I wonder how many people would be as amazed as my mom was to learn that her cell phone records were up for grabs. Whatever a clear definition of what "on the internet" may mean to you, it seems cynical to expect all nongeeks to just assume that nearly any "personal information" is so readily accessible...
Anecdotally - with ISP's failing to educate their newbies about this, it usually comes as quite a shock to others when I can quickly browse to their own unlisted phone number / street address / age / etc.
Salute - wish I had mod points for you (instead of excellent karma) and that I'd seen this topic earlier.
The widespread tolerance of prison horrors and misery has always baffled me, being unpragmatic as well as so needlessly cruel. I support Stop Prisoner Rape and encourage the exploration of their website...
An operator of an interactive computer service or an Internet service provider shall establish and maintain reasonable procedures to enable any person to request and obtain disclosure of the legal name and address of an information content provider who posts false or defamatory information about the person on a public forum website.
Comes a vacuum, as posters retreat who aren't criminals but have reasonable fears of retribution, and a clear need for anonymity...
Um. To clarify, make that "... they're determined to mainstream it, either in concert with passive tracking devices which read the identifying information mixed under the audio..."
Sorry 'bout that.
<grrr>
Minority Report gets closer and closer
on
Our Ratings, Ourselves
·
· Score: 4, Insightful
RFID first, apparently - they're determined to mainstream it, either mixed under the audio (as detailed in the article) or Ad-ID...
"I'm sitting there in a chair. The store's full of people watching this. All of a sudden, [a Baltimore County cop is] standing me up and handcuffing me behind my back, telling me, 'We have to do this until we get it straightened out.' Bolesta was then taken to the county police lockup in Cockeysville, where he sat handcuffed to a pole and in leg irons [for three hours] while the Secret Service was called in."
Best Buy isn't the worst villain here. Beware Baltimore County...
Since there's no way to tabulate all of the resources and staff time (worldwide) his efforts consumed, and no way to distribute a collected fine... yeah, I think theft on this scale calls for a hefty sentence. It's a shame such sentences aren't more common.
The problem with information (data), is that it can be very easily re-purposed, disseminated, aggregated, and combined with other sources. It happens all the time...
Having worked for law enforcement, I'm nervous about any aggregation of data in an era where politically hot issues so easily distort the quaint ol' concept of "innocent until proven guilty". Highly visible lists and uberdatabases making the news in recent years may serve to illustrate the difficulty of clearing one's name. Certainly the intended purpose of many of these projects is laudable. But the unintended consequences of attempting to connect diverse "dots" can pose a threat that, well, doesn't seem to be acknowledged by many here... not to mention those in positions of power who are trusted to mitigate such risks.
Okay, okay. I was trying to make a distinction between the legal "label" and the common usage of the word... Grrr. But you're right, and I'm wrong.
(The "legal" and "moral" meanings are certainly not identical. That was what I had hoped to say by using the word "theft"... uh... imprecisely. Apologies all 'round.)
Again, though, don't make the mistake of assuming that the author of a work has some natural right to control the work.
Agreed, and understood - I intended to refer only to the "legal fiction" of such a right, not any "natural right."
Dude - good grief - wishing more people would honor the known terms of a business exchange is not "holding the world back"... "I made something. If you want to see it, the price is _x_." There it is. When we get closer to a moneyless world, and Doom16 is offered for nothing more than esoteric ego-boosting jollies, then I would think we'll both be railing against the pigopolists.
I can be a word-twister. I'll give you that one. And I don't want to go way offtopic when this same debate has been archived here so many times before... (Copying is unstoppable, and inevitable. Check. That doesn't negate anything I've said.)
"Compromise" requires both parties to abandon getting what they want. More word-twisting, maybe, but negotiation is what's required - in any society, and any age.
"Within reason" is a big pile of subjectivity. If the creator of the work doesn't get to define exactly what "within reason" means - then who does? The RIAA/MPAA/BSA? They probably wouldn't agree with _my_ notion of "within reason"... Tragedy-of-the-commons is the result when everyone acts within their own idea of "within reason".
(And now I have freaks...? For wishing geeks who work hard would get paid for their work?)
...you and your ilk will not be able to stop the matter copiers, once nanotechnology matures.
Wow. And here I didn't even know I had an "ilk". You've got me pegged as something unpleasant, even though I'm not sure we disagree. When that blissful day comes that...everyone can copy anything, including the boxes that themselves make the copies..., we'll certainly have to completely revamp the notions of ownership and attribution. But this is far afield from the article's topic (there are many archived/. discussions where copyrights and buggy whips have been discussed to death), and still in the realm of conjecture. Right now, though - with the current economic principles under which Doom3 was written and offered - people (at least some people) are taking something which has a price tag and refusing to pay for it. Yes, copying will never be stopped - and yes, the laws will look quite different in ten years. We're not yet at that techno-wonderland where money has no meaning. That's theoretically interesting but "it don't put bread on the table," and even game programmers gotta eat. If you want them to do Doom4 for free, the time to break that news to 'em is well before it goes on sale. Then, we'll see what they do. But they wrote this title with the currently common expectation that enough people would pay for it to make it worth their time and trouble, and that's not an idiotically outdated hope.
But hey, what do I know, maybe great word-of-mouth will generate far more sales down the line for 'em. That's what we say about P2P music usage, 'round these parts (but my ilk might not see it that way).
Interesting... I didn't use the word 'crime'. You did.
Clearly I wasn't talking about legal terminology.
Whether or not anyone is "caught", it's still theft (a quaint old moral concept which would become appropriate to use when an artist's work was misappropriated against their stated wishes).
Coward, coward, coward. Copying bits that are arranged in a deliberate order against the stated wishes of the material's creator is theft. So is "borrowing" it. If it's worth owning, wait for it and pay for it. If you don't "wanna pay for it", and the creator hasn't told you it's free for the taking, you have no right to possess a copy of it.
Your ad hominem slur doesn't stick, either. Perhaps you've never produced content with the intent or hope of making your living from it. (If that seems evil to you, that's a shame.) Endless copying provides precious little incentive for the codemonkeys who dumped a lot of their life into this title.
Wrong, yet again, when you say that people can be responsible for "making people think" anything... but that's a whole different topic.
Without going any further offtopic (and having read enough grumbles about Apple's customer service as well), you don't know how many times I wish we'd gone with Darwin (and saved ~$40K)...
Those decreased iTunes sales are not going to hurt nearly as much as pissing off prospective | repeat iPod buyers.
Your little analogy is ungood. As another poster says, "You can play MP3 and non-Protected AAC files (and other formats as well) on the iPod." Apple can only wish they have the kind of format lock-in the XBox has.
"Scientists have discovered a new process for how memories are stored. And a key player in the process is a protein from the same class of prions that include the deadly agents that spawn diseases of brain deterioration, such as mad cow disease.
Their study, published [19 Dec 2003 ?] in two papers in the journal Cell, suggests that proteins in a mishapen or prion state are not always up to no good in the brain.
'For a while we've known quite a bit about how memory works, but we've had no clear concept of what the key storage device is,' said Susan Lindquist, director of the Whitehead Institute for Biomedical Research in Cambridge, Mass., and co-author of the study with Eric Kandel of Columbia University...."
Your remarks make me wonder if the providers are worrying less about churn than they used to.
About a year ago, after AT&T Wireless finally sporked me for the last time, I went with T-Mobile because they were the only provider here in Sacramento which offered a one-year contract, as opposed to 2-year lock-ins...
You're talking about the company which charged PC sellers for every unit they shipped - whether or not the OS was even installed on the unit. That's magically making a monopoly.
Resisting those seller's attempts to offer other browsers or media players is catering to the inertia of the masses.
I think you greatly underestimate how much business users have adapted their processes to the software. If expectations are lowered (repeatedly) it means a lot less to say it "fulfilled its purpose." And "adequate" - when despicable steps are taken to make sure the competitor's offerings won't even run on the OS - is sloppy seconds.
Slashdot Mirror
This year, it was filed online. ONLY online. No other option.
/>
Requiring IE, all too often. Good thing it's integrated with the OS.
<grrr
When someone's computer gets all screwed up with viruses they often buy another computer to work around the problem.
/>
So I guess you've met my sister.
<grrr
I wonder how many people would be as amazed as my mom was to learn that her cell phone records were up for grabs. Whatever a clear definition of what "on the internet" may mean to you, it seems cynical to expect all nongeeks to just assume that nearly any "personal information" is so readily accessible...
/>
Anecdotally - with ISP's failing to educate their newbies about this, it usually comes as quite a shock to others when I can quickly browse to their own unlisted phone number / street address / age / etc.
<grrr
Salute - wish I had mod points for you (instead of excellent karma) and that I'd seen this topic earlier.
/>
The widespread tolerance of prison horrors and misery has always baffled me, being unpragmatic as well as so needlessly cruel. I support Stop Prisoner Rape and encourage the exploration of their website...
<grrr
An operator of an interactive computer service or an Internet service provider shall establish and maintain reasonable procedures to enable any person to request and obtain disclosure of the legal name and address of an information content provider who posts false or defamatory information about the person on a public forum website.
/>
Comes a vacuum, as posters retreat who aren't criminals but have reasonable fears of retribution, and a clear need for anonymity...
<grrr
... according to the article. (And cell phones ? This could get interesting.)
The bacteria they're most worried about don't usually exist outside of hospitals.
Cue jokes referring to one-handed web surfing.
<grrr>
Um.
To clarify, make that "... they're determined to mainstream it, either in concert with passive tracking devices which read the identifying information mixed under the audio..."
Sorry 'bout that.
<grrr>
RFID first, apparently - they're determined to mainstream it, either mixed under the audio (as detailed in the article) or Ad-ID...
<grrr>
From the Guerilla News Network, perhaps the original interview:
"I'm sitting there in a chair. The store's full of people watching this. All of a sudden, [a Baltimore County cop is] standing me up and handcuffing me behind my back, telling me, 'We have to do this until we get it straightened out.' Bolesta was then taken to the county police lockup in Cockeysville, where he sat handcuffed to a pole and in leg irons [for three hours] while the Secret Service was called in."
Best Buy isn't the worst villain here. Beware Baltimore County...
<grrr>
Since there's no way to tabulate all of the resources and staff time (worldwide) his efforts consumed, and no way to distribute a collected fine... yeah, I think theft on this scale calls for a hefty sentence. It's a shame such sentences aren't more common.
<grrr>
You reminded me of a recent Dvorak column titled "How to Kill Linux" (probably linked in many other /. threads)...
<grrr>
If you walked up to someone on the street and shot them in the head,
There used to be a difference between "suspect" and "offender".
<grrr>
Wish I was trusted with mod points for ya.
The problem with information (data), is that it can be very easily re-purposed, disseminated, aggregated, and combined with other sources. It happens all the time...
Having worked for law enforcement, I'm nervous about any aggregation of data in an era where politically hot issues so easily distort the quaint ol' concept of "innocent until proven guilty". Highly visible lists and uberdatabases making the news in recent years may serve to illustrate the difficulty of clearing one's name.
Certainly the intended purpose of many of these projects is laudable. But the unintended consequences of attempting to connect diverse "dots" can pose a threat that, well, doesn't seem to be acknowledged by many here... not to mention those in positions of power who are trusted to mitigate such risks.
<grrr>
Agreed. Just don't apply labels that don't fit.
Okay, okay. I was trying to make a distinction between the legal "label" and the common usage of the word...
Grrr.
But you're right, and I'm wrong.
(The "legal" and "moral" meanings are certainly not identical. That was what I had hoped to say by using the word "theft"... uh... imprecisely. Apologies all 'round.)
Again, though, don't make the mistake of assuming that the author of a work has some natural right to control the work.
Agreed, and understood - I intended to refer only to the "legal fiction" of such a right, not any "natural right."
<grrr>
Dude - good grief - wishing more people would honor the known terms of a business exchange is not "holding the world back"...
"I made something. If you want to see it, the price is _x_." There it is.
When we get closer to a moneyless world, and Doom16 is offered for nothing more than esoteric ego-boosting jollies, then I would think we'll both be railing against the pigopolists.
I can be a word-twister. I'll give you that one.
And I don't want to go way offtopic when this same debate has been archived here so many times before...
(Copying is unstoppable, and inevitable. Check.
That doesn't negate anything I've said.)
"Compromise" requires both parties to abandon getting what they want. More word-twisting, maybe, but negotiation is what's required - in any society, and any age.
"Within reason" is a big pile of subjectivity. If the creator of the work doesn't get to define exactly what "within reason" means - then who does? The RIAA/MPAA/BSA? They probably wouldn't agree with _my_ notion of "within reason"...
Tragedy-of-the-commons is the result when everyone acts within their own idea of "within reason".
(And now I have freaks...?
For wishing geeks who work hard would get paid for their work?)
<grrr>
...you and your ilk will not be able to stop the matter copiers, once nanotechnology matures.
...everyone can copy anything, including the boxes that themselves make the copies..., we'll certainly have to completely revamp the notions of ownership and attribution. /. discussions where copyrights and buggy whips have been discussed to death), and still in the realm of conjecture. Right now, though - with the current economic principles under which Doom3 was written and offered - people (at least some people) are taking something which has a price tag and refusing to pay for it.
Wow. And here I didn't even know I had an "ilk".
You've got me pegged as something unpleasant, even though I'm not sure we disagree.
When that blissful day comes that
But this is far afield from the article's topic (there are many archived
Yes, copying will never be stopped - and yes, the laws will look quite different in ten years. We're not yet at that techno-wonderland where money has no meaning. That's theoretically interesting but "it don't put bread on the table," and even game programmers gotta eat. If you want them to do Doom4 for free, the time to break that news to 'em is well before it goes on sale. Then, we'll see what they do.
But they wrote this title with the currently common expectation that enough people would pay for it to make it worth their time and trouble, and that's not an idiotically outdated hope.
But hey, what do I know, maybe great word-of-mouth will generate far more sales down the line for 'em. That's what we say about P2P music usage, 'round these parts (but my ilk might not see it that way).
<grrr>
Interesting... I didn't use the word 'crime'.
You did.
Clearly I wasn't talking about legal terminology.
Whether or not anyone is "caught", it's still theft (a quaint old moral concept which would become appropriate to use when an artist's work was misappropriated against their stated wishes).
<grrr>
Coward, coward, coward. Copying bits that are arranged in a deliberate order against the stated wishes of the material's creator is theft. So is "borrowing" it.
If it's worth owning, wait for it and pay for it.
If you don't "wanna pay for it", and the creator hasn't told you it's free for the taking, you have no right to possess a copy of it.
Your ad hominem slur doesn't stick, either. Perhaps you've never produced content with the intent or hope of making your living from it. (If that seems evil to you, that's a shame.) Endless copying provides precious little incentive for the codemonkeys who dumped a lot of their life into this title.
Wrong, yet again, when you say that people can be responsible for "making people think" anything... but that's a whole different topic.
<grrr>
it could be said that id did this to itself
Maybe in Bizarro World. But in this universe, thieves are responsible for the thefts.
<grrr>
Purely anecdotal, but I've gotta second this.
Without going any further offtopic (and having read enough grumbles about Apple's customer service as well), you don't know how many times I wish we'd gone with Darwin (and saved ~$40K)...
<grrr>
Those decreased iTunes sales are not going to hurt nearly as much as pissing off prospective | repeat iPod buyers.
Your little analogy is ungood. As another poster says, "You can play MP3 and non-Protected AAC files (and other formats as well) on the iPod." Apple can only wish they have the kind of format lock-in the XBox has.
<grrr>
RC - is there anything to the speculation of some that prions might not always be harmful?
..."
"Scientists have discovered a new process for how memories are stored. And a key player in the process is a protein from the same class of prions that include the deadly agents that spawn diseases of brain deterioration, such as mad cow disease.
Their study, published [19 Dec 2003 ?] in two papers in the journal Cell, suggests that proteins in a mishapen or prion state are not always up to no good in the brain.
'For a while we've known quite a bit about how memory works, but we've had no clear concept of what the key storage device is,' said Susan Lindquist, director of the Whitehead Institute for Biomedical Research in Cambridge, Mass., and co-author of the study with Eric Kandel of Columbia University.
thanks
<grrr>
Your remarks make me wonder if the providers are worrying less about churn than they used to.
About a year ago, after AT&T Wireless finally sporked me for the last time, I went with T-Mobile because they were the only provider here in Sacramento which offered a one-year contract, as opposed to 2-year lock-ins...
<grrr>
You're talking about the company which charged PC sellers for every unit they shipped - whether or not the OS was even installed on the unit. That's magically making a monopoly.
Resisting those seller's attempts to offer other browsers or media players is catering to the inertia of the masses.
I think you greatly underestimate how much business users have adapted their processes to the software. If expectations are lowered (repeatedly) it means a lot less to say it "fulfilled its purpose." And "adequate" - when despicable steps are taken to make sure the competitor's offerings won't even run on the OS - is sloppy seconds.
<grrr>
All those sites that you go to that have these ads are staying in business because of them.
:)
False.
If DoubleClick went away so would a lot of that content.
True.
Gotta watch out for "all" and "never"...
The devil doesn't really need an advocate, eh?
<grrr>