Where my concern comes is that DRM can be made very invasive and there exists a non-null probability that DRM will become so restrictive that no material that lacks DRM signatures will be able to be used.
This is what I don't get. Why would the government, or anyone else, have any interest in forcing me to DRM my own web page? One that I don't want to DRM because I want it to have the maximum amount of exposure? That I want people to copy, distribute, etc.? (See example above or below.:)
And I can just see the argument for making equipment without DRM illegal.
Because I don't agree with the premiss of your argument, I can't agree with the conclusion. I don't see the argument wny making equipment without DRM illegal as long as that equipment cannot legally access DRM content, which given the DMCA it cannot.
Looks to me like the days of the "home brew" computer are coming back. There will very quickly be a market for non-DRM computers.
Agreed.
Of course, then we can expect the government to make it illegal to own non-DRM'd computing equipment. You know what this sounds like? Stallman's "right to read" dystopia. (Check it out on GNU.org).
I don't agree. Non-DRMed computing equipment will simply be unable to acceess DRM content. If the computer can't access DRM content without permission, authorization or payment, DRM content providers won't care. They already have all that they need: DRM software and the DMCA.
Some content providers (e.g., individuals with web pages, Google Groups/Usenet, perhaps corporate providers such as CNN depending on the market) will continue to be happy to provide non-DRM content. Non-DRM computers will be able to access that content, and some (perhaps many) will be content with that.
The key issue is not merely the "right to read," but instead the "right to read what?" or "the right to read [fill in the blank]" under what terms and conditions.
The typical Slashdot submission (including this one) assumes that everyone has the "right" to read everything on every possible device despite the fact that the content is offered subject to specific terms and conditins, and that one agrees to the terms and conditions before accessing the content.
It appears the attitude is, "Yeah, I know this is subject to agreed terms and conditions, and DRM, and I agreed to same when I downloaded it, but DAMN IT, I WANTED IT. I have a "right" to enter into a contract, and knowingly download DRM content, and then just say, screw you."
Re:What's important is; Shareholder lawsuit
on
Gosling on Opening Java
·
· Score: 3, Insightful
What's important is that they open-source it before Sun tanks, or before some nasty company takes control of it. In short, they ought to do like Netscape did, and I'm sure even McNealy would rather do that than any other alternative...
Well, at least as long as they don't admit to doing so publicly.:) Can you say, "Shareholder lawsuit for waste of, or giving away, corporate assets?" I knew you could.:)
Yes, your Honor, we decided to essentially give away our valuable intellectual property for no consideration (i.e., nothing in return) before some "nasty company" could either: (a) buy the property; or (b) pay more for Sun's stock based on Sun's owndership of the property. NO, we wouldn't want that! Not if it meant Microsoft might get the property. Similarly, we couldn't possibly take the risk that MS would buy the asset out of bankruptcy, thereby enriching our creditors and/or stockholders.
Is that reduced timeline maybe an example of what this/. article from a couple months ago was talking about? Essentially it stated that a lot of the new worms are actually being caused by the reverse engineering of patches to easily find exploits.
"...when pressed about U.S. kids who do well in both, attend excellent universities, but have no guarantees of good jobs when they graduate, Barrett remarks 'I don't have a solution to that one.'"
Guess what America, no more getting fed an easy life. If you are smart enough to excel in school then try to apply that knowledge in getting a job. Americans have to learn to be resourceful and accept blame when they fail. I don't think Americans understand that. * * * America needs to stop crying and accept the change.
4. How is Gentoo, the company, organized? What is its member structure? Also, how one can get CVS commit access?
Daniel Robbins: At its heart, Gentoo Linux really isn't a company but a development team and user community. I do have a corporation called Gentoo Technologies, Inc. that holds the copyrights for the vast majority of our GPL code, but that's it. We aren't generating any income from Gentoo Linux (besides donations), and our development team is 100% volunteer. Generally, we have been completely supported by donations, particularly from a few of our developers. For example, our server is in a great datacenter thanks to a generous developer. As we grow, we plan to gradually wean ourselves from our dependence on donations by developing creative and "free software-friendly" ways of generating income.
Does Robbins own all of the stock in Gentoo Technologies, Inc.? If so, conversion to non-profit status may be easy (though having the IRS recognize it as non-profit for tax purposes may not.) If others own some of the stock, it conversion may prove problematic as they might have to agree. Otherwise, there might be a shareholders lawsuit for corporate waste (i.e., in this case, making a gift of corporate assets without compensation).
Why was Gentoo Technologies, Inc. initially set up as a for-profit company? It doesn't make sense. Since it was not a 501(c)(3) non-profit, donations to Gentoo Technologies, Inc. were not tax deductible. (Hell, it may have been the case that the donors were legally, albeit technically, responsible to pay gift tax on any donation over the annual limit.)
Which may be precisely the problem. "Peace of mind" causing parents to be inattentive, incautious, and careless. And when the systems goes down, as it inevitably will? Will there be civil liability, or will the parents have to sign a waiver of liability when they rent the wrist band for their child?
When the system goes down, will a child be lost, kidnapped, hurt, etc. that otherwise would not have been because his parents relied on the system instead of knowing that they, and only they were responsible for keeping track of their child?
Perhaps the analogy is a bad one, but this reminds me a bit of the problem national parks are having with people who *rely* on GPS and/or their cell phones to keep them out of trouble. No wilderness or outdoor skills, no ability to use a compass or read a map, and half of the time no jacket. But they figure as long as they have their cell phones, they'll be ok. And when they can't get reception, the battery goes dead, or they drop it.....
Unlike cable DVRs, TiVo machines also can guess what programs a user might enjoy based on viewing habits.
Does this remind anyone of Clippy? "It appears you are writing a letter....." Does anyone value this feature? Maybe its just me, but I don't like it when machines attempt to guess what my intentions are. I certainly wouldn't pay extra for the "feature."
Another scientific paper on the subject: "The ballistic impact characteristics of Kevlar (R) woven fabrics impregnated with a colloidal shear thickening fluid," JOURNAL OF MATERIALS SCIENCE 38 (2003) 2825 - 2833.
For a scientific paper on the subject, see Advanced Body Armor Utilizing Shear Thickening Fluids, by Y. S. Lee, R. G. Egres Jr. and N. J. Wagner, all of the Center for Composite Materials and Dept. of Chemical Engineering, U. of Delaware, and E. D. Wetzel of the Army Research Laboratory, Weapons and Materials Research Directorate Aberdeen Proving Ground.
For a University of Delaware Press Release (with photos), see here.
The iPod Mini was almost universally laughed at on Slashdot, and we seem to have a bad record of predicting these things (the original iPod announcement comes to mind..."Lame"). Apple does research which they use to develop new products. All we have is our personal preferences and better-than-you attitudes.
Yes, but our personal preferences and "better-than-you attitudes" could be the basis for a valuable new market research tool. Whenever the consensus on Slashdot is that a new product is "lame," the only proper conclusion is that it is going to be a big hit. If you're lucky enough for the Slashdot consensus to be that your product "sucks," then, Yoo Hoo!, buy your company's stock.
On the other hand, if the Slashdot crowd praises your product -- particularly if they go on and on and on about its infinate configurability and the fact that there are many ways to accomplish the same task -- you might want to take a second look.
If the ground measurements are 0.34 degrees/decade, and the external measurements are 0.43 degrees/decade, then presumably the extra energy is contained within the circulating atmosphere.
If this is true, does it mean that we are in for some rough weather? Is there anything other than anecdotal evidence that the weather has been worse (i.e., more windy, "energy... contained within the circulating atmosphere") over the past 18 years than it was before?
Then again, does the book violate the DMCA?
on
Hardware Hacking
·
· Score: 2, Interesting
No mod chips were used in the book, at least from what I can see. So maybe you should stop jumping to conclusions and do some research before spouting your mouth off.
Thanks for the calm, rational and respectful reply. Did more research. Turns out that, at least as far as Sony is concerned, the presence of a "mod chip" is not necessary to allege a violation of the DMCA. Indeed, as noted by Prof. David S. Touretzky at Carnegie Mellon University, merely publishing information aiding circumvention of a copyright protection or management system can cause Sony to assert a DMCA claim:
The creator of aibohack.com, who uses the pseudonym "AiboPet", was distributing modified versions of Sony's software for the AIBO robot pet. Clearly this was a copyright violation that Sony had the right to protest.
But he was also publishing some basic information about the protection scheme for the AIBO's memory stick. In their letter to him, Sony claimed this little essay violated the DMCA and asked that the file be taken down.
Similarly, your response regarding the copy protection protocol does not justify your actions. Your discontinuation of "Format AIBO" is certainly a step in the right direction. However, your site still contains
information providing the means to circumvent AIBO-ware's copy protection protocol constituting a violation of the anti-circumvention provisions of the Digital Mellennium Copyright Act.
Rather than focusing on pirates, many copyright owners have chosen to use the DMCA to hinder their legitimate competitors. For example, Sony has invoked section 1201 to protect their monopoly on Playstation video game consoles, as well as their "regionalization" system limiting users in one country from playing games legitimately purchased in another.
* * * *
Sony Attacks Playstation "Mod Chips"
Apart from using the DMCA against vendors of personal computer emulators of Sony's Playstation, Sony has sued a number of manufacturers of so-called "mod chips" for alleged circumvention under the DMCA. In doing so, Sony has been able to enforce a system of geographical regional restrictions that raises significant anticompetitive issues.
So-called "mod chips" are after-market accessories that modify Playstation consoles to permit games legitimately purchased in one part of the world to be played on a games console from another geographical region. Sony has sued mod chip manufacturers in the U.S., the U.K., and Australia. In the U.S., Sony sued Gamemasters, Inc., distributor of the Game Enhancer peripheral device, which allowed U.S. Playstation users to play games purchased in Japan and other countries. Although there was no infringement of Sony's copyright, the court granted an injunction under the DMCA's anti-circumvention provisions, effectively banning the use of a technology that would permit users to use legitimately-purchased non-infringing games from other regions.
particular those who want to target punters without a PC
If I didn't have a PC with a wireless lan card, I'm pretty sure I wouldn't have a wireless access point. If I didn't have a computer, why would I have a broadband internet connection?
Yikes! You're right. How stupid (of me to have missed the obvious)!
This is is really stupid... or diabolically clever! You ask, "If I didn't have a computer, why would I have a broadband internet connection?" Before, there was no good reason to have a broadband internet connection. (There probably still isn't.) But now there is at least one plausible reason -- Internet Radio! Don't own a computer? Don't know how to operate a computer? Can't afford a computer? NO PROBLEM! Just pay $XX per month and purchase our Internet Radio for $XXX (with low montly payments) and you can listen to radio stations in Hi Fidelity from around the world!
Still there's MORE! For just $XXX for the Internet Television, enjoy streaming Internet Video (porn) from all around the world!
Hutchison wouldn't say who he's been talking to, but he claimed to have received plenty of interest from ISPs looking to build products to sell on top of their broadband access offerings - particular those who want to target punters without a PC.
Isn't this just a severely crippled laptop with a WiFi card or built-in WiFi? Isn't this like those e-mail only machines that were sold awhile back? (We all know how popular those proved to be.) What happens when one wants to do some Stream Ripping?
Given these limitations, how much would you pay for something like this? At what point does it make more sense to simply by a laptop with a WiFi card or built in WiFi?
These days it's risky to release information about a security vulnerability without having a patch in place first. Look at Blaster - I believe that the author *used a security bulletin* to write the worm and then just targeted unpatched machines.
Until managed applications become the norm, however, we need a better process for distributing patches. The Witty worm, released March 19, provides a good example of why this is true. The Witty worm affects products produced by Internet Security Systems Inc. (ISS). It exploits a vulnerability in the Protocol Analysis Module software component used across the ISS product line. Affected software products included the BlackIce firewall products and RealSecure security products (see story).
* * * *
Lastly, and most importantly, once the patch was released, the exploit was released the very next day. This wasn't a coincidence where the exploiters just missed having a zero-day exploit. If the patch had been released a week earlier, the worm also would have come out a week earlier.
The patch had the specific information embedded in it that the exploiters needed, and the exploiters already had the expertise and tools required to rapidly make use of the information.
The latest version of Diebold's GEMS software that was certified in California is 117.17; the audit revealed that counties were using other versions, such as 117.20, 117.22, 117.23, 118.18, and 118.18.02. The audit also revealed that three counties -- Los Angeles, Trinity and Lassen -- were using software versions that had not been approved for use at the federal level.
if programming and programmers tried to make their code smaller, while avoiding pitfalls like 600MB installs (re q3,halflife etc.) wouldn't the games be more popular?
I have no doubt that they would be more desireable. I do doubt they would sell more because games would cost more. Making the code smaller costs money, which would translate into higher prices and lower demand. It might even be the case that game manufacturers would make less money as any increased profit due to higher prices would be offset by the decreased demand.
The feds are just taking care of their corporate masters, that's all.
Obviously, the only thing that would make warez sites and online piracy organizations morally objectionable and properly subject to sanction would be if they distributed, sold or bartered binaries for derivative works of GPLed software in violation of the GPL.
Why don't we have a Federal Standard? I mean with all the problems I have been hearing about how some county's voting problems vary from county to county.
The Federal Election Commission has a FAQ About The National Voluntary Voting System Standards. According to the FAQ, "[a]s of April 2001, the following States have adopted the FEC's voting system standards *OR* require the testing of systems against the standards by independent testing authorities (ITAs) designated by the National Association of State Election Directors":
Alabama, Alaska, California, Colorado, Connecticut, Delaware, District of Columbia, Florida, Georgia, Hawaii, Idaho, Illinois, Indiana, Iowa, Kansas, Kentucky, Louisiana, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, Michigan, Minnesota, Missouri, Nevada, New Mexico, New York, Ohio, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, South Carolina, South Dakota, Tennessee, Texas, Utah, Virginia, Washington, Wyoming
Slashdot Mirror
I wonder if the author of the author of Dabber has violated the DMCA by circumventing a copyright protection system -- i.e., the code to the Sasser worm.
More specifically, I wonder if the author of Sasser can sue the author of Dabber for statutory damages of up to "$2,500 per act of circumvention."
This is what I don't get. Why would the government, or anyone else, have any interest in forcing me to DRM my own web page? One that I don't want to DRM because I want it to have the maximum amount of exposure? That I want people to copy, distribute, etc.? (See example above or below.
Because I don't agree with the premiss of your argument, I can't agree with the conclusion. I don't see the argument wny making equipment without DRM illegal as long as that equipment cannot legally access DRM content, which given the DMCA it cannot.
Agreed.
I don't agree. Non-DRMed computing equipment will simply be unable to acceess DRM content. If the computer can't access DRM content without permission, authorization or payment, DRM content providers won't care. They already have all that they need: DRM software and the DMCA.
Some content providers (e.g., individuals with web pages, Google Groups/Usenet, perhaps corporate providers such as CNN depending on the market) will continue to be happy to provide non-DRM content. Non-DRM computers will be able to access that content, and some (perhaps many) will be content with that.
The key issue is not merely the "right to read," but instead the "right to read what?" or "the right to read [fill in the blank]" under what terms and conditions.
The typical Slashdot submission (including this one) assumes that everyone has the "right" to read everything on every possible device despite the fact that the content is offered subject to specific terms and conditins, and that one agrees to the terms and conditions before accessing the content.
It appears the attitude is, "Yeah, I know this is subject to agreed terms and conditions, and DRM, and I agreed to same when I downloaded it, but DAMN IT, I WANTED IT. I have a "right" to enter into a contract, and knowingly download DRM content, and then just say, screw you."
Well, at least as long as they don't admit to doing so publicly.
Yes, your Honor, we decided to essentially give away our valuable intellectual property for no consideration (i.e., nothing in return) before some "nasty company" could either: (a) buy the property; or (b) pay more for Sun's stock based on Sun's owndership of the property. NO, we wouldn't want that! Not if it meant Microsoft might get the property. Similarly, we couldn't possibly take the risk that MS would buy the asset out of bankruptcy, thereby enriching our creditors and/or stockholders.
This appears to be a recurring theme on Slashdot -- i.e., that release of information about the vulnerability and/or the patch causes the exploit (attached to Slow Down the Security Patch Cycle?). See also here (attached to Secret Repairs Preceded TCP Flaw Release).
And don't complain about overtime pay.
People insist that they have a "right" to overtime pay. Fine. But they don't have a right not to have their jobs shipped off to India.
From OS News, Posted on 2002-05-14:
Does Robbins own all of the stock in Gentoo Technologies, Inc.? If so, conversion to non-profit status may be easy (though having the IRS recognize it as non-profit for tax purposes may not.) If others own some of the stock, it conversion may prove problematic as they might have to agree. Otherwise, there might be a shareholders lawsuit for corporate waste (i.e., in this case, making a gift of corporate assets without compensation).
Why was Gentoo Technologies, Inc. initially set up as a for-profit company? It doesn't make sense. Since it was not a 501(c)(3) non-profit, donations to Gentoo Technologies, Inc. were not tax deductible. (Hell, it may have been the case that the donors were legally, albeit technically, responsible to pay gift tax on any donation over the annual limit.)
From the article:
Copyright Assignment to Gentoo
Gentoo Technologies Inc. Copyright Assignment Form
Gentoo Documentation Issues
Which may be precisely the problem. "Peace of mind" causing parents to be inattentive, incautious, and careless. And when the systems goes down, as it inevitably will? Will there be civil liability, or will the parents have to sign a waiver of liability when they rent the wrist band for their child?
When the system goes down, will a child be lost, kidnapped, hurt, etc. that otherwise would not have been because his parents relied on the system instead of knowing that they, and only they were responsible for keeping track of their child?
Perhaps the analogy is a bad one, but this reminds me a bit of the problem national parks are having with people who *rely* on GPS and/or their cell phones to keep them out of trouble. No wilderness or outdoor skills, no ability to use a compass or read a map, and half of the time no jacket. But they figure as long as they have their cell phones, they'll be ok. And when they can't get reception, the battery goes dead, or they drop it.....
From the CRN/Associated Press story:
Does this remind anyone of Clippy? "It appears you are writing a letter....." Does anyone value this feature? Maybe its just me, but I don't like it when machines attempt to guess what my intentions are. I certainly wouldn't pay extra for the "feature."
Another scientific paper on the subject: "The ballistic impact characteristics of Kevlar (R)
woven fabrics impregnated with a colloidal
shear thickening fluid," JOURNAL OF MATERIALS SCIENCE 38 (2003) 2825 - 2833.
For a scientific paper on the subject, see Advanced Body Armor Utilizing Shear Thickening Fluids, by Y. S. Lee, R. G. Egres Jr. and N. J. Wagner, all of the Center for Composite Materials and Dept. of Chemical Engineering, U. of Delaware, and E. D. Wetzel of the Army Research Laboratory, Weapons and Materials Research Directorate Aberdeen Proving Ground.
For a University of Delaware Press Release (with photos), see here.
Yes, but our personal preferences and "better-than-you attitudes" could be the basis for a valuable new market research tool. Whenever the consensus on Slashdot is that a new product is "lame," the only proper conclusion is that it is going to be a big hit. If you're lucky enough for the Slashdot consensus to be that your product "sucks," then, Yoo Hoo!, buy your company's stock.
On the other hand, if the Slashdot crowd praises your product -- particularly if they go on and on and on about its infinate configurability and the fact that there are many ways to accomplish the same task -- you might want to take a second look.
For example, I just criticized the new WiFi radio as a crippled WiFi laptop. So how do I buy the stock?
If this is true, does it mean that we are in for some rough weather? Is there anything other than anecdotal evidence that the weather has been worse (i.e., more windy, "energy... contained within the circulating atmosphere") over the past 18 years than it was before?
Thanks for the calm, rational and respectful reply. Did more research. Turns out that, at least as far as Sony is concerned, the presence of a "mod chip" is not necessary to allege a violation of the DMCA. Indeed, as noted by Prof. David S. Touretzky at Carnegie Mellon University, merely publishing information aiding circumvention of a copyright protection or management system can cause Sony to assert a DMCA claim:
Victor Matsuda, Vice President, Entertainment Robot America, Sony Electronics Inc. stated in his letter of October 24, 2001:
This leads to the obvious question. Will Sony assert that the book Hardware Hacking violates the DMCA? Think this isn't possible? Then consider when HP used the DMCA to quash a vulnerability publication.
From the Publisher:
Which makes me ask, is there a chapter on your potential liability under the DMCA? --
Drinkers Purgatory
Yikes! You're right. How stupid (of me to have missed the obvious)!
This is is really stupid... or diabolically clever! You ask, "If I didn't have a computer, why would I have a broadband internet connection?" Before, there was no good reason to have a broadband internet connection. (There probably still isn't.) But now there is at least one plausible reason -- Internet Radio! Don't own a computer? Don't know how to operate a computer? Can't afford a computer? NO PROBLEM! Just pay $XX per month and purchase our Internet Radio for $XXX (with low montly payments) and you can listen to radio stations in Hi Fidelity from around the world!
Still there's MORE! For just $XXX for the Internet Television, enjoy streaming Internet Video (porn) from all around the world!
The ster article, "Firms prep Wi-Fi Internet radio tuners," states:
Isn't this just a severely crippled laptop with a WiFi card or built-in WiFi? Isn't this like those e-mail only machines that were sold awhile back? (We all know how popular those proved to be.) What happens when one wants to do some Stream Ripping?
Given these limitations, how much would you pay for something like this? At what point does it make more sense to simply by a laptop with a WiFi card or built in WiFi?
I wonder if this is a variation of the argument regarding whether we should "Slow Down the Security Patch Cycle?"
The story you tell about Blaster is similar to the Computer World story regarding the Witty worm:
Are you sure? Do you have a source?
The reason why I ask is because the National Association of State Election Directors has an Updated List of NASED Certified Systems. According to the Updated NASED List of Qualified Voting Systems (12/05/03 - Current), the following Diebold voting systems qualify:
Further, the Federal Election Commission has a FAQ About The National Voluntary Voting System Standards. The FAQ indicates that to meet the standards, an election system must satisfy either "FEC's voting system standards" *OR* pass tests "by independent testing authorities (ITAs) designated by the National Association of State Election Directors." Thus, the Diebold systems approved by NASED should satisfy the voluntary voting systems requirements for federal elections.
The Federal Election Commission has a FAQ About The National Voluntary Voting System Standards. The FAQ indicates that to meet the standards, an election system must satisfy either "FEC's voting system standards" or pass tests "by independent testing authorities (ITAs) designated by the National Association of State Election Directors."
The National Association of State Election Directors has, among other things:
(1) a List of NASED Certified Systems;
(2) an Updated List of NASED Certified Systems; and, most importantly,
(3) an Overview of the Certification Process.
Has the Open Voting Consortium made any attempt to get their software certified?
I have no doubt that they would be more desireable. I do doubt they would sell more because games would cost more. Making the code smaller costs money, which would translate into higher prices and lower demand. It might even be the case that game manufacturers would make less money as any increased profit due to higher prices would be offset by the decreased demand.
Actually, information wants to be anthropomorphized.
Obviously, the only thing that would make warez sites and online piracy organizations morally objectionable and properly subject to sanction would be if they distributed, sold or bartered binaries for derivative works of GPLed software in violation of the GPL.
The Federal Election Commission has a FAQ About The National Voluntary Voting System Standards. According to the FAQ, "[a]s of April 2001, the following States have adopted the FEC's voting system standards *OR* require the testing of systems against the standards by independent testing authorities (ITAs) designated by the National Association of State Election Directors":
The National Association of State Election Directors has, among other things:
(1) a List of NASED Certified Systems;
(2) an Updated List of NASED Certified Systems; and
(3) an Overview of the Certification Process.