Re:Random ramblings-REALITY CHECK
on
Selfish Society
·
· Score: 1
I predict massive social disruptions if all computers vanished - for one thing, many businesses and even parts of the government have gotten rid of the necessary infrastructure and budget to shuffle paper rather than electronic information. The massive surge in productivity that has occurred in the last few years is mostly due to the increased efficiency of electronic communications. If all the computers went away, we'd be unemployed, but then so would most of the world - the major productivity hit would close many businesses and cause monster layoffs at the rest.
By the way, are you aware that you are really user 216242? I wonder if it would be possible to time the new account process so that your nick was really your user number...
When she talks about "going back to the garage", does that mean that HP is going to start making test and measurement equipment again (which they were very good at), and stop trying to be "Dell Also" (which they suck at)?
Yes and no. IIRC, they spun off test and measurement as "Agilent", so that they wouldn't get dragged to the bottom when the rest of HP sinks (if I were in a bitter mood, I'd say "pulled below by the boiler explosion that is HP-UX", but I'm not. Oh wait, I am. Was that out loud?). Anyway, the answer to your question is: Buy Agilent, sell HP. Except for their calculators, which I still like.
Well, if there is no manufacturer (Linux, for example) you really have to post your code to the kernel mailing list, which is publicly available. I agree that ready-to-go exploit code isn't very ethical to provide, though. There's a difference between a five-line code snippet that demonstrates the problem, and a nice GUI client that anyone could use to unleash an attack. Of course, some admins would use the nice GUI tool to test their own networks, but there's a limit to how far you can extend that justification.
I have to agree - and that is exactly the sort of thing which makes it impossible for me to sympathize with the industry even when they are technically in the right. They have continually operated in an unethical manner that is contrary to the spirit of copyright law solely for their material gain, rather than really thinking of the purchaser of their works or even of their own artists. At this point I really can't work up too much disapproval for the people who are screwin' 'em right back.
BTW, I like "DeHavilland Mosquito" - I'll have to listen to a couple more of yours today.
Isn't that what driving licenses are for? I'm suggesting a similar thing for the net. You wouldn't let your 5 year old son drive a car, why let him online? Both are dangerous in their own ways.
I don't think that age is necessarily the correct criterion here; maybe some sort of exam instead. I know plenty of 18+ year old people at work who can't even handle not clicking on an email that's a virus, whereas I'm sure there are plenty of 10 year olds who have figured that out. A 5-year-old behind the wheel is a danger to others, but a 5-year-old loose on the Net can really only hurt themselves. And with proper parental guidance, that danger can be minimized. As far as stuff that children shouldn't know about, I'll be making that decision for my children, thanks very much.
If Napster aggressively made sure that coprighted music did not appear on their index, and only music by artists such as you who grant permission to redistribute, there would be no issue. And yes, it is technically possible to do that.
Why? Alta Vista doesn't have to police their index in such a way. The RIAA is really bending the law here - they are legally entitled to go after the actual purveyors of unlawful music, but they would rather rake an indexing service over the coals. It is the job of the copyright holder to enforce their copyright against violators of that copyright.
I would be much more supportive of the recording industry if they would act ethically within the bounds of the spirit of copyright law - by prosecuting individuals who illegally redistribute their copyrighted music. But their wholesale disregard for the spirit of copyright law in the first place (I do have the right to rip my CDs as mp3s, regardless of their comments to the contrary) and their willingness to unethically manipulate the laws of the land towards their objectives (taxes on recording media for all users, even non-infringing ones, not to mention the travesty that is the DMCA) have convinced me that the recording industry cannot be trusted and cannot (IMHO, of course) ethically be supported by a right-thinking individual.
To sum up: while the majority of Napster users are not in the right, neither is the recording industry.
While I have argued in the past to support the non-copyright-infringing uses of Napster et al., it makes me twinge to see Frederick Douglass quoted on such a poster, since I have to admit that the majority of Napster users are using it and would use any replacement of it to illegally distribute copyrighted music.
Before the flames start, let me be clear on my position:
no, I don't think Napster is liable for the actions of its users
yes, the RIAA is just taking the easy and not-very-lawful way out by suing Napster and not the individuals who are distributing illegal mp3s
the law is that copyright holders have the limited right to control the distribution of their works
while copying and distributing music isn't as much stealing as getting a 5-finger discount at Goody's would be, it is against the current law of the land
IMHO, some form of copyright law is good and necessary, and when properly administered brings justice for copyright holders
but the monopolistic uses of the law by the RIAA and the MPAA and the modifications of the law by the DMCA and the Sonny Bono Copyright Extension Act are not in the public interest and do not serve to bring about justice.
Those things being said, I don't think that Messrs. Douglass and/or Thoreau would perceive the injustice of preventing people from breaking the law with property which is not their own. Althought they might agree that shutting down all of Napster is an injustice to the legitimate users of the system.
From my reading of the article, it sounds like the judge has already denied Napster common carrier status. They had argued that they fell under the Safe Harbor provision of the DMCA, since they don't maintain any content and they ban copyright-abusing users when requested under the law. Unfortunately that argument didn't seem to work.
Actually, I read on ZDNet that some guy name "Anonymous Coward" had taken the credit for it. They had a bunch of quotes from the guy, it sounds like he might have some multiple personalities going on...:)
That might be part of the problem for Chris Johnson - before, he could put his tracks up in one place, but now he has to distribute them on a number of different networks, and they probably still won't reach the distribution that napster.com had. Unless Napigator can serve as a meta-napster client and search all of these networks in parallel?
Maybe you're posting this to the wrong article, but are you aware that K5 is down? That is the whole point of this article, right? Searching that site is going to be a little difficult in the future...
As far as the comments becoming less meaningful, I see about the same amount of relevant and interesting comments per article that I used to, but now they're spread out among many comments that are only so-so. Sure, there's a down side to being a popular site, but on the other hand the breadth of opinion and information has only improved (though perhaps the depth has not).
Maybe the best way to fix the karma whoring is just not to display karma, or to display it as "Excellent", "Good", "Normal", and "Bad". Other than that, I wouldn't say that moderation has been the disaster that you make it out to be.
It is interesting to see how american court cases try to attack "dirty pictures" outside the US, where nobody cares if women bare their breasts on the beach. There is a double standard at work, and when an american company is on the losing end of a judgement, americans hear more about it. The double standard goes both ways, when european companies lose to american laws, only europeans hear the rants.
In exactly what cases has the U.S. government sued foreign web sites that are available in the U.S. for pornography? Sure, Congress and the conservative parts of the country make threatening noises and pass unconstitutional laws on the topic every so often, but I don't know of any instances similar to what this French court is doing. Have any actual suits been filed in the U.S. against foreign companies whose web sites can be viewed from the U.S.? At least in the U.S. there is some understanding that parts of the Internet are out of control of the country's government. This french court doesn't seem to understand that.
If I may say so, you have excellent taste. I'd chip in at least $50. I'm on my 10th or 12th time through the existing 4 novels, and every new novel which isn't the sequel to Wizard and Glass just makes it worse. Especially since it's starting to sound like this series will bring in elements from many of his other books. Pretty amazing, considering the spartan beginning of The Gunslinger.
I was thinking that there already had been a test case and the ACLU was appealing the prosecution of that case on the basis of COPA. I hadn't realized that it was the government who was doing the original appealing. Mea culpa.
Actually, Jamie is correct. The ruling to which you have linked only indicates that a higher court has upheld the original injunction on the enforcement of COPA. The law has no force until the case brought against it is completed. So the appeal against the injunction is over, but the case against the law itself is just beginning.
Not to mention their hijacking of the status bar. If that's what the standards body supports, then I'm prepared to abandon standards. Every browser for himself, I say, and let lynx sort them out!
Tangentially related: I heard on the news this morning that Bertelsmann will be buying CDNow. Apparently they had lost $200 million and are throwing in the towel.
Slashdot Mirror
I predict massive social disruptions if all computers vanished - for one thing, many businesses and even parts of the government have gotten rid of the necessary infrastructure and budget to shuffle paper rather than electronic information. The massive surge in productivity that has occurred in the last few years is mostly due to the increased efficiency of electronic communications. If all the computers went away, we'd be unemployed, but then so would most of the world - the major productivity hit would close many businesses and cause monster layoffs at the rest.
By the way, are you aware that you are really user 216242? I wonder if it would be possible to time the new account process so that your nick was really your user number...
Maybe if you bribed them with some porn... ;)
I'm impressed that someone thought that was "Insightful" - it was definitely one of my more disjointed posts. Oh well.
Yes and no. IIRC, they spun off test and measurement as "Agilent", so that they wouldn't get dragged to the bottom when the rest of HP sinks (if I were in a bitter mood, I'd say "pulled below by the boiler explosion that is HP-UX", but I'm not. Oh wait, I am. Was that out loud?). Anyway, the answer to your question is: Buy Agilent, sell HP. Except for their calculators, which I still like.
Well, if there is no manufacturer (Linux, for example) you really have to post your code to the kernel mailing list, which is publicly available. I agree that ready-to-go exploit code isn't very ethical to provide, though. There's a difference between a five-line code snippet that demonstrates the problem, and a nice GUI client that anyone could use to unleash an attack. Of course, some admins would use the nice GUI tool to test their own networks, but there's a limit to how far you can extend that justification.
I have to agree - and that is exactly the sort of thing which makes it impossible for me to sympathize with the industry even when they are technically in the right. They have continually operated in an unethical manner that is contrary to the spirit of copyright law solely for their material gain, rather than really thinking of the purchaser of their works or even of their own artists. At this point I really can't work up too much disapproval for the people who are screwin' 'em right back.
BTW, I like "DeHavilland Mosquito" - I'll have to listen to a couple more of yours today.
I don't think that age is necessarily the correct criterion here; maybe some sort of exam instead. I know plenty of 18+ year old people at work who can't even handle not clicking on an email that's a virus, whereas I'm sure there are plenty of 10 year olds who have figured that out. A 5-year-old behind the wheel is a danger to others, but a 5-year-old loose on the Net can really only hurt themselves. And with proper parental guidance, that danger can be minimized. As far as stuff that children shouldn't know about, I'll be making that decision for my children, thanks very much.
Why? Alta Vista doesn't have to police their index in such a way. The RIAA is really bending the law here - they are legally entitled to go after the actual purveyors of unlawful music, but they would rather rake an indexing service over the coals. It is the job of the copyright holder to enforce their copyright against violators of that copyright.
I would be much more supportive of the recording industry if they would act ethically within the bounds of the spirit of copyright law - by prosecuting individuals who illegally redistribute their copyrighted music. But their wholesale disregard for the spirit of copyright law in the first place (I do have the right to rip my CDs as mp3s, regardless of their comments to the contrary) and their willingness to unethically manipulate the laws of the land towards their objectives (taxes on recording media for all users, even non-infringing ones, not to mention the travesty that is the DMCA) have convinced me that the recording industry cannot be trusted and cannot (IMHO, of course) ethically be supported by a right-thinking individual.
To sum up: while the majority of Napster users are not in the right, neither is the recording industry.
While I have argued in the past to support the non-copyright-infringing uses of Napster et al., it makes me twinge to see Frederick Douglass quoted on such a poster, since I have to admit that the majority of Napster users are using it and would use any replacement of it to illegally distribute copyrighted music.
Before the flames start, let me be clear on my position:
Those things being said, I don't think that Messrs. Douglass and/or Thoreau would perceive the injustice of preventing people from breaking the law with property which is not their own. Althought they might agree that shutting down all of Napster is an injustice to the legitimate users of the system.
Flame On!
From my reading of the article, it sounds like the judge has already denied Napster common carrier status. They had argued that they fell under the Safe Harbor provision of the DMCA, since they don't maintain any content and they ban copyright-abusing users when requested under the law. Unfortunately that argument didn't seem to work.
LOL
Actually, I read on ZDNet that some guy name "Anonymous Coward" had taken the credit for it. They had a bunch of quotes from the guy, it sounds like he might have some multiple personalities going on...:)
That might be part of the problem for Chris Johnson - before, he could put his tracks up in one place, but now he has to distribute them on a number of different networks, and they probably still won't reach the distribution that napster.com had. Unless Napigator can serve as a meta-napster client and search all of these networks in parallel?
I saw an article earlier (possibly on Wired?) that cryptome was also suffering from a DOS attack.
I didn't know about scoop.k5.org, so perhaps it is I who is the dumbass. Or we could call it even.
I disagree - the SNR is fine if you browse at +1 or +2. As long as there are still good comments, it's worthwhile to maintain the discussion fora.
Maybe you're posting this to the wrong article, but are you aware that K5 is down? That is the whole point of this article, right? Searching that site is going to be a little difficult in the future...
You should read at +1 - it really does help.
As far as the comments becoming less meaningful, I see about the same amount of relevant and interesting comments per article that I used to, but now they're spread out among many comments that are only so-so. Sure, there's a down side to being a popular site, but on the other hand the breadth of opinion and information has only improved (though perhaps the depth has not).
Maybe the best way to fix the karma whoring is just not to display karma, or to display it as "Excellent", "Good", "Normal", and "Bad". Other than that, I wouldn't say that moderation has been the disaster that you make it out to be.
In exactly what cases has the U.S. government sued foreign web sites that are available in the U.S. for pornography? Sure, Congress and the conservative parts of the country make threatening noises and pass unconstitutional laws on the topic every so often, but I don't know of any instances similar to what this French court is doing. Have any actual suits been filed in the U.S. against foreign companies whose web sites can be viewed from the U.S.? At least in the U.S. there is some understanding that parts of the Internet are out of control of the country's government. This french court doesn't seem to understand that.
If I may say so, you have excellent taste. I'd chip in at least $50. I'm on my 10th or 12th time through the existing 4 novels, and every new novel which isn't the sequel to Wizard and Glass just makes it worse. Especially since it's starting to sound like this series will bring in elements from many of his other books. Pretty amazing, considering the spartan beginning of The Gunslinger.
That was exactly the point that I drew from the photo, was there any other possible conclusion?
I was thinking that there already had been a test case and the ACLU was appealing the prosecution of that case on the basis of COPA. I hadn't realized that it was the government who was doing the original appealing. Mea culpa.
Actually, Jamie is correct. The ruling to which you have linked only indicates that a higher court has upheld the original injunction on the enforcement of COPA. The law has no force until the case brought against it is completed. So the appeal against the injunction is over, but the case against the law itself is just beginning.
On second thought, View->Page Source:
Oh, never mind. I think I've isolated the source of the problem :)
Not to mention their hijacking of the status bar. If that's what the standards body supports, then I'm prepared to abandon standards. Every browser for himself, I say, and let lynx sort them out!
Tangentially related: I heard on the news this morning that Bertelsmann will be buying CDNow. Apparently they had lost $200 million and are throwing in the towel.