Album sales dropping is what their true fear has been all these years. It's the whole reason they are tearing their hair out about apple. The reason they are even willing to dump DRM so they can sell music for ipods outside iTunes. The single is king again and the record industries are going to be forced to swallow their bile and accept the hit to their pocket books.
We kept the server intentionally dumb and standards-based, so that anyone can set up a server for themselves and/or their friends or company.
This is actually really great idea for backup purposes. It would have to take data archival problems into account but I'd love to see more programs do this in a standard way. It could help out a lot with simplifying the backup process for people who don't really have the ability to do a comprehensive full drive backup.
anyone can get over the privacy issues, Mozilla just needs to encrypt the user's settings with a strong key and store the encrypted data to the server. Only the user can decrypt it (assuming he remembers his passphrase) and you're done.
Clearly you are not up to date on the tinfoil. What happens if they store that data till quantum computers come out?! They'll just break the encryption and years later they'll know about all your goatse links.
This is really the poignant question to me. People can say whatever they want about buying music but if they are simply dumping DRM so they can bring back the old pricing schemes they are just going to piss off paying customers even worse. I assume they aren't stupid enough to try and drop "per song" right away but I seriously doubt they plan to leave things this way.
I am no expert in this area, but if all the functions of sleep are so easily replaceable, then wouldn't nature have done so long before? Being in a state of very low alertness in a jungle is something which would have been filtered out by evolution long long ago.
Do you have any idea how many calories a well fit body uses? The kind of animal that lives in the wild uses a lot of energy. It's only natural that they'd go into some form or powered down mode during periods where the energy cost of hunting for food is unlikely to be met by the food actually found.
I think they meant the panels in the parking lot provide up to 10 percent of the power. They are also called Solar "Trees" even though they appear to simply be overhangs with panels on top of them.
analog also decays. The difference is that it is easier to pull SOMETHING out of it as it decays.
This isn't true at all. If you actually plan for the decay you can make the digital copy keep far higher quality via error correction data.
The study the article was based on sounds like the typical problems faced by people who just don't get it when it comes to protecting their data. I wouldn't be surprised if they don't even have the digital films stored in a format they can freely read without the use of proprietary software.
The irony is no matter what they do most of the films (even the ones that suck) will never disappear due to being passed around the net constantly. Sooner or later they'll lose one due to their own ineptitude and end up downloading it off a torrent.
This may not be relevant but I think it's worth pointing out that the reason the tech was supposedly looking for files is bullshit. They probably made that up after they discovered the files. The tech was almost certainly looking for normal porn or movies on purpose to copy it. Using a video file to check if a burner is installed correctly is utter nonsense.
I know in some Best Buys it gets so bad that it's not even techs individually doing this sort of thing. Last time I had a friend working at one they even had a server setup where they copied customers files that were interesting so everyone could get at them. I can't imagine Circuit City is any different.
This thing is only going to get worse. Fact is some people are always going to have reasonable reasons for trusting someone else to work on their computer. A lot of these techs even use tools to override any normal security just to make their jobs easier. People are going to have to get smart about not putting things they want private on non removable media. Software is going to have to become more mature at making sure normal users know where there information is on their drive and know how to remove it also.
The big deal about quantum computers (to me anyways) is that supposedly they can break encryption. That's a bad thing obviously. I'm always confused that when we see these stories about quantum computers that nobody is discussing how much longer it will be before big brother can read all my email even when Im wearing my tinfoil hat!
So what's up with that? I must have some assumptions wrong or the usual sorts would be predicting the sky is falling.
As the guy who handles the gaming stuff and someone who actually reads f13 you should know who Gamecock is and that they would never say Bioshock "sucks". They were doing some of their typical anti establishment speal and they screwed up by interrupting Bioshock's acceptance speech time. They screwed up and admitted it.
For those asking by the way Gamecock is G.O.D. games (or the people who ran it anyways).
The record industry put a lot of work into trying to make watermarking work. The article claims the system is an audio only watermarking system too. If Nielsen really had a system that worked their first customers would of been the RIAA.
By the time they get "watermarking" to work what they'll have is a pattern matching machine that can match tv shows to youtube clips. They are a long ways from doing that though due to the amount of content it would have to work through in a timely manner.
You see a lot of people complaining about editorial quality or whatever but usually I could care less. Lately it's been getting worse and worse with the summaries and I've been thinking about "slashdot" alternatives or what not. In reality though I've been to lazy to bother.
This article goes way over the line though. The misquoted/poorly worded summary is completely slanderous implying that the image is fake when the article it links to shows the exact opposite is true. In addition this isn't even one of the political free speech topics which are usually the target of such poor summaries. When even the science articles are getting this treatment I draw the line.
I doubt such a post will change anything but I figured it was worth it to raise the ire of other users if possible while I leave for greener pastures.
Whoa there buddy. You sound like you might be talking about what most creative types call "art". Don't you know art is a "Good Thing(TM)"? The political/moral message from these artists, who are all philosophers and statesmen of great skill no doubt, will make you "think about things". Thinking about things that artists want you to think about is all the entertainment you need!
The time limit is too short but it sounds like in principle he had a better chance than anyone who's IP is given up to the RIAA. Of course that could just be your basic "yea you can object but we'll ignore your objection".
I'm a little alarmed at how much of this stuff seems to revolve around IP's lately though personally. I wonder how many innocent people are going to have to get burned before these legal types learn what a trojan is. I hope in cases of more serious criminal activity that a little more care is taken in regards to cyber forensics. Somehow I fear I wouldn't be happy with the answer though.
The story doesn't even talk about it being hard to install another OS. They just make some off handed comment in the first paragraph saying other people are supposedly complaining about it.
Sorry but you are just flat out wrong. Saving money IS making money. Increasing output and sophistication of output for increasingly lower costs is the very basis for developing wealth and value in ways that an economics system needs to encourage.
In fact in proper economics theory since copying software is practically free the mere act of writing code creates wealth. Paying someone their wages does not decrease wealth. Thus it's still capitalism.
I've tried to think of how to write this next part several times because you are clearly dismissing my main argument. I can't understand how you can dismiss it though when it's simple facts.
The argument is simple. Open source IS a thing(fact). The wording of the GPL restricts certain ways of buying and selling this thing(fact). The GPL does not forbid all ways of buying this thing(fact). Demand for this thing exists(fact as I myself at least represent demand for it).
You seem to want to be weasel about the demand from what I can see. You have some horrible preconceived notion that products must be produced by companies and sold to consumers too. This is wrong. The only people who need to "make money" are the people that keep the wealth generating.
In conclusion programmers are making money through their wages and that's the only thing that needs to happen. Don't worry though. When we start making computers that can run the rest of the world I as your local software coding overlord will remember to code some of the robots to make you some cheese to go with your whine.
Just to remind people from outside the US: People are allowed to drive at 16 years of age here. Also do not forget how different our cities laid out and our lack of public transit.
The mere concept of a 16 year old not getting a license a day after turning 16 is probably unconsciously dismissed by almost all Americans. Even if you are unlikely to be allowed to drive you are very likely to be treated like a loser for not having a license.
If you actually tried to make the argument "but what if they don't have an ID?" most of these whiny mothers would simply point out that you that you can get a license for purely ID purposes and dismiss anything else along those lines.
Have you ever signed the bill for having AC installed for your computer room in an existing building? While that is just 1 expense of many, it makes me think rule #1 is not accurate.
That's not really an argument for portability. That's an argument for picking a better place to put your data center. If "outside in a box" is a cheaper answer that still doesn't really have anything to do with it being portable. It's a given that if you put a data center in the middle of your climate controlled building that it's going to be a bitch piping out all that heat outside.
No matter how "blackbox" these things are though you still have to think about security and location. Seems like the real benefits are more about pre-built mass manufacturing advantages.
Second, notice that if you are hired, you are not making money from the software. The company is not making money from the software, so your wages are little more than charity.
This is where you are WRONG. It's the whole reason you can not understand anything.
The company is buying a product from YOU who is making PROFIT via your wages. You think all those companies are doing it as some sort of charity to counter MS or whatever it is you are thinking. Google doesn't pay massive cash for for firefox development out of charity. They do it because their business model is totally reliant on a browser and web free from the kind of crap MS would push on it.
You think they wouldn't have to pay the costs for that if they bought some closed source product some other company produced? Bollocks. It would cost them more and they'd be at the mercy of the company making the product. They'd have to do it in-house and that has all sorts of problems. By doing it open source through mozilla they get the advantages of a 3rd party and they don't have to trust that company because the community will keep the product clean if it strays.
Mozilla is of course an exception in many peoples minds but that's not really true. The same process is repeated ad nauseum in companies all over the globe these days for much smaller projects. Other people who aren't even hired for such a thing do small work on OS products for their work because it's faster,cheaper, and safer for their company. All that work is paid for. All those workers PROFIT from their usage of open source via their wages.
I don't believe in the crappy "free as in beer" BS anymore than you do. The difference is I can see where the money is coming from. You say vendor lock in is not unique to software but you are missing a fundamental point. Vendor lock in capability is mostly a byproduct of technology. The more technology we get the more harmful it can be. Throwing stuff like the DMCA and increased US reliance on the IP industry is only going to make the dangers of lock-in even worse. If companies ever figure out how to "sell" a way to totally avoid vendor lock-in then open source will probably become totally insignificant instantly. Until then though it's the only game in town.
Don't link journals which are archived (and thus unable to accept comments) as the main meat of your post. If you have something like that to say have the guts to post it again and take a Karma hit.
By the way that journal entry proposes that there are only two main ways to make money off of open source. Yet you left out the one way the majority of people get cash from open source development. Open source is a software feature that many companies are willing to fork out cash for. They do so by hiring coders to write the actual software. The fact is there is a high cash demand for software that has no lock-in. That demand is only increasing as we move further into the information age and more people wise up to the dangers of vendor lock-in. The reality is the only real way to avoid vendor lock-in is open source. So their only choice is full blown in-house development or modification of existing open source packages. Obviously the cheapest option usually turns out to be modification.
Your bias may be confused because you don't understand that the only people who need to make cash off it are the people writing the code. You look at it from the outlook of a company trying to make a product and sell it to others. There is no point in that though. Indeed from a programmers perspective open source can liberate us from poor wages delivered by crappy companies who chose software features via the marketing department. Probably in the future the payment methods will have to be refined for non business users but there are already known solutions to that situation.
I'm not sure why you are quoting the police report. It says she did all that stuff to find out about Megan. Probably she is guilty of far more but nowhere is a motive for committing such acts described.
The woman in question that harassed the kid is named in a police report and in that report she states that she instigated the account in question and used it over a period of time to gain the confidence of the girl before harassing her.
No it does NOT say that. This is what I'm talking about. It says that she admits to creating the account. Nowhere is it even implied that she admitted intent to harass her. Nor did she admit to making the comments in question. Through reading all this you yourself have become confused and you are now speaking as if she did it for sure.
But the problem here is that, at a minimum, this mother in question facilitated that harassment and permitted it to take place.
You don't know that she facilitated such at all. None of the articles even explain how the kid got the password. She's a douche about the "don't feel as guilty" comment for sure but you are still jumping to dangerous conclusions. The evidence looks pretty damning but it's not good enough for uninvolved people to go about giving the accused grief.
I have to agree the attitude of the bloggers is truly frightening. Especially when you actually start reading through the articles it's clear the original blog which enraged everyone left out some pretty salient points.
1) Nowhere in everything I read was there anything listed which could be called probable cause on the accused mothers part. Nothing in all of it describes why she would even really dislike the girl in question.
2) Even worse possibly the original blog totally leaves out the fact that someone elses daughter (the mother who reported everything) had the password to this "Josh" persona and made one of the original posts. How did she get it? Nobody says. Does anyone here think a bunch of OTHER kids didn't have the password as well? Perhaps it got into the hands of girls who normally make fun of her? There could be a whole nother tangent in there that isn't even being investigated sadly.
3) Based on some of the quotes the mother of the girl who suicided made it sounds like she said some pretty stupid shit and blames herself now as well. Doesn't mean she's right or wrong but it was more info that was left out.
In conclusion it's all very vague and we don't have a fucking clue.
I really don't see where the need to overclock comes from anymore.
You seem to be looking at it from a non gaming perspective. Considering the article is about a gaming system that seems to be a bit off topic as far as viewpoints go.
Slashdot Mirror
Album sales dropping is what their true fear has been all these years. It's the whole reason they are tearing their hair out about apple. The reason they are even willing to dump DRM so they can sell music for ipods outside iTunes. The single is king again and the record industries are going to be forced to swallow their bile and accept the hit to their pocket books.
This is actually really great idea for backup purposes. It would have to take data archival problems into account but I'd love to see more programs do this in a standard way. It could help out a lot with simplifying the backup process for people who don't really have the ability to do a comprehensive full drive backup.
Clearly you are not up to date on the tinfoil. What happens if they store that data till quantum computers come out?! They'll just break the encryption and years later they'll know about all your goatse links.
This is really the poignant question to me. People can say whatever they want about buying music but if they are simply dumping DRM so they can bring back the old pricing schemes they are just going to piss off paying customers even worse. I assume they aren't stupid enough to try and drop "per song" right away but I seriously doubt they plan to leave things this way.
Do you have any idea how many calories a well fit body uses? The kind of animal that lives in the wild uses a lot of energy. It's only natural that they'd go into some form or powered down mode during periods where the energy cost of hunting for food is unlikely to be met by the food actually found.
It's simply hibernation writ small.
I think they meant the panels in the parking lot provide up to 10 percent of the power. They are also called Solar "Trees" even though they appear to simply be overhangs with panels on top of them.
This isn't true at all. If you actually plan for the decay you can make the digital copy keep far higher quality via error correction data.
The study the article was based on sounds like the typical problems faced by people who just don't get it when it comes to protecting their data. I wouldn't be surprised if they don't even have the digital films stored in a format they can freely read without the use of proprietary software.
The irony is no matter what they do most of the films (even the ones that suck) will never disappear due to being passed around the net constantly. Sooner or later they'll lose one due to their own ineptitude and end up downloading it off a torrent.
This may not be relevant but I think it's worth pointing out that the reason the tech was supposedly looking for files is bullshit. They probably made that up after they discovered the files. The tech was almost certainly looking for normal porn or movies on purpose to copy it. Using a video file to check if a burner is installed correctly is utter nonsense.
I know in some Best Buys it gets so bad that it's not even techs individually doing this sort of thing. Last time I had a friend working at one they even had a server setup where they copied customers files that were interesting so everyone could get at them. I can't imagine Circuit City is any different.
This thing is only going to get worse. Fact is some people are always going to have reasonable reasons for trusting someone else to work on their computer. A lot of these techs even use tools to override any normal security just to make their jobs easier. People are going to have to get smart about not putting things they want private on non removable media. Software is going to have to become more mature at making sure normal users know where there information is on their drive and know how to remove it also.
The big deal about quantum computers (to me anyways) is that supposedly they can break encryption. That's a bad thing obviously. I'm always confused that when we see these stories about quantum computers that nobody is discussing how much longer it will be before big brother can read all my email even when Im wearing my tinfoil hat!
So what's up with that? I must have some assumptions wrong or the usual sorts would be predicting the sky is falling.
As the guy who handles the gaming stuff and someone who actually reads f13 you should know who Gamecock is and that they would never say Bioshock "sucks". They were doing some of their typical anti establishment speal and they screwed up by interrupting Bioshock's acceptance speech time. They screwed up and admitted it.
For those asking by the way Gamecock is G.O.D. games (or the people who ran it anyways).
The record industry put a lot of work into trying to make watermarking work. The article claims the system is an audio only watermarking system too. If Nielsen really had a system that worked their first customers would of been the RIAA.
By the time they get "watermarking" to work what they'll have is a pattern matching machine that can match tv shows to youtube clips. They are a long ways from doing that though due to the amount of content it would have to work through in a timely manner.
You see a lot of people complaining about editorial quality or whatever but usually I could care less. Lately it's been getting worse and worse with the summaries and I've been thinking about "slashdot" alternatives or what not. In reality though I've been to lazy to bother.
This article goes way over the line though. The misquoted/poorly worded summary is completely slanderous implying that the image is fake when the article it links to shows the exact opposite is true. In addition this isn't even one of the political free speech topics which are usually the target of such poor summaries. When even the science articles are getting this treatment I draw the line.
I doubt such a post will change anything but I figured it was worth it to raise the ire of other users if possible while I leave for greener pastures.
Whoa there buddy. You sound like you might be talking about what most creative types call "art". Don't you know art is a "Good Thing(TM)"? The political/moral message from these artists, who are all philosophers and statesmen of great skill no doubt, will make you "think about things". Thinking about things that artists want you to think about is all the entertainment you need!
The time limit is too short but it sounds like in principle he had a better chance than anyone who's IP is given up to the RIAA. Of course that could just be your basic "yea you can object but we'll ignore your objection".
I'm a little alarmed at how much of this stuff seems to revolve around IP's lately though personally. I wonder how many innocent people are going to have to get burned before these legal types learn what a trojan is. I hope in cases of more serious criminal activity that a little more care is taken in regards to cyber forensics. Somehow I fear I wouldn't be happy with the answer though.
Doesn't change much. It's only a couple of examples that happen to be in the few area's which I already noted as exceptions (like New York City).
The story doesn't even talk about it being hard to install another OS. They just make some off handed comment in the first paragraph saying other people are supposedly complaining about it.
Sorry but you are just flat out wrong. Saving money IS making money. Increasing output and sophistication of output for increasingly lower costs is the very basis for developing wealth and value in ways that an economics system needs to encourage.
In fact in proper economics theory since copying software is practically free the mere act of writing code creates wealth. Paying someone their wages does not decrease wealth. Thus it's still capitalism.
I've tried to think of how to write this next part several times because you are clearly dismissing my main argument. I can't understand how you can dismiss it though when it's simple facts.
The argument is simple. Open source IS a thing(fact). The wording of the GPL restricts certain ways of buying and selling this thing(fact). The GPL does not forbid all ways of buying this thing(fact). Demand for this thing exists(fact as I myself at least represent demand for it).
You seem to want to be weasel about the demand from what I can see. You have some horrible preconceived notion that products must be produced by companies and sold to consumers too. This is wrong. The only people who need to "make money" are the people that keep the wealth generating.
In conclusion programmers are making money through their wages and that's the only thing that needs to happen. Don't worry though. When we start making computers that can run the rest of the world I as your local software coding overlord will remember to code some of the robots to make you some cheese to go with your whine.
Just to remind people from outside the US: People are allowed to drive at 16 years of age here. Also do not forget how different our cities laid out and our lack of public transit.
The mere concept of a 16 year old not getting a license a day after turning 16 is probably unconsciously dismissed by almost all Americans. Even if you are unlikely to be allowed to drive you are very likely to be treated like a loser for not having a license.
If you actually tried to make the argument "but what if they don't have an ID?" most of these whiny mothers would simply point out that you that you can get a license for purely ID purposes and dismiss anything else along those lines.
That's not really an argument for portability. That's an argument for picking a better place to put your data center. If "outside in a box" is a cheaper answer that still doesn't really have anything to do with it being portable. It's a given that if you put a data center in the middle of your climate controlled building that it's going to be a bitch piping out all that heat outside.
No matter how "blackbox" these things are though you still have to think about security and location. Seems like the real benefits are more about pre-built mass manufacturing advantages.
This is where you are WRONG. It's the whole reason you can not understand anything.
The company is buying a product from YOU who is making PROFIT via your wages. You think all those companies are doing it as some sort of charity to counter MS or whatever it is you are thinking. Google doesn't pay massive cash for for firefox development out of charity. They do it because their business model is totally reliant on a browser and web free from the kind of crap MS would push on it.
You think they wouldn't have to pay the costs for that if they bought some closed source product some other company produced? Bollocks. It would cost them more and they'd be at the mercy of the company making the product. They'd have to do it in-house and that has all sorts of problems. By doing it open source through mozilla they get the advantages of a 3rd party and they don't have to trust that company because the community will keep the product clean if it strays.
Mozilla is of course an exception in many peoples minds but that's not really true. The same process is repeated ad nauseum in companies all over the globe these days for much smaller projects. Other people who aren't even hired for such a thing do small work on OS products for their work because it's faster,cheaper, and safer for their company. All that work is paid for. All those workers PROFIT from their usage of open source via their wages.
I don't believe in the crappy "free as in beer" BS anymore than you do. The difference is I can see where the money is coming from. You say vendor lock in is not unique to software but you are missing a fundamental point. Vendor lock in capability is mostly a byproduct of technology. The more technology we get the more harmful it can be. Throwing stuff like the DMCA and increased US reliance on the IP industry is only going to make the dangers of lock-in even worse. If companies ever figure out how to "sell" a way to totally avoid vendor lock-in then open source will probably become totally insignificant instantly. Until then though it's the only game in town.
Don't link journals which are archived (and thus unable to accept comments) as the main meat of your post. If you have something like that to say have the guts to post it again and take a Karma hit.
By the way that journal entry proposes that there are only two main ways to make money off of open source. Yet you left out the one way the majority of people get cash from open source development. Open source is a software feature that many companies are willing to fork out cash for. They do so by hiring coders to write the actual software. The fact is there is a high cash demand for software that has no lock-in. That demand is only increasing as we move further into the information age and more people wise up to the dangers of vendor lock-in. The reality is the only real way to avoid vendor lock-in is open source. So their only choice is full blown in-house development or modification of existing open source packages. Obviously the cheapest option usually turns out to be modification.
Your bias may be confused because you don't understand that the only people who need to make cash off it are the people writing the code. You look at it from the outlook of a company trying to make a product and sell it to others. There is no point in that though. Indeed from a programmers perspective open source can liberate us from poor wages delivered by crappy companies who chose software features via the marketing department. Probably in the future the payment methods will have to be refined for non business users but there are already known solutions to that situation.
I'm not sure why you are quoting the police report. It says she did all that stuff to find out about Megan. Probably she is guilty of far more but nowhere is a motive for committing such acts described.
No it does NOT say that. This is what I'm talking about. It says that she admits to creating the account. Nowhere is it even implied that she admitted intent to harass her. Nor did she admit to making the comments in question. Through reading all this you yourself have become confused and you are now speaking as if she did it for sure.
You don't know that she facilitated such at all. None of the articles even explain how the kid got the password. She's a douche about the "don't feel as guilty" comment for sure but you are still jumping to dangerous conclusions. The evidence looks pretty damning but it's not good enough for uninvolved people to go about giving the accused grief.
I have to agree the attitude of the bloggers is truly frightening. Especially when you actually start reading through the articles it's clear the original blog which enraged everyone left out some pretty salient points.
1) Nowhere in everything I read was there anything listed which could be called probable cause on the accused mothers part. Nothing in all of it describes why she would even really dislike the girl in question.
2) Even worse possibly the original blog totally leaves out the fact that someone elses daughter (the mother who reported everything) had the password to this "Josh" persona and made one of the original posts. How did she get it? Nobody says. Does anyone here think a bunch of OTHER kids didn't have the password as well? Perhaps it got into the hands of girls who normally make fun of her? There could be a whole nother tangent in there that isn't even being investigated sadly.
3) Based on some of the quotes the mother of the girl who suicided made it sounds like she said some pretty stupid shit and blames herself now as well. Doesn't mean she's right or wrong but it was more info that was left out.
In conclusion it's all very vague and we don't have a fucking clue.
You seem to be looking at it from a non gaming perspective. Considering the article is about a gaming system that seems to be a bit off topic as far as viewpoints go.