OK, so there may be a problem with the data. As we do not know how they got their data, maybe their is an issue with it. I strongly suspect, but can not prove, that they aggregated data from multiple trackers.
But, thank you for actually providing a reasoned answer.
As there is no professional certification for so-called software engineers nor for programmers, such "other industry members and subject matter experts" are neither. Who is to say who is an expert and what is to stop Joe Wannabe from claiming to be an expert programmer because he took C and Assembler 10 years ago in community college?
Really? Do you always know what is best for you in everything? Even the things you know little or nothing about? What you call "submission" is actually putting one's trust in someone else.
When someone important to you, including yourself, becomes deathly sick or injured, who are you going to choose between a mediocre doctor and an elite doctor?
By saying that the "elite" are selfish and greedy, one ignores the fact that the "elite" are those that are the best at what they do and arbitrarily assigns a values that generally may not be true. It is pandering to the lowest common denominator.
See, there you go again. You ignore evidence presented to you, then resort to name calling when called on it.
Yes, it is obvious you do not care about the truth, the law, or what is right as you have made up your mind that anything that benefits you is right regardless of the impact on others.
Oh, and you have not proved the data is garbage. You have merely claimed it is so and then demanded your word be believed as the truth.
I just pointed out two major flaws in your analogy, therefore your analogy can not perfect. By claiming it is perfect when presented with evidence it is seriously flawed, you have shown yourself to be a closed-minded zealot.
Their data may have been collected 2 years ago and analyze over the intervening time. Or it may have been collected over 2 years.
I suggest you check out the article linked to in the previous slashdot article.
No analogy is perfect, but some are horribly false. His was horribly false and he did make the statement that TorrentFreak knew more about torrents than the researchers. Well, Microsoft, perforce, knows more about Windows than anyone else.
But, if it will mollify you, how about PlanetHalo and Halo3?
On sites that allow both infringing and non-infringing data, only 0.3% of torrents are legal.
I would be interested in knowing how many trackers have no restrictions on infringing data, how many block infringing data, the number of torrents and seeders on each (basically the relative population sizes), and how many of the torrents on the blocking trackers are actually infringing.
The reason being that if infringement blocking trackers account have a significantly smaller amount of traffic, then they might not have much of an effect on the result if all trackers were examined.
The researchers didn't examine one tracker or one torrent. Rather they sampled multiple torrents on multiple trackers.
The numbers in your analogy completely defy other reputable sources. The numbers in the study are similar those of another study done by Princeton.
If they are using "obviously bogus data", it should be easy to show how the data is "bogus". Yet, I don't see anything like that. What I see is someone who is biased saying "I don't believe it." No research, no numbers, no proof, no evidence, just opinion.
So, if the data is, as you say, "obviously bogus", prove it.
They looked at data from a specific set of 23 sites which probably did not include those sites. It is quite probable that they did not look at those sites specifically because they are limited. What they most-likely did was check sites which do not have a restricted policy.
To turn your own example against you.
If I were to do an analysis of FTP, and then deliberately limited my study to "controlled non-pirate" sites, I would come up with a hopelessly biased sample and useless numbers.
They checked sites which could contain infringing data. You suggest that check sites where they are guaranteed not to find infringing data. Which is data set is going to be more biased?
Torrentfreak has a vested interest in discrediting the study. If you substitute TorrentFreak with Microsoft and BitTorrent with Windows and your comment would be modded to oblivion.
We are supposed to believe the analysis of a biased entity over professional researchers?
What, exactly, are TorrentFreak's and Ernesto's qualifications to analyze the data? Do they have education or degrees that include statistical and/or numerical analysis of data?
Or, did they read it and decide that it can't possibly be true because they don't like the results? Is it not in their best interest to promote the idea that the study is flawed?
Looks like I have a new mod stalker. Someone who is too much of coward to face me in public and too stupid to make a decent argument is busy looking up my old comments and modding them down.
If you purchased the CDs and you still have the CDs, then you have a fair use defense. But, if you don't have the original CDs anymore, then you are still infringing on the copyright.
See, if you give away or lose your copy, you do not have a right to make a copy to replace it.
Really? So if "everyone" was committing murder, or rape, or driving drunk, or incest, or speeding, then there would be a problem with those laws too, right?
The entire thread up to your comment talks about the BP spill and U.S. law, not laws in general. Your comment about a spill in the waters of another country under a completely independent set of regulations is irrelevant.
They are discussing U.S. laws and regulation. You are making off-topic comments.
Form follows function? Really? A web browsers function was originally reading hyper-linked text. But people decided that it would be neat if one could see pictures. Then, hear sound. Then games, movies, etc.
Now, dumbass programmers try to use the browser as the interface to everything, regardless of whether it is appropriate. The other day on slashdot, there was someone asking about the best way to print from a browser because he was writing an inventory management system for a company that used a web browser as the interface rather than write an appropriate interface.
I have no doubt you are of the same mind set. You have a hammer and treat everything like it is a nail.
Yes, tell me how much you like JavaScript when it locks up your browser. Remember this as you and your ilk continue to use the browser for more and more and basically turn it into an OS that runs on top of another OS. And, as more and more browsers are using the same innards (WebKit anyone), it is going to become a mono-culture. And, we know what happens with mono-cultures, don't we?
Meanwhile, you are using appeal to popularity to justify stupidity and laziness.
Slashdot Mirror
Nuclear power is doing fairly well in Europe, most notably France which gets 78% of its power from nuclear power.
Nuclear power has been around for over 50 years and in that time less than 5,000 have died from nuclear power plant accidents (ref)
Please do at least a little research on nuclear power before making unfounded claims.
OMG!!! FINALLY!!!! Someone with some sense.
OK, so there may be a problem with the data. As we do not know how they got their data, maybe their is an issue with it. I strongly suspect, but can not prove, that they aggregated data from multiple trackers.
But, thank you for actually providing a reasoned answer.
As there is no professional certification for so-called software engineers nor for programmers, such "other industry members and subject matter experts" are neither. Who is to say who is an expert and what is to stop Joe Wannabe from claiming to be an expert programmer because he took C and Assembler 10 years ago in community college?
As there is no supporting evidence or story and nothing that can be verified, it is, by definition, apocryphal.
Really? Do you always know what is best for you in everything? Even the things you know little or nothing about?
What you call "submission" is actually putting one's trust in someone else.
When someone important to you, including yourself, becomes deathly sick or injured, who are you going to choose between a mediocre doctor and an elite doctor?
By saying that the "elite" are selfish and greedy, one ignores the fact that the "elite" are those that are the best at what they do and arbitrarily assigns a values that generally may not be true. It is pandering to the lowest common denominator.
You blew it at 0.
See, there you go again. You ignore evidence presented to you, then resort to name calling when called on it.
Yes, it is obvious you do not care about the truth, the law, or what is right as you have made up your mind that anything that benefits you is right regardless of the impact on others.
Oh, and you have not proved the data is garbage. You have merely claimed it is so and then demanded your word be believed as the truth.
I just pointed out two major flaws in your analogy, therefore your analogy can not perfect. By claiming it is perfect when presented with evidence it is seriously flawed, you have shown yourself to be a closed-minded zealot.
Their data may have been collected 2 years ago and analyze over the intervening time. Or it may have been collected over 2 years.
I suggest you check out the article linked to in the previous slashdot article.
No analogy is perfect, but some are horribly false. His was horribly false and he did make the statement that TorrentFreak knew more about torrents than the researchers. Well, Microsoft, perforce, knows more about Windows than anyone else.
But, if it will mollify you, how about PlanetHalo and Halo3?
Actually, they should have framed it as follows:
I would be interested in knowing how many trackers have no restrictions on infringing data, how many block infringing data, the number of torrents and seeders on each (basically the relative population sizes), and how many of the torrents on the blocking trackers are actually infringing.
The reason being that if infringement blocking trackers account have a significantly smaller amount of traffic, then they might not have much of an effect on the result if all trackers were examined.
Your car analogy is false because:
If they are using "obviously bogus data", it should be easy to show how the data is "bogus". Yet, I don't see anything like that. What I see is someone who is biased saying "I don't believe it." No research, no numbers, no proof, no evidence, just opinion.
So, if the data is, as you say, "obviously bogus", prove it.
They looked at data from a specific set of 23 sites which probably did not include those sites. It is quite probable that they did not look at those sites specifically because they are limited. What they most-likely did was check sites which do not have a restricted policy.
To turn your own example against you.
They checked sites which could contain infringing data. You suggest that check sites where they are guaranteed not to find infringing data. Which is data set is going to be more biased?
Torrentfreak has a vested interest in discrediting the study. If you substitute TorrentFreak with Microsoft and BitTorrent with Windows and your comment would be modded to oblivion.
But, did you analyze the data before you made your comments?
We are supposed to believe the analysis of a biased entity over professional researchers?
What, exactly, are TorrentFreak's and Ernesto's qualifications to analyze the data? Do they have education or degrees that include statistical and/or numerical analysis of data?
Or, did they read it and decide that it can't possibly be true because they don't like the results? Is it not in their best interest to promote the idea that the study is flawed?
Looks like I have a new mod stalker. Someone who is too much of coward to face me in public and too stupid to make a decent argument is busy looking up my old comments and modding them down.
If you purchased the CDs and you still have the CDs, then you have a fair use defense. But, if you don't have the original CDs anymore, then you are still infringing on the copyright.
See, if you give away or lose your copy, you do not have a right to make a copy to replace it.
Really? So if "everyone" was committing murder, or rape, or driving drunk, or incest, or speeding, then there would be a problem with those laws too, right?
The entire thread up to your comment talks about the BP spill and U.S. law, not laws in general. Your comment about a spill in the waters of another country under a completely independent set of regulations is irrelevant.
They are discussing U.S. laws and regulation. You are making off-topic comments.
Get it?
That appears to be a configuration and monitoring tool for the NUFLO flow rate meter, not the control system.
U.S. law does not apply in Australian waters. Australian law does. How about we stick to what we are discussing: U.S. Law.
Please describe in detail the solution they were using and all available alternative solutions.
Also, show that this issue was caused by software and not, say, a bad SIMM or corrosion on a board.
Really? How many browsers use webkit? Thought so.
Form follows function? Really? A web browsers function was originally reading hyper-linked text. But people decided that it would be neat if one could see pictures. Then, hear sound. Then games, movies, etc.
Now, dumbass programmers try to use the browser as the interface to everything, regardless of whether it is appropriate. The other day on slashdot, there was someone asking about the best way to print from a browser because he was writing an inventory management system for a company that used a web browser as the interface rather than write an appropriate interface.
I have no doubt you are of the same mind set. You have a hammer and treat everything like it is a nail.
Yes, tell me how much you like JavaScript when it locks up your browser. Remember this as you and your ilk continue to use the browser for more and more and basically turn it into an OS that runs on top of another OS. And, as more and more browsers are using the same innards (WebKit anyone), it is going to become a mono-culture. And, we know what happens with mono-cultures, don't we?
Meanwhile, you are using appeal to popularity to justify stupidity and laziness.