can recommend lawyers we've worked with in the past if it comes to a lawsuit. It's definitely the trickier part, but we recently launched a free question and answer tool (https://www.muckrock.com/questions/) in addition to our individual support. Hope that helps.
Processing all the requests and appeals across the federal government cost $412,647,829.53 in FY 2010: http://www.justice.gov/oip/foiapost/fy-2011-annual-report-summary.pdf We hope to reduce these costs by eliminating the need for duplicitous requests, since everything requested through MuckRock is eventually made public. The federal government also has a system for recouping fees from requesters.
Michael here from MuckRock. Nobody else does what we do in the US for free. We lick the stamps, send the envelopes, scan the documents when they come back, and help post them. Hundreds of our users and thousands of our visitors find this to be a valuable service, but if you don't want to use us,we make that easy to: We've got thousands of request templates you can copy and paste for your own use, and a public database of agency contacts that's much more comprehensive than anything else we've seen. Any particular concerns we can address, please let me know. But for the record, over the past 3 years, we've spent about $30 on advertising, all on Google AdWords. Wasn't worth it.
Absolutely, and you've come up with a great point. If they are scanning and replacing ads, then sure (since as you point out they lose common carrier status) they can scan a) warez b) pirated music/movies c) illegal porn d) libelous material, at least at some levels. By editing some material they substantially endanger their rights to distribute all material, per what I was taught in Intro to Internet Law (could be outdated by now) and ISP's won't have many customers if you can't download your mp3z.
Hard? No. Extremely unscalable, particularly at the ISP level? Absolutely, plus that's opening another whole can of worms that most ISPs (today) aren't willing to open (see above re: private banking information concerns, for example). Of course, who would have thought they'd have the sheer chutzpah to replace other sites ads and, you know, threaten the very basis of much of the Internet economy? I sure didn't, even knowing it was technically possible.
<quote>You can create a virtual entity that your friends work under</quote>
Multiple people working on software under one entity's name? Psh, the idea would never catch on. Everyone knows corporations were a failed experiment in 17th-century France, never able to be used for a practical purpose.
Such a system was also mentioned, decades before, in some of Heinlein's writing. The idea always appealed to me, but it has very interesting legal ramifications. Whose policing data leakage? How to authenticate, or how to price? The Knol model has all of that built right in: The more popular, the more money.
Right, but the risk of that investment is still relatively large and for it to pay off in a meaningful way, you have to be the only one or one a few people with that information. Having it credibly posted on a blog is likely to dampen the pre-announcement growth (like this year) and lessen the financial loss (I don't know if it was lower).
It's free and they don't spam you, and Ars Technica oversimplifies a lot of points or just plain misrepresents them. I won't get into how much the Slashdot summary distorts the Ars Technica coverage ...
The report states that ODF files can't due all the things OOXML does, which means it won't meet the needs of most large, established enterprises. If you've ever worked on professional-looking reports, or worse imported reports, you'll realize this is pretty quickly obvious.
HOWEVER, the reports two takeaway points are: Both XML-based standards are a huge step in the right direction that allow capabilities for the enterprise impossible with proprietary formats that aren't easily readable.
The SECOND takeaway point is actually that Google docs and other SaaS might make this format war moot, which is anti-Microsoft if anything.
Go, read it yourself
Can the press print copywrited material?
... if they can afford the consequences.
... anarchist rags, mostly, but during the cold war some papers/magazines printed details on making nukes.
Yes, with impunity if they follow fair use news-worthiness rules. Google it.
Can the press print libel?
Yes. If they source it properly they can even print it without being sued, but unlike in Britain, America does not have prior restraint so they are free to print it
Can the press advertise cigarettes?
Yup. Read magazines much?
Can the press print a detailed how to make highly explosive material?
Yup, and they do it all the time
And now, as I discovered 3 days ago, it has XFCE, which I installed in 10 minutes on my laptop, no hassle, no razzle-dazzle.
Smooth.
Since LAME violates several mp3 patents, besides the obvious LGPL violations (if they are distributing LaME, which is disputed) Sony is violating several more people's rights. LAME is ONLY available for non-commercial, educational use. This would be a glaring violation (hence the reason that few distros ship (especially free ones) with mp3 support (legally)).
http://try..turning..your..browser..off..only..dis play..links..mode..that..way..you..could..read..th e..rest..of..the..summary..if..your..computer..has ..a..bug..andyou..cant..turn..off..only..display.. links..mode..ill..summarize..the..summary...basica lly..flickr..is..a..site..where..you..can..post..p ictures.youtube..and..revver..because..it..is..a.. competitor..lets..you..host..onlinevideo..as..stat ed..in..the..summary...vc..means..venture..capital ist..where..people..give..you..money..to..blow..on ..hookers..andcain..while..you..promise..them..imp ossible..products..with..no..real..revenue..potent ial...sequoia..capital..is..one..of..these..ventur e..capitalist..firms./..
Bittorrent is NOT an itty-bitty part of the internet. It makes up (or for a while at least, made up) 35% of internet usage. The point is, DNS is more or less a centralized internet phonebook. You can do without the original yellowpages right? Why not let different companies host competing DNS services, and let the market decide?
Ok, I don't really think that is a good idea, but honestly, for all the heat the U.S. has been taking, Europe is a lot worse at allowing freedom of speach. The gov. has fully respected the system, tracking down owners of servers rather than shutting down the DNS listing. That is the only way to ensure this stuff stays free and open. We have absolutely no guarantee that political speach, no matter how odious to us, will remain protected under the U.N., and recent politics in Europe, Africa and ESPECIALLY Security Council China point to a censored net.
Alright, I know these don't really exist on slashdot, but somebody has to care about ethics and standards. First of all, the editorial blurb: "detailing how Blu-Ray drives for the Playstation 3" will cost Sony $100. Great, except the article has a) no sources b) no details. Fuad Abazovic is one of the register's better reporters, but that means he loosely bases his stories on reality. MS gets a 50% bulk discount on their DVD drives?
...)
<p>Sorry buddy, that's really low discount. DVD-RW is $50 retail, so MS can probably buy them in bulk for a QUARTER of that price. Retail is typically a 100% plus markup already of what the individual store pays, so when MS buys in bulk for XBox, they typically pay a quarter of what stores pay. And why does Sony NOT get that discount, still having to pay full retail $100? Dunno, but that sure is odd considering Sony OWNS BLU RAY. <p>For emphasis: SONY OWNS BLU RAY. So for their own damn game system they pay cost, which is -- maybe, maybe 10%? At a high estimate? <p>Abazovic hears "$100" blu ray drive and runs with it. Fine, it's his job to sensationalize for a crappy e-zine. But you deserve the facts (ugh, that just sounded like MS' campaign
Of course, the SMH might also have just ripped off of an RMS press release, but then ZDNet is TWICE removed from the source, so why not just post the damn SMH link? It's non-reg? And it's a hell of a lot more independent media than ZDNet, which isn't really a news source, fellas. Thanks.
Oh, and the link: http://smh.com.au/articles/2005/08/25/112456296535 8.html
"...dumbed down to meet the restrictions of every government on the world together, there would be no content at all."
Somebody beat you to it, bub.
Interesting?! Modded interesting!??? Funny, maybe, troll, probably, but here's what drupal is: an online, open source, content management system. You can run newspapers from it (I do), blogs (most people), or getfirefox promotional webpages. But this comment is not "interesting," it's "nonsensical" (which I also happen to find "funny").
Right. Sorry, but you don't have much experience in publishing, do you? To make money, they have to charge that much (no, not for potter, but for 99 percent of the books out there on more limited release). It's not a damn DVD, which costs 10 cents ad infinum. If they were to drop the price on potter, it'd hurt the sales of other books. There's no book collusion cartel: anybody interested in cartel'ing wouldn't be in publishing. I'm not against buying used books (I've got 30 books currently checked out from the library), but to imply a a pricing scheme as you do is just ridiculous. Publishers are going out of business left and run. If they get a harry potter, it could mean the difference between a round of layoffs and a small christmas bonus. They do it because they love books, not for money.
Course, tinfoil hat sells better on slashdot, especially when sprinked with crappy RMS sci-fi (no seriously, it's terrible writing. Terrible.).
One point to remember, however, is that this money on extra security isn't being wasted. First of all, it decreases the chance that a pirated copy will hit the net before the books hit shelves nationally. The ONLY way potter will lose sales is if an advance copy hits the internet a few days before its for sale, and eager readers read the entire thing online, and then no longer see a point in reading it. Otherwise, the convenience of a book far outweighs the extra cost, and people will just buy the book over reading it on their monitor, especially kids.
Secondly, the extra security has gotten Rawlings front page articles on CNN, NYT, BBC, etc. etc. building up the book hype. A SoHo Potter celebration wouldn't make all these news sources; but coupled with the extra security, all the other potter crap gets free press too as article fluff. Just gotta be savvy when playing the game.
Which is why there is an incredibly low amount of movie pirating over the "internet." So low, that only 1/3 of the internet is used up by this "bittorrent" thing that most "movie pirates" use. Christ, journalism's in a sad, sad state when this crud gets past editors and printed as "fact." Films over the internet is inherently bad? No, slow transfers over the internet, yes. Big difference. Not that slashdot.org has better editing, but ...
Full disclosure: I'm a journalist.
Verizon is the best national coverage, which could mean the difference between a sale and a customer lost. If this is what putting bread on the table requires, we don't really have a choice about refusing service for ideological reasons. And since we're forced to get a crippled product, hacking puts pressure on the manufacturer to improve their product (Don't believe me? Look at XBMC and the corporate media centers that came out shortly after). OK, so sue me, I live in Amerika, a capistali$t society, but quite frankly, I want a good product. You call it frivilous toys, I call being able to sync my ubuntu address book with my verizon phone a business advantage that will help me better serve my customers and myself.
And what the hell is wrong with reproduction? Move out of your parents basement for god's sake.
Actually, I would.
<p>*Slaps self in the face with a salmon*
<p>
However, I'd also like to see more of that stuff put on the "specs" page rather than hidden somewhere. And what does crosstool cross-compiling support mean exactly? And will it, most importantly, sync with linux? Many linux devices aren't easily compatible with linux distros, which is annoying to users. Your device doesn't seemed targed at that type of user, which is fine. I wasn't meaning to rail on the device (ok, I was, because I think it's a bad idea), but the idea that it was a major breakthrough for linux as the brief implied seemed a bit simple. I'm starting up my own business repackaging open source product to non-techies, so I understand, but the over-vagueness on details generally portends: linux users are SOL.