Old school perhaps, but if they have no web presence, and you don't go to their shows just find their mailing address from their booking agent, mgr agency or fan club. You can bet artists:
- want to hear from fans - want to be accessible for donations - enjoy knowing you like them and are willing to pay
Gifts are easy to make. We all pay bills to all kinds of companies every month. Get out your stinkin' checkbook or whatnot and simply send the your favorite artists some money directly.
Please, skip buying their music from this insane system. Trade, beg, borrow or steal it, but donate to the artists you like. Send them the $10 for the album. Remove the guilt, feed your inner pirate, and get some new tunes. There are actually a lot of great bands out there, and plenty of ways to find them. And they would make much more from this than from wait for royalty checks from the AA
What is Art?
What is Love?
What is Beauty?
What is Truth?
What is...the point? Saying it never makes it so (except in baseball), so Roger bloats out to movies while others prefer different eye candy. So be it.
no different than the tabloid:
What is YoungerstersTooSassyForTheirOwnGood?
What is TheBestHolidayDestination?
What is MilkTooOldToDrink?
aimless wandering around
dressing up as a flying phallus (without a tie)
crowding around the "hot looking"
starting conversations with "check out my new script"...oh and there's new rules for Second Life too.
Given the advent of Web 2.0 services, the by-keystroke networking, and thus inspection, can indeed be done. even before you hit enter, and even if you backspace, the newer search toolbars' traffic can be inspected. I think this may be the legalization of the implicit keystroke logger.
Long ago and far away, IBM thought it would be simpler to add buttons above a keyboard to act as commands when the intuition of a "mode" for existing keys was not polling well in tests. So, the designer of the the keyboard layout at that time placed F1 to F12 along the top - more in certain situations. As the amoeba of OS's and apps crawl to now, we're still dealing with those, PLUS the various PC manufacturer's "helpful" buttons for instant internet, instant presentation mode, etc.
Buttons are not entirely bad, but they certain a bad habit. In the end, a product cannot determine the popularity of certain functions or patterns of use. So, building a button set is doomed in its relation to the machine being single-use or multi-use. For the iPhone there's a certain reaching for multi-use instrument - so I can agree with their current design. However, certain functions are simply unavoidable: disc eject, power, volume are all pretty standard PC buttons that I welcome. The rest are just clutter and I enjoy reprogramming them on a whim. I would expect the iPhone to have something similar: battery eject (Steve also doesn't like replacing batteries, I've noticed), power and volume.
Kind in mind: This argument is about the integration of a well-known tool into Studio, not it's use altogether. One can use these tools with Express via their independent UI's. MS is merely trying to keep the floodgates closed on the Express version because it's in their profitable pocket to sell that "integration" feature. There are quite a few tools to cram into Studio, not all good IMO. For the "folks at home" cracking out Express, good for you, but learn to use all the individual tools separately, not the integrated versions, the skills will transfer to other toolsets much more easily.
If you work in the industry, you usually get an MSDN membership ships all MS's top products (either partially or fully paid by your employer). If you don't, you may not really be in the MS development world - almost everything they ship has licensing costs. It's just part of their development world. (I'm avoiding the FOSS discussion here).
Personally, I purposefully dislike add-ins to Studio, as the bloat turns it into an all-in-one behemoth that (like Office) scares me.
Seriously, the articles do nothing more than point out the *best places* MySQL may or may not work, not that it is better than anything.
One size yet again does not fit all.
Exactly - MS's ad campaigns are battling...MS prior customers! Most people I see with a Zune tell me not to get one..they don't use the over-Pod features. Additionally, when they want to share some music.. they talk about simply giving me a thumbdrive to copy. WTF is MS thinking...Zune's DRM makes it DOA - as judged by MS's own Zune owners!
Everyone knows Thompson only markets games. His lawsuits are sideshows for excited teenagers and parents to get informed of the hottest new title.
I call bullshit. MS is only doing this to get street cred with the kids about how "realistic" or "adult" their latest Halo is.
The US patent office is a bank of concepts that allow courts to more cleanly delineate authorship, invention and ownership. That's all. It's not a commercial endorsement, not a proof in and of itself, and not final. Patents granted are the Office's best attempt at assigning a submitter to a described concept, and giving it a number.
However, the US doesn't reach across the globe (hence concepts may be easily copyable but not ultimately marketable), the concepts may indeed have originated elsewhere and diligence suffered, and a patent's only value is in the market it commands.
MS's entry into the market competes with a free product. That product can use ANY AND ALL of MS's patents, knowingly or not, and continue to survive well. Why? Because MS cannot chase down every user of the free products. Also, the companies using these products must be given adequate information as to *what* is in violation and time to remedy said problems. Only until it steadfastly refuses to do this can it really be considered in violation. Even then, it may disagree with MS's assumptions on the description of the patent, with the conclusion of the Patent Office, or finally with the jurisdiction of US patent law.
If MS leans on US foreign policy lawmakers to pressure other governments to punish violators of their claimed patents, several layers of argument cascade out: What foreign/domestic patents has MS themselves violated, or disregarded? Which patents are not considered valid in a global environment? Additionally, what aspects of global trade can the US tweak without painful repercussions?
They will pester and *maybe* sue the largest users, suggesting settlement by installing MS replacements. I believe this is a flawed strategy, however. MS can only create bad blood. It's hands are not clean, and its targets are also its customers. It should realize at some point that choice will arise and bridges burned are rebuilt in other directions - as has been going on for the past 10 years.
They don't realize this yet, but attacking FOSS only causes it to morph into something strong, more impervious to said attacks in the future. But attacking their customers about their use .
- Open the wifi completely up - drop the timebombs. People who share copyright info are subjective to...well, the mess we already have when they do it with laptops and phones.
- Allow cloudcasting, where folks can listen to you live
- Bring on the live recording components. Accessorize!
- Drop "squirt". Just drop it. It hurts my ears.
- Sexy means much much more design work. Milky brown is not a color.
- Hit the market pricepoint lower, selling a stripped version
- Drop all DRM. Do NOT create a music service for it, but merely play in the existing markets: people's owned music.
- Bring the APIs! Open it up!
my last suggestion:
- Sell of the whole damned thing to an external company and let them worry about it. Then get back to work innovating.
Well, if anything, this is one strong ad for the law firm. He ties together the CA-storm-on-the-horizon RICO, the MediaSecurity fallibility, the driftnet "Smith"-style instigations, and various CA anti-SLAPP and Rule 408 sentiment. Nicely done sir.
The RIAA will change nothing with this. However, they are going find folks spending the money (above and beyond settlement) to get press and dismissals, if possible. I believe the tide is turned.
Sure. Here's my advice: Get Out of The Fucking Way!
Great music is being made by innovative people all the time, distributed on channels that get relatively no market, listened to by people that have money and are willing to pay - but not enough people just yet.
Let radio be pay-per-month - there's a market. Let giant shows in packed stadiums sell tickets for $300 (+$25 per ticket "handling") - there's a market. Let radio continue to plug new artists (without payola!) by having producers screen music and create a "show". All could continue to be commercials markets for music.
But when I support a band, buy their disc at a local show, come home and transfer it everywhere INCLUDING my friend's devices (in exchange for some of his songs) - this is the way of the world and nothing can really stop it.
I'm a believer in creating a market that wants to consume your content, not digging into the crevices for micropayments. They could charge per person listening, per public playing, per machine holding the content, per episode, but enough already. It's art, meant to be created, enjoyed and rewarded - all are a sloppy process.
The market should simply facilitate ways for people to meet the artists, get to know them, and help them stay inspired. Alas, that machine already exists too - the local paper has a lot of band reviews, and there's more than enough sites. Labels already pimp their artists. So what should the RIAA do? Become a for-hire legal service for ensuring commercial uses of content are duly compensated to license holders. But stat OUT of the private use arena - it's just a losing battle.
while the revelation of the compound is somewhat novel, research around diseases has supposed "breakthroughs" like this quite often. the quest for funding outright on the web seems awkward, since there's more than enough foundations that fund cancer research and medicine. but i'm not in academia, so maybe this is the norm?
i'm not a big believer in conspiracies, and if cancer folks will travel to the backwaters of the earth to get voodoo remedies, shark parts and holy men to pray over them, they will surely fund anything with even a glimmer of promise. if this works, i expect it to float to the top once the news catches on (and it works).
That means Exxon is willing to buy someone's credibility to lend weight to a dissenting opinion. The ethical problems are:
- The "opinion" is financially motivated, thus it clouds the truth. Real science jobs pay for work done, and clarity of the results, regardless of the side it falls upon.
- Exxon has a stake in the public reaction to the UN's paper, thus they appear greedy (as corporations tend) and without respect for how scientific opinions are formed: study and dissent.
- The purchase of someone's credentials by Exxon for this paper, now a public trade, will severely compromise their perceived objectivity. That bounty should be much higher for any self-respecting scientist, closer to 1milUS.
Trying to chase MS through their Office releases, remaining completely compatable to a proprietary format is a fool's errand. This guy should have realized this way beforehand.
Linux, or any heterogeneous OS environment, works well when the data travels on an open protocol, not some convoluted, broken document format. MS does great work with their products, don't get me wrong, and I have a lot of respect for the Office suite. However, If they don't want people to use it without Windows, then don't chase it. It's just easier to work the psychology of the workers and convince them to use a different standard.
Any what's with that photo?! Did someone just mash his face backwards to fit in the frame?
Why not combine the ideas? Everyone should begin an order for a PC from Dell, HP, etc - and then fight to get XP or Linux on it, regardless of the OEM pushing. When (assumed) request cannot be met, cancel the order.
There are ways combat this - like requiring timing that only hardware can satisfy, but virtualization is a tough thing to hide from. In the end, it will require an dual-key system from each piece of hardware that the system accepts. You cannot write a virtual one because you cannot provide a valid key. Yes, yes, I know this is a terrible design.
Then you degrade the problem to a Man in the Middle, where your microcode simulates a processor and performs some operations before/after sending to same/different hardware. Microcode is the standard for many OS's now.
In these cases, the OS sends a public key to the hardware, and receives one in return, you can capture them but cannot mimic these pieces. Then, each buffer in the pipeline ends up encrypted, leaving you to decipher.
This is the gist of the whole architecture: locking down anywhere one could put custom code. The problem is, in a heterogeneous environment, there's no much stability with asking a whole market to obey these specs. Someone is going to write hardware that conforms, but has an unencrypted out channel. In fact, companies will simple comply to the Trusted Computing program but sell this out at a high price. MS creates a valued market out of it's security scheme, losing both the anti-piracy initiative, and the content providers' trust, eventually.
Until these phases come to pass, the market moves slowly to adjust to the new formats and pricing. Content providers pour into the channels believing the issue is "solved". Then, suddenly, an unrevokeable layer is compromised (as in: you cannot re-stamp all the discs already on the market) and much of the content appears in black market format. The market floods easily because people do not believe the cost of the model is worth the output (like music today).
If you think I'm speculating, all of this has happened before. Hacking in all it's forms has never had any different lesson.
Scanning/Copying based on a terminator byte pattern is fraught with error and is definitely not secure.
Buffer sizes are terribly problematic when left tot he caller to check on overflow. It must be in the methods, and thus part of the data structure. (see point above).
Strings these days are UTF-7 or 8, which makes them an even better candidate for a object-based construct rather than a memory map.
The effort to uniquely watermark each copy individually is similar to encoding...high processor time. So I doubt this will be done per consumer. Perhaps per block of time or server. Even if it's per consumer, there is a hitch:
The encoding format is a known standard, so this the manipulation of the frames and core data is already possible. For example: decode to HD, perform some minor bit flipping on colors or clear out metadata areas, then encode (either MPEG4 again or to another format). Lossy compression muddies the water on the encode, so that it may not survive the pass. Only they have the tools to determine if the original owner is detectable from the end file.
violence depictions based on real-world events need a certain buffer to be forgiven. war/battle sims, movies and lots of other artistic content constantly invade/avoid such a buffer. 9/11 was "off-limits" until the softest, most congratulatory touches began - or hack comments about ethnicities, etc.
The buffer is time, or social distance, or satire versus sympathy (Borat movie comes to mind), etc.
These days, you can re-enact or view depictions the scenes from some major historical moments - many quite violent and offensive if there hadn't been that buffer.
i call nonsequiteur. if digital information can be backed up and stored to alleviate a disaster, then this fellow is simply using someone else's storage as his backup.
also, if someone has a photo of your mom and you lost yours in a flood, wouldn't you want to get a copy of theirs? even if that photo wasn't taken by you, but (say) printed in a magazine. Would you feel unfettered about having to back-order the magazine again, just for that photo?
Frankly, the Information Age is making digital information easy to copy, store and acquire. HE is the legal owner of that content - the physical presence is superfluous.
I find it depressing how each relevant news item causes an almost identical repeat of circular arguing from the standard positions on Global Warming. Nothing as yet has caused a "tipping point" of reconsideration from the average population. I'm just not hearing it from the charismatic speakers of divergent groups that Yes Indeed This Is A Problem.
This doesn't cause me to doubt it exists, or that we've caused it. It causes me to doubt that anything will seriously change. Business As Usual.
This shelf detaching (and then refreezing later) is a potential for Greenland. If we get a sudden few feet in ocean water (unlike an ice shelf, Greenland's ice will move from land to ocean), then an extended European winter, mass fishing industry havoc and the economic ripples everywhere - it may wake everyone up.
Or it may not. History has shown that death itself is the most effective societal teacher.
Slashdot Mirror
Old school perhaps, but if they have no web presence, and you don't go to their shows just find their mailing address from their booking agent, mgr agency or fan club. You can bet artists:
- want to hear from fans
- want to be accessible for donations
- enjoy knowing you like them and are willing to pay
Gifts are easy to make. We all pay bills to all kinds of companies every month. Get out your stinkin' checkbook or whatnot and simply send the your favorite artists some money directly.
Please, skip buying their music from this insane system. Trade, beg, borrow or steal it, but donate to the artists you like. Send them the $10 for the album. Remove the guilt, feed your inner pirate, and get some new tunes. There are actually a lot of great bands out there, and plenty of ways to find them. And they would make much more from this than from wait for royalty checks from the AA
scandal rocks the news world as debates rage:
What is Art?
What is Love?
What is Beauty?
What is Truth?
What is...the point? Saying it never makes it so (except in baseball), so Roger bloats out to movies while others prefer different eye candy. So be it.
no different than the tabloid:
What is YoungerstersTooSassyForTheirOwnGood?
What is TheBestHolidayDestination?
What is MilkTooOldToDrink?
IBM would like to discourage employees from
aimless wandering around
dressing up as a flying phallus (without a tie)
crowding around the "hot looking"
starting conversations with "check out my new script"
Given the advent of Web 2.0 services, the by-keystroke networking, and thus inspection, can indeed be done. even before you hit enter, and even if you backspace, the newer search toolbars' traffic can be inspected. I think this may be the legalization of the implicit keystroke logger.
Long ago and far away, IBM thought it would be simpler to add buttons above a keyboard to act as commands when the intuition of a "mode" for existing keys was not polling well in tests. So, the designer of the the keyboard layout at that time placed F1 to F12 along the top - more in certain situations. As the amoeba of OS's and apps crawl to now, we're still dealing with those, PLUS the various PC manufacturer's "helpful" buttons for instant internet, instant presentation mode, etc.
Buttons are not entirely bad, but they certain a bad habit. In the end, a product cannot determine the popularity of certain functions or patterns of use. So, building a button set is doomed in its relation to the machine being single-use or multi-use. For the iPhone there's a certain reaching for multi-use instrument - so I can agree with their current design. However, certain functions are simply unavoidable: disc eject, power, volume are all pretty standard PC buttons that I welcome. The rest are just clutter and I enjoy reprogramming them on a whim. I would expect the iPhone to have something similar: battery eject (Steve also doesn't like replacing batteries, I've noticed), power and volume.
I use these tools daily.
Kind in mind: This argument is about the integration of a well-known tool into Studio, not it's use altogether. One can use these tools with Express via their independent UI's. MS is merely trying to keep the floodgates closed on the Express version because it's in their profitable pocket to sell that "integration" feature. There are quite a few tools to cram into Studio, not all good IMO. For the "folks at home" cracking out Express, good for you, but learn to use all the individual tools separately, not the integrated versions, the skills will transfer to other toolsets much more easily.
If you work in the industry, you usually get an MSDN membership ships all MS's top products (either partially or fully paid by your employer). If you don't, you may not really be in the MS development world - almost everything they ship has licensing costs. It's just part of their development world. (I'm avoiding the FOSS discussion here).
Personally, I purposefully dislike add-ins to Studio, as the bloat turns it into an all-in-one behemoth that (like Office) scares me.
NOW
Seriously, the articles do nothing more than point out the *best places* MySQL may or may not work, not that it is better than anything.
One size yet again does not fit all.
Hmmm..where's my Model204 manuals...?
Exactly - MS's ad campaigns are battling...MS prior customers! Most people I see with a Zune tell me not to get one..they don't use the over-Pod features. Additionally, when they want to share some music.. they talk about simply giving me a thumbdrive to copy. WTF is MS thinking...Zune's DRM makes it DOA - as judged by MS's own Zune owners!
Everyone knows Thompson only markets games. His lawsuits are sideshows for excited teenagers and parents to get informed of the hottest new title.
I call bullshit. MS is only doing this to get street cred with the kids about how "realistic" or "adult" their latest Halo is.
The US patent office is a bank of concepts that allow courts to more cleanly delineate authorship, invention and ownership. That's all. It's not a commercial endorsement, not a proof in and of itself, and not final. Patents granted are the Office's best attempt at assigning a submitter to a described concept, and giving it a number.
However, the US doesn't reach across the globe (hence concepts may be easily copyable but not ultimately marketable), the concepts may indeed have originated elsewhere and diligence suffered, and a patent's only value is in the market it commands.
MS's entry into the market competes with a free product. That product can use ANY AND ALL of MS's patents, knowingly or not, and continue to survive well. Why? Because MS cannot chase down every user of the free products. Also, the companies using these products must be given adequate information as to *what* is in violation and time to remedy said problems. Only until it steadfastly refuses to do this can it really be considered in violation. Even then, it may disagree with MS's assumptions on the description of the patent, with the conclusion of the Patent Office, or finally with the jurisdiction of US patent law.
If MS leans on US foreign policy lawmakers to pressure other governments to punish violators of their claimed patents, several layers of argument cascade out: What foreign/domestic patents has MS themselves violated, or disregarded? Which patents are not considered valid in a global environment? Additionally, what aspects of global trade can the US tweak without painful repercussions?
They will pester and *maybe* sue the largest users, suggesting settlement by installing MS replacements. I believe this is a flawed strategy, however. MS can only create bad blood. It's hands are not clean, and its targets are also its customers. It should realize at some point that choice will arise and bridges burned are rebuilt in other directions - as has been going on for the past 10 years.
They don't realize this yet, but attacking FOSS only causes it to morph into something strong, more impervious to said attacks in the future. But attacking their customers about their use .
I disagree on some points:
- Open the wifi completely up - drop the timebombs. People who share copyright info are subjective to...well, the mess we already have when they do it with laptops and phones.
- Allow cloudcasting, where folks can listen to you live
- Bring on the live recording components. Accessorize!
- Drop "squirt". Just drop it. It hurts my ears.
- Sexy means much much more design work. Milky brown is not a color.
- Hit the market pricepoint lower, selling a stripped version
- Drop all DRM. Do NOT create a music service for it, but merely play in the existing markets: people's owned music.
- Bring the APIs! Open it up!
my last suggestion:
- Sell of the whole damned thing to an external company and let them worry about it. Then get back to work innovating.
Well, if anything, this is one strong ad for the law firm. He ties together the CA-storm-on-the-horizon RICO, the MediaSecurity fallibility, the driftnet "Smith"-style instigations, and various CA anti-SLAPP and Rule 408 sentiment. Nicely done sir.
The RIAA will change nothing with this. However, they are going find folks spending the money (above and beyond settlement) to get press and dismissals, if possible. I believe the tide is turned.
Sure. Here's my advice: Get Out of The Fucking Way!
Great music is being made by innovative people all the time, distributed on channels that get relatively no market, listened to by people that have money and are willing to pay - but not enough people just yet.
Let radio be pay-per-month - there's a market. Let giant shows in packed stadiums sell tickets for $300 (+$25 per ticket "handling") - there's a market. Let radio continue to plug new artists (without payola!) by having producers screen music and create a "show". All could continue to be commercials markets for music.
But when I support a band, buy their disc at a local show, come home and transfer it everywhere INCLUDING my friend's devices (in exchange for some of his songs) - this is the way of the world and nothing can really stop it.
I'm a believer in creating a market that wants to consume your content, not digging into the crevices for micropayments. They could charge per person listening, per public playing, per machine holding the content, per episode, but enough already. It's art, meant to be created, enjoyed and rewarded - all are a sloppy process.
The market should simply facilitate ways for people to meet the artists, get to know them, and help them stay inspired. Alas, that machine already exists too - the local paper has a lot of band reviews, and there's more than enough sites. Labels already pimp their artists. So what should the RIAA do? Become a for-hire legal service for ensuring commercial uses of content are duly compensated to license holders. But stat OUT of the private use arena - it's just a losing battle.
while the revelation of the compound is somewhat novel, research around diseases has supposed "breakthroughs" like this quite often. the quest for funding outright on the web seems awkward, since there's more than enough foundations that fund cancer research and medicine. but i'm not in academia, so maybe this is the norm?
i'm not a big believer in conspiracies, and if cancer folks will travel to the backwaters of the earth to get voodoo remedies, shark parts and holy men to pray over them, they will surely fund anything with even a glimmer of promise. if this works, i expect it to float to the top once the news catches on (and it works).
That means Exxon is willing to buy someone's credibility to lend weight to a dissenting opinion. The ethical problems are:
- The "opinion" is financially motivated, thus it clouds the truth. Real science jobs pay for work done, and clarity of the results, regardless of the side it falls upon.
- Exxon has a stake in the public reaction to the UN's paper, thus they appear greedy (as corporations tend) and without respect for how scientific opinions are formed: study and dissent.
- The purchase of someone's credentials by Exxon for this paper, now a public trade, will severely compromise their perceived objectivity. That bounty should be much higher for any self-respecting scientist, closer to 1milUS.
Trying to chase MS through their Office releases, remaining completely compatable to a proprietary format is a fool's errand. This guy should have realized this way beforehand.
Linux, or any heterogeneous OS environment, works well when the data travels on an open protocol, not some convoluted, broken document format. MS does great work with their products, don't get me wrong, and I have a lot of respect for the Office suite. However, If they don't want people to use it without Windows, then don't chase it. It's just easier to work the psychology of the workers and convince them to use a different standard.
Any what's with that photo?! Did someone just mash his face backwards to fit in the frame?
Why not combine the ideas? Everyone should begin an order for a PC from Dell, HP, etc - and then fight to get XP or Linux on it, regardless of the OEM pushing. When (assumed) request cannot be met, cancel the order.
There are ways combat this - like requiring timing that only hardware can satisfy, but virtualization is a tough thing to hide from. In the end, it will require an dual-key system from each piece of hardware that the system accepts. You cannot write a virtual one because you cannot provide a valid key. Yes, yes, I know this is a terrible design.
Then you degrade the problem to a Man in the Middle, where your microcode simulates a processor and performs some operations before/after sending to same/different hardware. Microcode is the standard for many OS's now.
In these cases, the OS sends a public key to the hardware, and receives one in return, you can capture them but cannot mimic these pieces. Then, each buffer in the pipeline ends up encrypted, leaving you to decipher.
This is the gist of the whole architecture: locking down anywhere one could put custom code. The problem is, in a heterogeneous environment, there's no much stability with asking a whole market to obey these specs. Someone is going to write hardware that conforms, but has an unencrypted out channel. In fact, companies will simple comply to the Trusted Computing program but sell this out at a high price. MS creates a valued market out of it's security scheme, losing both the anti-piracy initiative, and the content providers' trust, eventually.
Until these phases come to pass, the market moves slowly to adjust to the new formats and pricing. Content providers pour into the channels believing the issue is "solved". Then, suddenly, an unrevokeable layer is compromised (as in: you cannot re-stamp all the discs already on the market) and much of the content appears in black market format. The market floods easily because people do not believe the cost of the model is worth the output (like music today).
If you think I'm speculating, all of this has happened before. Hacking in all it's forms has never had any different lesson.
It thought this was cleared up years ago:
Scanning/Copying based on a terminator byte pattern is fraught with error and is definitely not secure.
Buffer sizes are terribly problematic when left tot he caller to check on overflow. It must be in the methods, and thus part of the data structure. (see point above).
Strings these days are UTF-7 or 8, which makes them an even better candidate for a object-based construct rather than a memory map.
I'd like to point out the....oh, wait...
The effort to uniquely watermark each copy individually is similar to encoding...high processor time. So I doubt this will be done per consumer. Perhaps per block of time or server. Even if it's per consumer, there is a hitch:
The encoding format is a known standard, so this the manipulation of the frames and core data is already possible. For example: decode to HD, perform some minor bit flipping on colors or clear out metadata areas, then encode (either MPEG4 again or to another format). Lossy compression muddies the water on the encode, so that it may not survive the pass. Only they have the tools to determine if the original owner is detectable from the end file.
violence depictions based on real-world events need a certain buffer to be forgiven. war/battle sims, movies and lots of other artistic content constantly invade/avoid such a buffer. 9/11 was "off-limits" until the softest, most congratulatory touches began - or hack comments about ethnicities, etc.
The buffer is time, or social distance, or satire versus sympathy (Borat movie comes to mind), etc.
These days, you can re-enact or view depictions the scenes from some major historical moments - many quite violent and offensive if there hadn't been that buffer.
I mean like I just got my WinNT installed and haven't upgraded the media player. Yah yah I know, I'm dumb but why don't they accommodate MEEEEEEEE.
Shaddap whiner. You're ranting about your install's current state, not the site.
i call nonsequiteur. if digital information can be backed up and stored to alleviate a disaster, then this fellow is simply using someone else's storage as his backup.
also, if someone has a photo of your mom and you lost yours in a flood, wouldn't you want to get a copy of theirs? even if that photo wasn't taken by you, but (say) printed in a magazine. Would you feel unfettered about having to back-order the magazine again, just for that photo?
Frankly, the Information Age is making digital information easy to copy, store and acquire. HE is the legal owner of that content - the physical presence is superfluous.
I find it depressing how each relevant news item causes an almost identical repeat of circular arguing from the standard positions on Global Warming. Nothing as yet has caused a "tipping point" of reconsideration from the average population. I'm just not hearing it from the charismatic speakers of divergent groups that Yes Indeed This Is A Problem.
This doesn't cause me to doubt it exists, or that we've caused it. It causes me to doubt that anything will seriously change. Business As Usual.
This shelf detaching (and then refreezing later) is a potential for Greenland. If we get a sudden few feet in ocean water (unlike an ice shelf, Greenland's ice will move from land to ocean), then an extended European winter, mass fishing industry havoc and the economic ripples everywhere - it may wake everyone up.
Or it may not. History has shown that death itself is the most effective societal teacher.