I don't know what to expect. On the one hand, it still has Berman/Braga at the helm, and no one makes TV suck like they do. OTOH, the article says that Bakula has creative control and that so far they've followed his suggestions. This guy knows what being in a quality SF show (Quantum Leap) is all about, so maybe he can turn things around.
I'm a lifelong Star Trek fan, so I'll be watching, but if it ends up being crap like Voyager was I won't be watching long.
This looks like a good move by Aimster. By going on the offensive, they're able to bring the issues they want to the forefront.
Their argument seems to be that, just as you can't bust down the door of a suspected CD pirate without a warrant (and therefore probable cause), then Aimster shouldn't be forced to monitor its users--only specific users in response to a proper search warrant.
If they're successful, this could be a wonderful precedent for digital privacy.
Creating a CD is almost 400% lower than making a cassette yet CD's are more expensive for some unknown reason.
The reason is far from unknown. CDs are in greater demand than cassette tapes, and therefore they can get away with charging a higher price for them. If people weren't willing to buy them at that price, the record companies would be forced to lower their prices.
In fact, one might argue that this high demand for music file sharing services is an example of precisely that. Any other business would drop prices in response; the RIAA goes whining to the government who, because of their political connections, is glad to oblige at the expense of consumers' freedom.
All of this, of course, clouds the real issue. Since several studies and polls have shown that free music file sharing results in increased sales, it's clear to me that what they're really wanting is to stop independent artists from having an easy way to distribute their music and gain recognition. Why else do you think the RIAA wants Napster to only allow songs on an "approved" list?
Here legal scolars for years have been making exceptions for silly things like libel, slander, threats, harrassment and conspiracy,
All of which cause direct harm. It is the harm they cause, not the fact that they're not "expressive speech," which prompts the legal action. Besides, most if not all of your examples are crimes at the state level, not at the Federal level. The First Amendment says "Congress shall make no law..." Congress doesn't pass state laws; they did pass the DMCA.
Not quite. When was the last time you saw an NC-17 movie playing at your local theatre? The "adult" ratings--even if it's for nothing more than four-letter words--prevent movies from wide distribution, so the filmmakers kowtow to what the MPAA wants them to change to get an R rating.
And they say that's not censorship???
Read the 9th Amendment. Just because it isn't in the Constitution doesn't mean it's not a right. And how are other software manufacturers intruding on Microsoft's "property" when they write software for Windows?
But don't you think that computer manufacturers should be free to install Linux instead of Windows without repercussions from Microsoft? Don't you think they should be able to install an alternate web browser if they wish? Don't you think they should have control over what gets displayed first on their machines? Don't you think software makers should have the ability to make compatible software and use the same functions of Windows that Microsoft currently prohibits?
If not, then you're no Libertarian, plain and simple. Yes, Microsoft has the right to do what they want with their operating system, but computer manufacturers also have the right to build their computers however they choose, and software makers have the right to make compatible software if they want, and these rights are being usurped or at least restricted by Microsoft. Just ask the Wine group.
Does anyone else remember when IBM tried basically this same thing with MicroChannel Architecture, and other companies came out with EISA and made it an open standard. MCA died the death. Will the same thing happen here?
Hack the MPAA web site with a 'bot, programmed to send out the source code to everyone who browses the page, encrypt it with some lame encryption scheme, and when they remove it sue them for circumventing an access control method!
Oh, yes! We could make DeCSS a form of good, old-fashioned SneakerWare! (Or was that SneakerWear?) Strange to think that used to be the only way to pirate software...what ever did we do without the internet?
They do this by virtue of the fact that there are a LOT of them! And the few large projects can't scan the whole sky at any given time, but all of the thousands upon thousands of small-time operations and amateur astronomers, as a collective, can, even without being organized to do so.
OT: the reason for the change was that the irony no longer applied when they detected the truth quark. The irony was that "truth" was hidden while "beauty" could be seen.
Yes, DBS providers must have permission to rebroadcast. In fact, Dish Network recently had to cut off a couple of stations because of a lack of retransmission consent. But this has nothing to do with converting the disgnal from analog to digital, as the previous poster stated.
18 A. I took 4 gigabytes, multiplied it by 19 8 to get gigabits,
4 gigabytes x 8 bits != 32 gigabits, because a gigabyte = 1024 megabytes, etc.
4 gigabytes = 4294967296 bytes = 34.3 gigabits
I Divided by 56,000 bits per second,
Which is bandwidth, not throughput. Throughput is 56000 *.8 = 44800bps, making for a total download time of over 213 hours, more in line with Gartner's figure. That's assuming a 56K connection (unlikely) and no errors (also unlikely). As Ryan360 pointed out, actual download time would be much longer. It also ties up your phone/internet connection for that amount of time.
Maybe somebody can help me with this. I have been hearing it a lot from the media, but can find no technical basis for this. How does having Cable or DSL make you more volnurable? I mean there is always users shareing their hard drives, but that is just the same on the modems.
The main difference is that Cable/DSL is much, much faster than a dial-up, and therefore doesn't take as long to perform your mischief.
Another difference is the "always-on" nature of many Cable/DSL providers. I have ADSL through BellSouth, which allows you to connect/disconnect like a normal dial-up, and gives you a different IP address each time. That's a lot better than a 24/7 connection with the same IP address the whole time. I'm still vulnerable to a degree, but not as much so as others.
And, of course, those with a 24/7 connection can always just disconnect the cable when they're not browsing. A little bit of effort will go a long way in this regard.
Isn't digitally encoding an analog video signal a modification? Is there specific wording in the law that would allow it? Otherwise my uneducated guess would be that it's going to fail in the courts again.
If that were true, then DBS providers would be breaking the law. They get very few signals digitally native.
Vote libertarian! As long as the Republocrats are in power, it'll just be a debate of what gets taxed more! My vote's for Harry Browne in November. www.harrybrowne.org
And for you fellow North Carolinians: Barbara Howe for governor! www.votehowe.org (Besides, you gotta love someone who uses a penguin as her mascot.:^)
Slashdot Mirror
I'm a lifelong Star Trek fan, so I'll be watching, but if it ends up being crap like Voyager was I won't be watching long.
Their argument seems to be that, just as you can't bust down the door of a suspected CD pirate without a warrant (and therefore probable cause), then Aimster shouldn't be forced to monitor its users--only specific users in response to a proper search warrant.
If they're successful, this could be a wonderful precedent for digital privacy.
The reason is far from unknown. CDs are in greater demand than cassette tapes, and therefore they can get away with charging a higher price for them. If people weren't willing to buy them at that price, the record companies would be forced to lower their prices.
In fact, one might argue that this high demand for music file sharing services is an example of precisely that. Any other business would drop prices in response; the RIAA goes whining to the government who, because of their political connections, is glad to oblige at the expense of consumers' freedom.
All of this, of course, clouds the real issue. Since several studies and polls have shown that free music file sharing results in increased sales, it's clear to me that what they're really wanting is to stop independent artists from having an easy way to distribute their music and gain recognition. Why else do you think the RIAA wants Napster to only allow songs on an "approved" list?
All of which cause direct harm. It is the harm they cause, not the fact that they're not "expressive speech," which prompts the legal action. Besides, most if not all of your examples are crimes at the state level, not at the Federal level. The First Amendment says "Congress shall make no law..." Congress doesn't pass state laws; they did pass the DMCA.
Y'know, I've read the Constitution many, many times, and I'm reasonably sure that it says freedom of "speech," not freedom of "expressive speech."
Also, as my song on Ampcast shows, computer code can be music, too!
Not quite. When was the last time you saw an NC-17 movie playing at your local theatre? The "adult" ratings--even if it's for nothing more than four-letter words--prevent movies from wide distribution, so the filmmakers kowtow to what the MPAA wants them to change to get an R rating. And they say that's not censorship???
Here's my contribution.
Read the 9th Amendment. Just because it isn't in the Constitution doesn't mean it's not a right. And how are other software manufacturers intruding on Microsoft's "property" when they write software for Windows?
If not, then you're no Libertarian, plain and simple. Yes, Microsoft has the right to do what they want with their operating system, but computer manufacturers also have the right to build their computers however they choose, and software makers have the right to make compatible software if they want, and these rights are being usurped or at least restricted by Microsoft. Just ask the Wine group.
Does anyone else remember when IBM tried basically this same thing with MicroChannel Architecture, and other companies came out with EISA and made it an open standard. MCA died the death. Will the same thing happen here?
Hack the MPAA web site with a 'bot, programmed to send out the source code to everyone who browses the page, encrypt it with some lame encryption scheme, and when they remove it sue them for circumventing an access control method!
Hey, I like it! Someone wanna modify mine thusly?
Oh, yes! We could make DeCSS a form of good, old-fashioned SneakerWare! (Or was that SneakerWear?) Strange to think that used to be the only way to pirate software...what ever did we do without the internet?
It's at my mp3 site, inspired by Joe Wecker's sung version.
They do this by virtue of the fact that there are a LOT of them! And the few large projects can't scan the whole sky at any given time, but all of the thousands upon thousands of small-time operations and amateur astronomers, as a collective, can, even without being organized to do so.
OT: the reason for the change was that the irony no longer applied when they detected the truth quark. The irony was that "truth" was hidden while "beauty" could be seen.
Yes, DBS providers must have permission to rebroadcast. In fact, Dish Network recently had to cut off a couple of stations because of a lack of retransmission consent. But this has nothing to do with converting the disgnal from analog to digital, as the previous poster stated.
18 A. I took 4 gigabytes, multiplied it by
.8 = 44800bps, making for a total download time of over 213 hours, more in line with Gartner's figure. That's assuming a 56K connection (unlikely) and no errors (also unlikely). As Ryan360 pointed out, actual download time would be much longer. It also ties up your phone/internet connection for that amount of time.
19 8 to get gigabits,
4 gigabytes x 8 bits != 32 gigabits, because a gigabyte = 1024 megabytes, etc.
4 gigabytes = 4294967296 bytes = 34.3 gigabits
I Divided by 56,000 bits per second,
Which is bandwidth, not throughput. Throughput is 56000 *
Maybe somebody can help me with this. I have been hearing it a lot from the media, but can find no technical basis for this. How does having Cable or DSL make you more volnurable? I mean there is always users shareing their hard drives, but that is just the same on the modems.
The main difference is that Cable/DSL is much, much faster than a dial-up, and therefore doesn't take as long to perform your mischief.
Another difference is the "always-on" nature of many Cable/DSL providers. I have ADSL through BellSouth, which allows you to connect/disconnect like a normal dial-up, and gives you a different IP address each time. That's a lot better than a 24/7 connection with the same IP address the whole time. I'm still vulnerable to a degree, but not as much so as others.
And, of course, those with a 24/7 connection can always just disconnect the cable when they're not browsing. A little bit of effort will go a long way in this regard.
Isn't digitally encoding an analog video signal a modification? Is there specific wording in the law that would allow it? Otherwise my uneducated guess would be that it's going to fail in the courts again.
If that were true, then DBS providers would be breaking the law. They get very few signals digitally native.
I spent too long playing Starship Titanic to be easily convinced that this is a good thing...
No, sadly that would violate the DMCA...
And for you fellow North Carolinians: Barbara Howe for governor! www.votehowe.org (Besides, you gotta love someone who uses a penguin as her mascot. :^)
Tux with a gun to his head, and written underneath it: "BUY THIS OS OR WE SHOOT THE PENGUIN!!!!!!!" M$'s getting desperate...