So a computer that could play a billion games of Unreal simultaneously is just around the corner?
It seems that there are lots of stories covering the hardware aspect... And the hardware seems inevitable, it'll happen... The software aspect should be covered too though. Right now, the only place you can hear about new theoretical quantum algorithms is in somewhat obscure journals... We need some for the masses. All that power is great, but how do you use it?
And a random Simpsons quote that seems appropriate:
Burns: Here I have a thousand monkeys working on a thousand typewriters. Soon, they'll have written the greatest novel ever written. [taking a manuscript from a monkey at a typewriter and reading] "It was the best of times, it was the... Blurst of times?!" You stupid monkey!
Alright, the whole idea of CPRM really does scare me. I'll buy drives from manufacturers that don't support CPRM if I have to.
My question however, is that even if this standard is "beaten down" in ATA, how likely is it that a software-only solution could be devised? Don't hard drives already have unique ID numbers encoded on them?
Are we directing our attention to the wrong problem, where instead we should be clamouring for fair-use protections in general?
Perhaps this is too political a question, but I'd love to hear the thoughts of someone so close to the issue.
Let's think about the DAT format, and the fact that every consumer-level DAT machine obeys the copy-protect bit when recording digital inputs. You can't copy DAT recordings of copy-once inputs... It's been like that for a long time. Nobody noticed, because only a few people embraced DAT.
But it's there, and it'll be there in digital TV, I will bet. I understand why the industry wants this: Greed. But I don't understand why the government has let it get this far. The consumer has rights. The government is there to protect the consumer (yes I, like the majority of the nation, voted for Gore).
If Bush had made consumer fair-use rights part of his platform, I would have overlooked that he's going to start an arms race with China, won't prosecute Microsoft when they appeal, and will try to take away my right to personal privacy... Well maybe not the last one, but Gore kinda wants to take that too...
My point is, this issue is major, because the technology is being standardized NOW. Strong action needs to be taken, and I'm not just talking about whining on Slashdot. Not just emails to congress... Physical mail. Did you contribute to their campaign? Get a friggin' appointment with them and tell them in no uncertain terms how serious this issue is.
I have personally begun accumulating shares of several equipment manufacturers... Now I have a stronger voice to them. And it's getting stronger. But I'm just one man...
Of course this is anecdotal evidence, but my mother, who has an English degree could definately be considered linguistically adept, could never program. Not a computer, and most likely not even a VCR.
The logic of saying that linguistically gifted persons could be good programmers because many programmers are above average linguists is flawed. It is similar to saying that since most apples are red, something red is probably an apple.
Fundamentals of programming are problem solving, organizational ability, semantics, and attention to detail. I have to take issue with those saying that "higher math" has anything to do with the majority of programmers' daily lives... Last time I checked, "decrease inventory by 1 and bill the customer" was NOT higher math. But I guess that really depends on what work you're doing...
In any case, I'd say those in fields other than linguistics would be far better suited to programming... Any engineering field, most likely... Problem solving is the common need amongst those fields. It's not a major stretch.
We're getting a little bit off-topic here, but hash tables and n-base converters are still not higher math. Higher math, by schooling standards anyways, would be linear algebra, calculus, even trigonometry...
A "real" programmer can write a nontrivial program without touching anything remotely "higher math." The only exceptions would be trig (which was tought in 9th grade) and matrices, both of which usually have reasonably specialized uses in 2/3d manipulations.
Back to topic, and my original expression, a linguistically adept person can have a great understanding of syntax, but none of core logic (hash tables, stacks, even while loops)... So the underlying statement is that linguistic ability does not a "real programmer" make.
You can't force them to agree to something you like because you think it will be good for them anyway. The bottom line is if they don't like it (and the courts agree with them) then you can't do it.
But that's the great part about capitalism... If enough consumers want it, it doesn't matter what the "industry" wants, consumers can vote with their pocketbooks...
Of course, consumers would have to agree on what they wanted... And that hasn't happened, at least not yet.
My personal thoughts on record companies is that they won't make more money (as some have suggested). They'll go out of business or find a new business. Let's look back at other industries that were eliminated or had to adapt due to technological change (and what caused it)
Pony Express (Telegraph)
Human Phone Operators (Mechanical Switches)
Train-based Cargo Service (Highways)
Trains are my favorite comparison... They had been the only real way for farmers (artists) to get their product to the consumer. They were not convenient, so you had to bring your product to them. They could charge what they wanted, nuts to the farmer.
Then came the massive infrastructure buildup, interstate highways, long-haul trucks, with competition between trucking lines. All of a sudden the railroad wasn't the best way to transport goods. Trucks could go all the way from producer to consumer, no loading or unloading, no trouble because there wasn't a train station in your town. Trucking was better and cheaper, and competitive speedwise.
So the rail industry began to shrink. Bankruptcy and all sorts of nastiness ensued. But eventually the market stabilized, and trains haul what they do well (big, heavy things long distances), trucks doing what they do well (everything else).
If we want to make this similar to the RIAA, the train lines of the time would have petitioned the government to make hauling corn by truck illegal, or coated the farmers' goods with an epoxy that only the train companies could remove once it was at market (it's a stretch, but gimme a break).
In summary, the RIAA should realize that they are not in control... The artists and consumers are, and the RIAA membership is not really needed anymore. They need to find a new way to add value, instead of these stopgap measures to try to secure a distribution position that shouldn't even exist anymore... Or they won't exist anymore.
Slashdot Mirror
So a computer that could play a billion games of Unreal simultaneously is just around the corner?
It seems that there are lots of stories covering the hardware aspect... And the hardware seems inevitable, it'll happen... The software aspect should be covered too though. Right now, the only place you can hear about new theoretical quantum algorithms is in somewhat obscure journals... We need some for the masses. All that power is great, but how do you use it?
And a random Simpsons quote that seems appropriate:
Burns: Here I have a thousand monkeys working on a thousand typewriters. Soon, they'll have written the greatest novel ever written. [taking a manuscript from a monkey at a typewriter and reading] "It was the best of times, it was the... Blurst of times?!" You stupid monkey!
Alright, the whole idea of CPRM really does scare me. I'll buy drives from manufacturers that don't support CPRM if I have to.
My question however, is that even if this standard is "beaten down" in ATA, how likely is it that a software-only solution could be devised? Don't hard drives already have unique ID numbers encoded on them?
Are we directing our attention to the wrong problem, where instead we should be clamouring for fair-use protections in general?
Perhaps this is too political a question, but I'd love to hear the thoughts of someone so close to the issue.
-Jason
It seems really likely that this will happen...
Let's think about the DAT format, and the fact that every consumer-level DAT machine obeys the copy-protect bit when recording digital inputs. You can't copy DAT recordings of copy-once inputs... It's been like that for a long time. Nobody noticed, because only a few people embraced DAT.
But it's there, and it'll be there in digital TV, I will bet. I understand why the industry wants this: Greed. But I don't understand why the government has let it get this far. The consumer has rights. The government is there to protect the consumer (yes I, like the majority of the nation, voted for Gore).
If Bush had made consumer fair-use rights part of his platform, I would have overlooked that he's going to start an arms race with China, won't prosecute Microsoft when they appeal, and will try to take away my right to personal privacy... Well maybe not the last one, but Gore kinda wants to take that too...
My point is, this issue is major, because the technology is being standardized NOW. Strong action needs to be taken, and I'm not just talking about whining on Slashdot. Not just emails to congress... Physical mail. Did you contribute to their campaign? Get a friggin' appointment with them and tell them in no uncertain terms how serious this issue is.
I have personally begun accumulating shares of several equipment manufacturers... Now I have a stronger voice to them. And it's getting stronger. But I'm just one man...
Of course this is anecdotal evidence, but my mother, who has an English degree could definately be considered linguistically adept, could never program. Not a computer, and most likely not even a VCR.
The logic of saying that linguistically gifted persons could be good programmers because many programmers are above average linguists is flawed. It is similar to saying that since most apples are red, something red is probably an apple.
Fundamentals of programming are problem solving, organizational ability, semantics, and attention to detail. I have to take issue with those saying that "higher math" has anything to do with the majority of programmers' daily lives... Last time I checked, "decrease inventory by 1 and bill the customer" was NOT higher math. But I guess that really depends on what work you're doing...
In any case, I'd say those in fields other than linguistics would be far better suited to programming... Any engineering field, most likely... Problem solving is the common need amongst those fields. It's not a major stretch.
I like pizza.
We're getting a little bit off-topic here, but hash tables and n-base converters are still not higher math. Higher math, by schooling standards anyways, would be linear algebra, calculus, even trigonometry...
A "real" programmer can write a nontrivial program without touching anything remotely "higher math." The only exceptions would be trig (which was tought in 9th grade) and matrices, both of which usually have reasonably specialized uses in 2/3d manipulations.
Back to topic, and my original expression, a linguistically adept person can have a great understanding of syntax, but none of core logic (hash tables, stacks, even while loops)... So the underlying statement is that linguistic ability does not a "real programmer" make.
But that's the great part about capitalism... If enough consumers want it, it doesn't matter what the "industry" wants, consumers can vote with their pocketbooks...
Of course, consumers would have to agree on what they wanted... And that hasn't happened, at least not yet.
My personal thoughts on record companies is that they won't make more money (as some have suggested). They'll go out of business or find a new business. Let's look back at other industries that were eliminated or had to adapt due to technological change (and what caused it)
- Pony Express (Telegraph)
- Human Phone Operators (Mechanical Switches)
- Train-based Cargo Service (Highways)
Trains are my favorite comparison... They had been the only real way for farmers (artists) to get their product to the consumer. They were not convenient, so you had to bring your product to them. They could charge what they wanted, nuts to the farmer.Then came the massive infrastructure buildup, interstate highways, long-haul trucks, with competition between trucking lines. All of a sudden the railroad wasn't the best way to transport goods. Trucks could go all the way from producer to consumer, no loading or unloading, no trouble because there wasn't a train station in your town. Trucking was better and cheaper, and competitive speedwise.
So the rail industry began to shrink. Bankruptcy and all sorts of nastiness ensued. But eventually the market stabilized, and trains haul what they do well (big, heavy things long distances), trucks doing what they do well (everything else).
If we want to make this similar to the RIAA, the train lines of the time would have petitioned the government to make hauling corn by truck illegal, or coated the farmers' goods with an epoxy that only the train companies could remove once it was at market (it's a stretch, but gimme a break).
In summary, the RIAA should realize that they are not in control... The artists and consumers are, and the RIAA membership is not really needed anymore. They need to find a new way to add value, instead of these stopgap measures to try to secure a distribution position that shouldn't even exist anymore... Or they won't exist anymore.