I'm no stranger to journalism, both online and offline, it's part of my job. But just having your own news site running Slashcode doesn't make you a journalist Jon. Sure, you can babble on about how these youngsters are full of ideas and energy and everything else, but if it's one thing they aren't full of is EXPERIENCE and a GOOD REPUTATION. Who would you pick as your news source...someone like Walter Cronkite, who has had years of experience reporting the news and has built up a reputation as someone who knows what they're talking about, or some news site run by some teenager that merely talks about why Napster rules and why you should watch Star Wars?
Face it Jon, these open media sites you rant about don't have ANYTHING to do with media reporting. With the occasional editorial or book review not withstanding, all places like Slashdot do is merely link to some story on places like CNN or MSNBC, throw in a few extra comments, and then let the posters and the trolls take over. That isn't news reporting at all, it's just "Yeah, what they said!" reporting! And need I mention bias? When it comes down to it, if I want coverage of the Microsoft anti-trust trial, I'll turn to a site like CNN that will give me the entire story and leave me to formulate an opinion, rather than Slashdot, which is openly biased against Microsoft and only tells me what they want people to hear. When it comes down to it, I want news, not noise.
Get your heads out of the clouds Jon, you aren't fooling anyone.
If you ask me, the only people who would really put online voting to use would be the technologically-savvy people out there, i.e. the 18 to 30 crowd. And the U.S. has enough trouble getting that age group to even vote.
Before we get concerned about online voting, we should worry about even getting people to just vote.
"Metallica isn't going against MP3s now... they are going against Napster."
I realize that. But, you're missing the point here. Three years ago, Metallica said that they didn't care that their music was being distributed on the Internet in MP3 form. My question is, why are they raising such a big ruckus over it three years later? Where was Lars back in 1997 to complain that his music was being traded like a commodity, and not an art?
"The question comes up how then can we legitamize mp3s and allow all this discussion to stop about illegal copying. It seems that either it will manifest itself in advertisements, much like some streaming radio and video providers are doing or else creating a highly encrypted limited use format of encoding."
Time to respectfully disagree...
For one, slapping ads on MP3s isn't going to work well. As somebody already mentioned in this forum, people have practically become desensitized to ads on the Internet, just look at the click-thru rates for banner ads. And when you throw that banner ad into a pop-up window, you've already given yourself the kiss of death. Besides, what is going to stop someone from finding ways to removing the ads from MP3s? There are already filters out there that remove the banner ads and pop-up windows from your browsing experience, a filter that removes ads from your listening experience may not be too far off.
As for the encryption...you aren't new to Slashdot, are you?:) Remember when places like barnesandnoble.com were offering Stephen King's e-book for free on the day of its' release? People had already cracked the weak encryption on the e-books while they were still being offered for free. Unless you're talking about tossing something like 128-bit encryption on these files, forget about it. Where there's a will, there's a way, and I'll bet the farm that somebody will find a way.
IMHO, there's really only one solution to this whole problem of MP3s: the artists, the industry, and the companies like Napster have to work together to find common ground, because there is money in MP3s. I believe that the musicians out there should be compensated for their hard work, but taking the "Shut down Napster" route that Metallica is on is just counter-productive and very stupid. Everybody knows that if Napster goes down, then programs like Gnutella and Freenet will just take it's place, and the "Sue 'em 'til they die" mentality of Metallica and the RIAA isn't going to work. The cat's out of the bag on MP3 trading, and unless everybody is willing to work together, find some common ground, and adapt to the changes, this problem will remain, no matter how many Lars Ulriches, Hilary Rosens, and Howard Kings there are out there.
E-Mail...the WWW...Usenet...software...and now MP3s??? Is there anything out there the advertisers won't try to slap an annoying ad on? Enough is enough already! I get bombarded with enough ads on the web as is, I don't need to have any more ads being forced my way!
[ RANT MODE = OFF ]
But keeping on the topic here, just throwing out the ad-infected MP3s on Napster and related services isn't going to help them spread. Once someone catches on that there's an ad in their MP3, *poof*, away it goes with one simple touch of the delete key. And if everyone deletes their ad-infected MP3s, then you've just lost the propagation (sp?) that is needed for a particular MP3 to spread around Napster.
Back in 1997, Metallica had a chat on MSN. There, someone asked the band what their thoughts were on the fact that their songs were being distributed on the Internet. According to Kirk Hammett, "We don't give a fuck!"
You know, I honestly wonder why Metallica is going against MP3s now...[ insert conspiracy theory here ]
Privacy.net has an address that you can use if you have to provide an e-mail address for registering software, or anything of that sort. All you have to do is use me@privacy.net for whatever reason, and it provides a bounce message to anyone who e-mails it.
Joey: Wow Grandpa, this was how the Internet was back in your day?
Grandpa: Yep Joey, that's right, this archive shows how the Internet looked back when I was a youngster like yourself.
Joey: Wow! You know Grandpa, it's too bad what the Internet has become now. Just look at this...porno, warez kiddies, AOLers, and ads everywhere! Talk about a downward spiral.
I don't know about today's computers, but I have an Apple IIc Plus in my basement that had a toggle switch that could switch between standard and Dvorak keyboard settings. Granted, you had to switch the keycaps around to match up with the Dvorak chart provided with the Apple manual, which got really annoying after a while. But it was really funny to secretly switch it to Dvorak and listen in as an unlucky user exclaimed, "The damn keyboard is broken!"
"Yes, but did we claim that WE are the supreme innovators?"
[ puts on asbestos suit ]
No, but with the attitudes that some people in the Linux / Open Source community carry around, you would think so. Most everything I hear coming from the Open Source camp is something like this...
"Linux is the best, down with Microsoft!"
"Open source is the way to go! Look at Netscape! Did we mention 'Down with Microsoft!' yet?"
Personally, I'm sick and tired of those few zealots who choose to speak for everyone. Nearly every other thing said by ESR is related to the Impending Death of Microsoft(tm), and RMS is off in his own little world mumbling God knows what. Is it any wonder some people get turned off by this?
If you ask me, the Linux / Open Source community needs to make / improve software more than they do making up more silly ideologies. To put it simply (apologies to Camp Chaos):
"Software Good! Ideology Bad!"
Well if that doesn't make me lose karma, what will?:)
...there was actually some spammer (www.martianconsulate.com) who advertised getting tracts of land on Mars for sooper cheep(tm) prices. Too bad the spammer got LARTed a while back.
So just be warned, if we ever do colonize Mars, we may come across some clueless newbies claiming to own Martian land:)
"Of course, there's nothing stopping someone from splitting an MP3 into several files, a la Usenet pr0n."
Technically, that is true. But I doubt anyone is going to go through the time and trouble to split up their collection of, say, 100 MP3s into (figuratively) 300 zip files when they can just share them via Napster or Gnutella and be done with it.
"Of course reactions would be different, because Microsoft are hated and quite rightly so. They deserve different treatment."
Ummm, seems that your bias is showing. Figures.
"Did anyone object to spying against Hitler? Did anyone object to Hitler sending out spies?"
Oh great, someone else is trying to compare Microsoft to Hitler. Jesus fucking Christ, can't morons like you say anything about Microsoft that doesn't invoke Godwin's Law? Yes, I'm flaming you, and rightly so. Microsoft's hat may be as black as night to you, and I'm sure many have been pissed off by Blue Screens of Death, but last I checked, Bill Gates wasn't responsible for the deaths of six million people. And when he is, we'll talk.
Matter of fact, Slashdot had a story about this earlier this year, where a federal judge ruled that deep linking was OK, as long as people knew that they were going to someone else's site. The RIAA had a similar situation with Lycos' MP3 search page, but nothing came about it.
In this case, if MP3Board.com is throwing links to different FTP servers out, but people know that these sites aren't run by MP3Board.com, then doesn't that make it OK?
...it's OK to sell / auction off Nazi-related items (like uniforms, medals, pictures, and the such) as long as they're for historical and / or educational purposes only (correct me if I'm wrong). In other words, no outright propaganda.
And I'm sure that if I stole a bunch of CDs from the Wall and threw them to people in the street, that would be "promotion" too, right?
I'll agree that, in theory, Napster is a tool for promotion. But in case you didn't know, the reason for artists to promote their music is so that they can sell CDs. Sure, Napster may be "promoting" the latest Filter CD, but where's the incentive to buy it if you've downloaded the CD in MP3 anyway?
"The RIAA can keep independent music off the radio and MTV and pretty much any other mainstream 'available to everyone' promotion vehicle, but they can't keep them off Napster."
Since when has the RIAA been keeping independent music off MTV and the radio. Hell, I work at my university's radio station, and we haven't been invaded by RIAA stormtroopers saying "Play Britney Spears or you shall die!" And if you want independent music on MTV, I strongly suggest you watch 120 Minutes (a damn great show) or see if you can get M2 from your cable provider.
The real reason why you can't find independent music on the radio (commercial anyway) and MTV is because the droves of pre-pubescent teens want to see crap-ass pre-fab acts like the Backstreet Boys, 98 Degrees, and Britney Spears. I spoke with an MTV exec at a journalism conference at Columbia University when I was in high school, and I was told that MTV has basically "sold out" (as he put it), because if the kiddies want to see some boy band, MTV will flood them with it, because they're in it for the money (surprise).
As for your assumption that the RIAA is keeping down the indie labels so bad that they have to use Napster, IMHO I think it's full of shit. Sure, I can find my college rock heroes like the Fastbacks, Swallow, EDL, Simon Says, and the Jon Spencer Blues Explosion on Napster, but the results are pale in comparison to how much you can find if you search for Metallica or Dr. Dre.
Simply put...Napster is a "promotional" tool in the theoretical sense (I admit that I have bought some CDs because I downloaded the music via Napster), but it is still primarily a tool for music piracy, no matter how much RMS-like reasoning you try to coat it with. You really want to help the indie labels? Go out and buy some of their CDs, and support your local college radio stations (I guess I'm a shill for those:)). Remember, labels like Sub Pop or Kill Rock Stars don't have as much money to throw away like Geffen and Atlantic do.
You know, maybe it would be nice if we could all quit our jobs because we didn't agree with their said principles and go work in the name of freedom. But we're all not Richard Stallman (ducks to avoid flames).
If you ask me, the one reason people go to work for Microsoft is because of the money. I know one such fellow who started work out there three years ago, and on paper, he's now worth about $700,000 or so. No matter how much of a case you make for RMS-like freedom, it's not going to tear him, and probably everyone else, away from their jobs at Microsoft. You can't just walk away from a good-paying job and say "Screw you" to all of your bills, especially for those in Seattle, where the cost of living isn't exactly what you'd find in Smalltown USA.
I'd be willing to bet that a lot of Microsoft employees want to make decent software. But it's not that easy to leave a job that can make you a millionaire by the time you're thirty, and move to a smaller company or some startup that can't match what Microsoft paid.
Quick, someone set a fire in Groom Lake. Maybe the government will allow reporters to tour the facility, to alleve public fears that the fire killed off those cute little aliens.:)
Slashdot Mirror
I'm no stranger to journalism, both online and offline, it's part of my job. But just having your own news site running Slashcode doesn't make you a journalist Jon. Sure, you can babble on about how these youngsters are full of ideas and energy and everything else, but if it's one thing they aren't full of is EXPERIENCE and a GOOD REPUTATION. Who would you pick as your news source...someone like Walter Cronkite, who has had years of experience reporting the news and has built up a reputation as someone who knows what they're talking about, or some news site run by some teenager that merely talks about why Napster rules and why you should watch Star Wars?
Face it Jon, these open media sites you rant about don't have ANYTHING to do with media reporting. With the occasional editorial or book review not withstanding, all places like Slashdot do is merely link to some story on places like CNN or MSNBC, throw in a few extra comments, and then let the posters and the trolls take over. That isn't news reporting at all, it's just "Yeah, what they said!" reporting! And need I mention bias? When it comes down to it, if I want coverage of the Microsoft anti-trust trial, I'll turn to a site like CNN that will give me the entire story and leave me to formulate an opinion, rather than Slashdot, which is openly biased against Microsoft and only tells me what they want people to hear. When it comes down to it, I want news, not noise.
Get your heads out of the clouds Jon, you aren't fooling anyone.
--
microsoft.gnu
Now that would be funny...or at the very least, ironic.
--
If you ask me, the only people who would really put online voting to use would be the technologically-savvy people out there, i.e. the 18 to 30 crowd. And the U.S. has enough trouble getting that age group to even vote.
Before we get concerned about online voting, we should worry about even getting people to just vote.
Just my two cents...
--
"Are you ignorant?"
:)
No, are you?
"Metallica isn't going against MP3s now... they are going against Napster."
I realize that. But, you're missing the point here. Three years ago, Metallica said that they didn't care that their music was being distributed on the Internet in MP3 form. My question is, why are they raising such a big ruckus over it three years later? Where was Lars back in 1997 to complain that his music was being traded like a commodity, and not an art?
--
"The question comes up how then can we legitamize mp3s and allow all this discussion to stop about illegal copying. It seems that either it will manifest itself in advertisements, much like some streaming radio and video providers are doing or else creating a highly encrypted limited use format of encoding."
:) Remember when places like barnesandnoble.com were offering Stephen King's e-book for free on the day of its' release? People had already cracked the weak encryption on the e-books while they were still being offered for free. Unless you're talking about tossing something like 128-bit encryption on these files, forget about it. Where there's a will, there's a way, and I'll bet the farm that somebody will find a way.
Time to respectfully disagree...
For one, slapping ads on MP3s isn't going to work well. As somebody already mentioned in this forum, people have practically become desensitized to ads on the Internet, just look at the click-thru rates for banner ads. And when you throw that banner ad into a pop-up window, you've already given yourself the kiss of death. Besides, what is going to stop someone from finding ways to removing the ads from MP3s? There are already filters out there that remove the banner ads and pop-up windows from your browsing experience, a filter that removes ads from your listening experience may not be too far off.
As for the encryption...you aren't new to Slashdot, are you?
IMHO, there's really only one solution to this whole problem of MP3s: the artists, the industry, and the companies like Napster have to work together to find common ground, because there is money in MP3s. I believe that the musicians out there should be compensated for their hard work, but taking the "Shut down Napster" route that Metallica is on is just counter-productive and very stupid. Everybody knows that if Napster goes down, then programs like Gnutella and Freenet will just take it's place, and the "Sue 'em 'til they die" mentality of Metallica and the RIAA isn't going to work. The cat's out of the bag on MP3 trading, and unless everybody is willing to work together, find some common ground, and adapt to the changes, this problem will remain, no matter how many Lars Ulriches, Hilary Rosens, and Howard Kings there are out there.
--
[ RANT MODE = ON ]
E-Mail...the WWW...Usenet...software...and now MP3s??? Is there anything out there the advertisers won't try to slap an annoying ad on? Enough is enough already! I get bombarded with enough ads on the web as is, I don't need to have any more ads being forced my way!
[ RANT MODE = OFF ]
But keeping on the topic here, just throwing out the ad-infected MP3s on Napster and related services isn't going to help them spread. Once someone catches on that there's an ad in their MP3, *poof*, away it goes with one simple touch of the delete key. And if everyone deletes their ad-infected MP3s, then you've just lost the propagation (sp?) that is needed for a particular MP3 to spread around Napster.
*sigh* Yet another stupid marketer...
--
Back in 1997, Metallica had a chat on MSN. There, someone asked the band what their thoughts were on the fact that their songs were being distributed on the Internet. According to Kirk Hammett, "We don't give a fuck!"
You know, I honestly wonder why Metallica is going against MP3s now...[ insert conspiracy theory here ]
--
Privacy.net has an address that you can use if you have to provide an e-mail address for registering software, or anything of that sort. All you have to do is use me@privacy.net for whatever reason, and it provides a bounce message to anyone who e-mails it.
You can read more about it here.
--
Joey: Wow Grandpa, this was how the Internet was back in your day?
Grandpa: Yep Joey, that's right, this archive shows how the Internet looked back when I was a youngster like yourself.
Joey: Wow! You know Grandpa, it's too bad what the Internet has become now. Just look at this...porno, warez kiddies, AOLers, and ads everywhere! Talk about a downward spiral.
Grandpa: Joey?
Joey: Yeah Grandpa?
Grandpa:: You're still looking at the archive.
--
I don't know about today's computers, but I have an Apple IIc Plus in my basement that had a toggle switch that could switch between standard and Dvorak keyboard settings. Granted, you had to switch the keycaps around to match up with the Dvorak chart provided with the Apple manual, which got really annoying after a while. But it was really funny to secretly switch it to Dvorak and listen in as an unlucky user exclaimed, "The damn keyboard is broken!"
--
"Yes, but did we claim that WE are the supreme innovators?"
:)
[ puts on asbestos suit ]
No, but with the attitudes that some people in the Linux / Open Source community carry around, you would think so. Most everything I hear coming from the Open Source camp is something like this...
"Linux is the best, down with Microsoft!"
"Open source is the way to go! Look at Netscape! Did we mention 'Down with Microsoft!' yet?"
Personally, I'm sick and tired of those few zealots who choose to speak for everyone. Nearly every other thing said by ESR is related to the Impending Death of Microsoft(tm), and RMS is off in his own little world mumbling God knows what. Is it any wonder some people get turned off by this?
If you ask me, the Linux / Open Source community needs to make / improve software more than they do making up more silly ideologies. To put it simply (apologies to Camp Chaos):
"Software Good! Ideology Bad!"
Well if that doesn't make me lose karma, what will?
--
...there was actually some spammer (www.martianconsulate.com) who advertised getting tracts of land on Mars for sooper cheep(tm) prices. Too bad the spammer got LARTed a while back.
:)
So just be warned, if we ever do colonize Mars, we may come across some clueless newbies claiming to own Martian land
--
"Of course, there's nothing stopping someone from splitting an MP3 into several files, a la Usenet pr0n."
Technically, that is true. But I doubt anyone is going to go through the time and trouble to split up their collection of, say, 100 MP3s into (figuratively) 300 zip files when they can just share them via Napster or Gnutella and be done with it.
--
"Of course reactions would be different, because Microsoft are hated and quite rightly so. They deserve different treatment."
Ummm, seems that your bias is showing. Figures.
"Did anyone object to spying against Hitler? Did anyone object to Hitler sending out spies?"
Oh great, someone else is trying to compare Microsoft to Hitler. Jesus fucking Christ, can't morons like you say anything about Microsoft that doesn't invoke Godwin's Law? Yes, I'm flaming you, and rightly so. Microsoft's hat may be as black as night to you, and I'm sure many have been pissed off by Blue Screens of Death, but last I checked, Bill Gates wasn't responsible for the deaths of six million people. And when he is, we'll talk.
Moron.
--
Matter of fact, Slashdot had a story about this earlier this year, where a federal judge ruled that deep linking was OK, as long as people knew that they were going to someone else's site. The RIAA had a similar situation with Lycos' MP3 search page, but nothing came about it.
In this case, if MP3Board.com is throwing links to different FTP servers out, but people know that these sites aren't run by MP3Board.com, then doesn't that make it OK?
Thoughts?
--
"Windows was a clone of the Mac. (and other sources)"
[ Puts on asbestos suit ]
And the Mac was a clone of the Xerox PARC GUI. What's your point?
--
...it's OK to sell / auction off Nazi-related items (like uniforms, medals, pictures, and the such) as long as they're for historical and / or educational purposes only (correct me if I'm wrong). In other words, no outright propaganda.
No wonder people hate the French...
raunchola (at) hushmail (dot) com
When you post a story that involves a link to the NY Times website, how about just prefixing the "www" with "partners" (http:// partners.nytimes.com/library/tech/00/05/circuits/a rticles/18aban.html), for the benefit of those who haven't registered, or don't want to?
Muchas gracias...now back to our program already in progress...
raunchola (at) hushmail (dot) com
"Napster is an avenue for music 'promotion'."
:)). Remember, labels like Sub Pop or Kill Rock Stars don't have as much money to throw away like Geffen and Atlantic do.
And I'm sure that if I stole a bunch of CDs from the Wall and threw them to people in the street, that would be "promotion" too, right?
I'll agree that, in theory, Napster is a tool for promotion. But in case you didn't know, the reason for artists to promote their music is so that they can sell CDs. Sure, Napster may be "promoting" the latest Filter CD, but where's the incentive to buy it if you've downloaded the CD in MP3 anyway?
"The RIAA can keep independent music off the radio and MTV and pretty much any other mainstream 'available to everyone' promotion vehicle, but they can't keep them off Napster."
Since when has the RIAA been keeping independent music off MTV and the radio. Hell, I work at my university's radio station, and we haven't been invaded by RIAA stormtroopers saying "Play Britney Spears or you shall die!" And if you want independent music on MTV, I strongly suggest you watch 120 Minutes (a damn great show) or see if you can get M2 from your cable provider.
The real reason why you can't find independent music on the radio (commercial anyway) and MTV is because the droves of pre-pubescent teens want to see crap-ass pre-fab acts like the Backstreet Boys, 98 Degrees, and Britney Spears. I spoke with an MTV exec at a journalism conference at Columbia University when I was in high school, and I was told that MTV has basically "sold out" (as he put it), because if the kiddies want to see some boy band, MTV will flood them with it, because they're in it for the money (surprise).
As for your assumption that the RIAA is keeping down the indie labels so bad that they have to use Napster, IMHO I think it's full of shit. Sure, I can find my college rock heroes like the Fastbacks, Swallow, EDL, Simon Says, and the Jon Spencer Blues Explosion on Napster, but the results are pale in comparison to how much you can find if you search for Metallica or Dr. Dre.
Simply put...Napster is a "promotional" tool in the theoretical sense (I admit that I have bought some CDs because I downloaded the music via Napster), but it is still primarily a tool for music piracy, no matter how much RMS-like reasoning you try to coat it with. You really want to help the indie labels? Go out and buy some of their CDs, and support your local college radio stations (I guess I'm a shill for those
raunchola (at) hushmail (dot) com
http: //partners.nytimes.com/library/tech/00/05/biztech/ articles/20privacy.html
Just replace "www" with "partners."
raunchola (at) hushmail (dot) com
Odd, Slashdot posts an anti-Doubleclick story, yet Doubleclick advertises on Slashdot.
And here's the screenshot...
Interesting, eh?
raunchola (at) hushmail (dot) com
"I think that all these Linux IPOs are a good sign."
Too bad they all crash and burn. Remember when Red Hat was at something like $320 when it first opened? Now it's only $19.
What goes up must come down.
raunchola (at) hushmail (dot) com
You know, maybe it would be nice if we could all quit our jobs because we didn't agree with their said principles and go work in the name of freedom. But we're all not Richard Stallman (ducks to avoid flames).
If you ask me, the one reason people go to work for Microsoft is because of the money. I know one such fellow who started work out there three years ago, and on paper, he's now worth about $700,000 or so. No matter how much of a case you make for RMS-like freedom, it's not going to tear him, and probably everyone else, away from their jobs at Microsoft. You can't just walk away from a good-paying job and say "Screw you" to all of your bills, especially for those in Seattle, where the cost of living isn't exactly what you'd find in Smalltown USA.
I'd be willing to bet that a lot of Microsoft employees want to make decent software. But it's not that easy to leave a job that can make you a millionaire by the time you're thirty, and move to a smaller company or some startup that can't match what Microsoft paid.
raunchola (at) hushmail (dot) com
Quick, someone set a fire in Groom Lake. Maybe the government will allow reporters to tour the facility, to alleve public fears that the fire killed off those cute little aliens. :)
raunchola (at) hushmail (dot) com
"I am so thankful for your patronizing tone.. NOT! Will you please fuck off back to Redmond, you whore?"
:)
Sorry, too long a flight from here
"Oh, and this other post of yours makes me puke, too. It clearly shows on who's paylist you are."
Oh! So sorry! I'm not on anyone's paylist, but thanks so much for jumping to conclusions anyway!
raunchola (at) hushmail (dot) com