"Watch out for the Next DMCA type act to outlaw general purpose computing access to networks. ESR predicted stuff like this three years ago [catb.org]"
And wouldn't you know, access to catb.org is filtered out by my employer as "hacking"
"high-speed internet"... that is limited to things like e-mailing and websurfing according to their terms of service. That's a lot of money for only partial access to the internet.
This same paranoia came up when GMail came out. People all freaked out that Google was reading their mails to match up ads.
I don't have GMail. I pay for a service (*) rather than look at ads.
But you know what, I still let my e-mail provider read all my mails. How else does anyone think that spam filters work? You can't filter out spam without reading the e-mails.
It's not like Eric Schmidt is there reading each message looking for the good ones.
If you check the linux forums for Jungle Disk, there are lots of people having problems with the rsync over an S3 bucket mounted through WebDAV. The problem seems to be in the webdav implementation, but its a problem nonetheless.
But I hadn't found that s3sync before. That sounds like it would do the trick. Thanks Nick for the tip.
Now my only problem would be the lousy 256 kbps or whatever uplink I get with my Verizon DSL. I wouldn't mind the slow uplink but saturating the uplink also saturates the downlink (1.5 Mbps). I could never figure that out. Sure, go ahead and discourage P2P with slow uplinks, but why does that have to make the connection almost unusable to the rest of the family surfing the net or me listening to streaming radio? I actually don't do P2P, but do a lot of cartography and am always uploading large image and/or PDF files to webservers.
Or the band could do like the Grateful Dead did in 1980 for their shows at the Warfield in San Francisco (part of Dead Set and Reckoning were recorded at these shows) and keep adding additional sequential shows until all the ticket requests were met.
"Another thing the author doesn't seem to realize is that Linux code (the kernel) is forking all the time."
More to the point, whether usability is enhanced or not has little to do with Linux, which is just the kernel. The usability issues live or die with the userland and desktop environment stuff, which isn't the stuff that Linus and the kernel hackers spend time tweaking.
So I add another vote to the "this isn't news" position.
But the for-example-purposes $21B wouldn't just be for "to better society". Google is scared of a potential lack of net neutrality down the line. With potential roadblocks or charges thrown in thier way by carriers not bound by net neutrality their business model could be greatly impacted. By looking to make available a third broadband option (i.e. wireless in addition to DSL/Cable) that was required to be open under the terms of its purchase, then the potential risk posed by lack of net neutrality would be somewhat balanced. So it would be $21B spent in minimizing a long term business risk.
This totally misses the point. Winamp's (for example) EULA may be long and tedious and nobody reads it, but it doesn't say that using it may be illegal. Why? Because winamp (AOL) paid fruanhofer for a patent licence to decode MP3.
Amarok (again, for example), hasn't paid Fraunhofer for a MP3 patent licence, hence you may actually be breaking the law by using a patented technique without a licence.
Of course, I think this is totally ludicrous and algorithms shouldn't be patentable. But for now at least, that is the law in U.S.
"When artists don't get paid properly, they cannot spend the amount of time they need to to make great work. Not only that, it's insulting to suggest that some artists shouldn't be paid a great deal of money when their work is in great demand."
I don't think most people objecting to these royalty rate increases are disagreeing with what you said. As you know, Internet Radio Stations already pay higher royalties than terrestrial stations. All we want, and what S. 1353 and H.R. 2060 would mandate, is that the royalty increase that the streaming stations would see would equal what satellite stations pay, instead of orderes of magnitude higher than that.
The RIAA and their shills keep framing this argument as if it were some way to get money into the artists' pockets, when in fact it is just a way to kill independent music streams, since RIAA can make more profits marketing fewer bands to large audiences.
Old timer: you missed the point. The examples he puts *do* apply because the RIAA (OK, Sound Exchange or whatever) is going after these royalties *after the fact*. Radio Paradise (my favorite) and the rest need to pay royalties for all the songs they played last year, all before the copyright board set the new royalties. You don't "have the right to not by it" if you already bought it once before you knew they were going to raise the price later.
And as someone else has already pointed out, they are not now doing it for free. They are paying higher roaylties than regular radio or satellite right now. This current problem relates to RIAA wanting higher rates even compared to what they are now paying.
Exactly. I have a friend who lives in a rural area where there is no broadband. He has a cell phone so no need for a landline. Seems stupid to pay extra for a landline (plus the cost of an ISP) just to get 28.8 dialup.
My laptop came with a battery so I don't need to run power cables. Look around, you're sure to find a model that comes standard with a battery installed.
Slashdot Mirror
"Watch out for the Next DMCA type act to outlaw general purpose computing access to networks. ESR predicted stuff like this three years ago [catb.org]"
And wouldn't you know, access to catb.org is filtered out by my employer as "hacking"
"high-speed internet" ... that is limited to things like e-mailing and websurfing according to their terms of service. That's a lot of money for only partial access to the internet.
This same paranoia came up when GMail came out. People all freaked out that Google was reading their mails to match up ads.
I don't have GMail. I pay for a service (*) rather than look at ads.
But you know what, I still let my e-mail provider read all my mails. How else does anyone think that spam filters work? You can't filter out spam without reading the e-mails.
It's not like Eric Schmidt is there reading each message looking for the good ones.
* service = fastmail.fm I highly recommend them.
If you check the linux forums for Jungle Disk, there are lots of people having problems with the rsync over an S3 bucket mounted through WebDAV. The problem seems to be in the webdav implementation, but its a problem nonetheless.
But I hadn't found that s3sync before. That sounds like it would do the trick. Thanks Nick for the tip.
Now my only problem would be the lousy 256 kbps or whatever uplink I get with my Verizon DSL. I wouldn't mind the slow uplink but saturating the uplink also saturates the downlink (1.5 Mbps). I could never figure that out. Sure, go ahead and discourage P2P with slow uplinks, but why does that have to make the connection almost unusable to the rest of the family surfing the net or me listening to streaming radio? I actually don't do P2P, but do a lot of cartography and am always uploading large image and/or PDF files to webservers.
But will gFiles (or whatever) work with rsync. No rsync with S3 is what is holding me back from that.
I think the guy who put together that powerpoint was incompetent.
Or the band could do like the Grateful Dead did in 1980 for their shows at the Warfield in San Francisco (part of Dead Set and Reckoning were recorded at these shows) and keep adding additional sequential shows until all the ticket requests were met.
"Another thing the author doesn't seem to realize is that Linux code (the kernel) is forking all the time."
More to the point, whether usability is enhanced or not has little to do with Linux, which is just the kernel. The usability issues live or die with the userland and desktop environment stuff, which isn't the stuff that Linus and the kernel hackers spend time tweaking.
So I add another vote to the "this isn't news" position.
Well, they probably blew up because MS was loading the new code that did both the XP WGA activation *and* this new Vista BSOD.
But the for-example-purposes $21B wouldn't just be for "to better society". Google is scared of a potential lack of net neutrality down the line. With potential roadblocks or charges thrown in thier way by carriers not bound by net neutrality their business model could be greatly impacted. By looking to make available a third broadband option (i.e. wireless in addition to DSL/Cable) that was required to be open under the terms of its purchase, then the potential risk posed by lack of net neutrality would be somewhat balanced. So it would be $21B spent in minimizing a long term business risk.
This totally misses the point. Winamp's (for example) EULA may be long and tedious and nobody reads it, but it doesn't say that using it may be illegal. Why? Because winamp (AOL) paid fruanhofer for a patent licence to decode MP3.
Amarok (again, for example), hasn't paid Fraunhofer for a MP3 patent licence, hence you may actually be breaking the law by using a patented technique without a licence.
Of course, I think this is totally ludicrous and algorithms shouldn't be patentable. But for now at least, that is the law in U.S.
And that's why your comments are off the mark.
They already pay more than over-the-air radio stations. The new rates would increase these (dramatically) even higher.
"When artists don't get paid properly, they cannot spend the amount of time they need to to make great work. Not only that, it's insulting to suggest that some artists shouldn't be paid a great deal of money when their work is in great demand."
I don't think most people objecting to these royalty rate increases are disagreeing with what you said. As you know, Internet Radio Stations already pay higher royalties than terrestrial stations. All we want, and what S. 1353 and H.R. 2060 would mandate, is that the royalty increase that the streaming stations would see would equal what satellite stations pay, instead of orderes of magnitude higher than that.
The RIAA and their shills keep framing this argument as if it were some way to get money into the artists' pockets, when in fact it is just a way to kill independent music streams, since RIAA can make more profits marketing fewer bands to large audiences.
Old timer: you missed the point. The examples he puts *do* apply because the RIAA (OK, Sound Exchange or whatever) is going after these royalties *after the fact*. Radio Paradise (my favorite) and the rest need to pay royalties for all the songs they played last year, all before the copyright board set the new royalties. You don't "have the right to not by it" if you already bought it once before you knew they were going to raise the price later.
And as someone else has already pointed out, they are not now doing it for free. They are paying higher roaylties than regular radio or satellite right now. This current problem relates to RIAA wanting higher rates even compared to what they are now paying.
But...
This RAM goes to 11!
Well, the Linux kernel for one.
It's the "(3) the amount and substantiality of the portion used in relation to the copyrighted work as a whole" part that is operative here.
Fair use allows you to copy parts of a work. It doesn't allow you to copy the whole song to give to someone.
Use GRASS, it's free, and works great for me.
. ortho.photo.html
http://grass.itc.it/grass62/manuals/html62_user/i
I once was sent a dead Apple motherboard along with my purchase of an OEM copy of Windows NT. That was pretty funny.
signed,
Red Sox fan
Maybe, but ibiblio hosts groklaw.
The ironic thing is that if Novell wins their suit against SCO, then SCO will have to fork over that licensing $ from Microsoft to Novell.
7 0114051543227
For example: http://www.groklaw.net/articlebasic.php?story=200
Exactly. I have a friend who lives in a rural area where there is no broadband. He has a cell phone so no need for a landline. Seems stupid to pay extra for a landline (plus the cost of an ISP) just to get 28.8 dialup.
My laptop came with a battery so I don't need to run power cables. Look around, you're sure to find a model that comes standard with a battery installed.
Why can't they be paid the same way they are paid on broadcast radio. Right now (even before this royalty increase), internet radio pays more money to the labels than the broadcast stations. All they are asking for is no more increases.