If someone knows of the story a few weeks ago about Napster, it talked about how RIAA considers napster a direct attempt to damage the record industry. They mentioned that they know about gnutella, httpd, nfs, etc. They are going after Napster because it is an Index that can speed up huge mass distribution. Gnutella uses peer-to-peer, and not a main index. RIAA has said that gnutella isn't a threat yet, but if web, nfs, and gnutella become wide-spread, THEY WILL seek the courts to shut down NFS, HTTP, and gnutella projects.
I personally would like to see them try to shut down NFS and http. There is no way they can do this. That is something that they can not say that "It does more damage than good" Courts will simple have to tell them, "We know it's hurting your industry, but we can not shut them down because they do far more good than bad. You (RIAA) will have to find a better way of protecting your media."
As for gnutella, honestly, they have a good reason to shut it down. People are breaking the law. However, before they will get a court ruling, chances are a new and more powerful way of getting mp3's will be created. They probably see Napster as something that will stay for a long time, and more importantly, it's easy to use (I've never used it, just seen it) It's a huge threat to the recording industry and Sadly, I think it's good they get it shut down, but in the end, they may loose still.
True, this has been going on for a long time, before Napster even. There have been battles about what is allowed on the internet and what isn't. The truth is the courts do a fairly good job, but yes, they are human and make mistakes. I think they will make some big mistakes that it will take many of us to join and fight against, but it will be fine. It will be impossible to stop mass distribution of anything on the internet. __They can not ban everything.__ They will learn that somethings they will just have to stop fighting and find better ways of protecting what they need to keep from being undistributable. Just like CD burners. They were very contriversial at the begining but not they are accepted. I see this happening with the internet.
We, as internet users, need to let congress know that we don't want to be banned from doing stuff on the internet. Have congress tell people "well, you made something that could be put on the internet and distributed, that is your fault, you should have been smarter. True, that isn't totally fair to someone trying to protect their company, but you also can't say "You can't use Napster to trade mp3's, but you can use Netscape."
I really believe the constitution is going to be challanged with the internet. As US citizens, or for other nations, let congress know what you want. That is what they are there for.
I feel sorry for autronauts who have to talk to those sales people to explain what they need. First of all, it's more technical than most parts they sell now, and second, RadioShack employees can't speak english very well, just wait until they get some intergalactic employees.
Web surfers will be able to log on to RadioShack's Web site and, because Icebreaker will be able to transmit live video over a broadband connection with mission control, watch real-time video footage of the rover exploring the lunar surface. The video also will be downloaded to RadioShack stores equipped with RCA's home digital theater demonstrations.
That is a cool Idea I think. Being able to turn to a channel and see where robots, satalites, astronauts are doing. It's a cool new idea for TV channels/cable. Kinda like the Truman Show in a certain way.
President "I am here tonight addressing America over the resent launch of our new Millitary Defense Satalite. Due to the massive costs of the system, we had many large companies and other countries help in the funding. Iraq, K-mart, and RadioShack all volunteered to help build it also. Iraq's leading terrorist group designed the OS and software to be run. K-Mart employees along with RadioShack worked together in mexico to build the satalite. We, the government, feel we have made good choices and have a strong product. There will be regulary scheduled mission that we will check it out and to replace batteries.
Reporter: Mr. president!
President: Yes?
Reporter Wouldn't it have been cheaper to not use those companies since you'll have to go to space more often now?
It's a cool idea, and nice to see RadioShack trying to stay up, which isn't always like them. But it bugs me a little in the article how RadioShack wants the PR for it. They will get it I guess, but I don't think NASA should turn their missions into advertising.
One thing to remember is that with this comes some major security issues. There will have to be some serious security holes totally patched, if that is even possible.
A question for everyone... What type of work is being done, or needs to be done for home security when the house is on the internet. Is there a company who's working on this? I would hate to have someone breaking into the house by disabling my security system from half way around the world.
Another question... Does this mean a central computer will control heat, locks, water, power, and ever thing down to childrens toys? I know this would be a good idea, but once again would this be worth the risk? I think not having some of those "features" would be safer for everyone, once again, what does everyone think, or anyone know places with information on these questions?
For your purposes, digital cameras are as advanced as you need. For others, they will be in a few years. And some will never be satisfied.
What you have to look at is:
What do I need. What do I want. What works..
What technology is out there that is good or not good enough is a personal opinion.
For me (as an exanple) , I won't settle for 1023x780 because my desktop is 1280x1024, and I couldn't fill it. Second, I don't have a good use in buying a camera for play use at that res. Third, I don't want to spend that much for a camera that will do that. Fourth, I couldn't be happy with 3000x3000 because when I get married and want to capture my kids, I want it to be perfect, and to be able to see every scrap and scar to remember the fun times we had. Fifth, I just plain can't justify buying something so expensive yet. Sixth, I don't want propritary equipment who wants to force me to use windows.
Next for battery life, those fall under the wants, and not needs. I would be happy with 32 pictures on a battery. 100 is amazing I think, in terms of what the world offers. The nice, utopian one would be a universal disk that holds enough pictures to be a lot, but not to much to organize once you want to sort through them, a life-time battery, and a resolution that from 10 feet away is better than seeing something a foot away.
Will that happen? maybe, but it still won't please everyone, but by then there will be something to replace cameras anyway.
I'm not satisfied with my non-digital camera, but honestly, Technology is wonderful and I'm glad to capture it somehow.
With all the millions of dollars Redhat and VALinux have received from going public, maybe it would be a good idea if they started to step behind developers in things like this. They have the money. Maybe they could help the people who have the brains, but not the money to help improve things like DVD in Linux? I think it would be a great idea if these companies could help out projects that are being burdened like this.
Slashdot Mirror
If someone knows of the story a few weeks ago about Napster, it talked about how RIAA considers napster a direct attempt to damage the record industry. They mentioned that they know about gnutella, httpd, nfs, etc. They are going after Napster because it is an Index that can speed up huge mass distribution. Gnutella uses peer-to-peer, and not a main index. RIAA has said that gnutella isn't a threat yet, but if web, nfs, and gnutella become wide-spread, THEY WILL seek the courts to shut down NFS, HTTP, and gnutella projects.
I personally would like to see them try to shut down NFS and http. There is no way they can do this. That is something that they can not say that "It does more damage than good" Courts will simple have to tell them, "We know it's hurting your industry, but we can not shut them down because they do far more good than bad. You (RIAA) will have to find a better way of protecting your media."
As for gnutella, honestly, they have a good reason to shut it down. People are breaking the law. However, before they will get a court ruling, chances are a new and more powerful way of getting mp3's will be created. They probably see Napster as something that will stay for a long time, and more importantly, it's easy to use (I've never used it, just seen it) It's a huge threat to the recording industry and Sadly, I think it's good they get it shut down, but in the end, they may loose still.
True, this has been going on for a long time, before Napster even. There have been battles about what is allowed on the internet and what isn't. The truth is the courts do a fairly good job, but yes, they are human and make mistakes. I think they will make some big mistakes that it will take many of us to join and fight against, but it will be fine. It will be impossible to stop mass distribution of anything on the internet. __They can not ban everything.__ They will learn that somethings they will just have to stop fighting and find better ways of protecting what they need to keep from being undistributable. Just like CD burners. They were very contriversial at the begining but not they are accepted. I see this happening with the internet.
We, as internet users, need to let congress know that we don't want to be banned from doing stuff on the internet. Have congress tell people "well, you made something that could be put on the internet and distributed, that is your fault, you should have been smarter. True, that isn't totally fair to someone trying to protect their company, but you also can't say "You can't use Napster to trade mp3's, but you can use Netscape."
I really believe the constitution is going to be challanged with the internet. As US citizens, or for other nations, let congress know what you want. That is what they are there for.
--Brandon
I feel sorry for autronauts who have to talk to those sales people to explain what they need. First of all, it's more technical than most parts they sell now, and second, RadioShack employees can't speak english very well, just wait until they get some intergalactic employees.
:-)
Web surfers will be able to log on to RadioShack's Web site and, because Icebreaker will be able to transmit live video over a broadband connection with mission control, watch real-time video footage of the rover exploring the lunar surface. The video also will be downloaded to RadioShack stores equipped with RCA's home digital theater demonstrations.
That is a cool Idea I think. Being able to turn to a channel and see where robots, satalites, astronauts are doing. It's a cool new idea for TV channels/cable. Kinda like the Truman Show in a certain way.
--Brandon
*Joking*
President "I am here tonight addressing America over the resent launch of our new Millitary Defense Satalite. Due to the massive costs of the system, we had many large companies and other countries help in the funding. Iraq, K-mart, and RadioShack all volunteered to help build it also. Iraq's leading terrorist group designed the OS and software to be run. K-Mart employees along with RadioShack worked together in mexico to build the satalite. We, the government, feel we have made good choices and have a strong product. There will be regulary scheduled mission that we will check it out and to replace batteries.
Reporter: Mr. president!
President: Yes?
Reporter Wouldn't it have been cheaper to not use those companies since you'll have to go to space more often now?
President: DOH!
It's a cool idea, and nice to see RadioShack trying to stay up, which isn't always like them. But it bugs me a little in the article how RadioShack wants the PR for it. They will get it I guess, but I don't think NASA should turn their missions into advertising.
One thing to remember is that with this comes some major security issues. There will have to be some serious security holes totally patched, if that is even possible.
A question for everyone... What type of work is being done, or needs to be done for home security when the house is on the internet. Is there a company who's working on this? I would hate to have someone breaking into the house by disabling my security system from half way around the world.
Another question... Does this mean a central computer will control heat, locks, water, power, and ever thing down to childrens toys? I know this would be a good idea, but once again would this be worth the risk? I think not having some of those "features" would be safer for everyone, once again, what does everyone think, or anyone know places with information on these questions?
--Brandon
For your purposes, digital cameras are as advanced as you need. For others, they will be in a few years. And some will never be satisfied.
What you have to look at is:
What do I need.
What do I want.
What works..
What technology is out there that is good or not good enough is a personal opinion.
For me (as an exanple) , I won't settle for 1023x780 because my desktop is 1280x1024, and I couldn't fill it. Second, I don't have a good use in buying a camera for play use at that res. Third, I don't want to spend that much for a camera that will do that. Fourth, I couldn't be happy with 3000x3000 because when I get married and want to capture my kids, I want it to be perfect, and to be able to see every scrap and scar to remember the fun times we had. Fifth, I just plain can't justify buying something so expensive yet. Sixth, I don't want propritary equipment who wants to force me to use windows.
Next for battery life, those fall under the wants, and not needs. I would be happy with 32 pictures on a battery. 100 is amazing I think, in terms of what the world offers. The nice, utopian one would be a universal disk that holds enough pictures to be a lot, but not to much to organize once you want to sort through them, a life-time battery, and a resolution that from 10 feet away is better than seeing something a foot away.
Will that happen? maybe, but it still won't please everyone, but by then there will be something to replace cameras anyway.
I'm not satisfied with my non-digital camera, but honestly, Technology is wonderful and I'm glad to capture it somehow.
With all the millions of dollars Redhat and VALinux have received from going public, maybe it would be a good idea if they started to step behind developers in things like this. They have the money. Maybe they could help the people who have the brains, but not the money to help improve things like DVD in Linux? I think it would be a great idea if these companies could help out projects that are being burdened like this.