Napster is dead, other client have come up; whatever they do will have no effect on P2P anymore.
We all know that, and so does Napster. So why are they building a new system?
To save their own ass; to appease the corporations...The only way Napster can still make some money is by selling itself to a company. Sure the business itself is not going to be profitable, BUT it is obvious that P2P -is- popular, just that corporations need to find a way to manage it to their own benefit.
(In Napster's POV) If Napster can partner with enough big music companies (ie: BMG) and begin the first commercial P2P system, and get a patent on it, they can still turn a profit in a long run via licensing fees (since we also know that as soon as Big Business finds out how to make money from P2P, they will....
I'd mod tis up, but don't have any moderator points, so I'll just reply instead.
BUT, the creators of MySQL do and should be allowed to keep a trademark on their name. They put forth the original effort in writing the code, and should receive credit for it, regardless of whether its financial. By registering MySQL.org, NuSphere is getting the attention of people who weren't actually looking for the Gemini code, (had they been, they'd type in NuSphere.com)...
This happened about two years ago with Slashdot. Someone else had registered slashdot.com, made a framed page on which one frame led to slashdot.org and the other was a banner. Now I'm sure that everyone would agree that Slashdot should have been able to take over the slashdot.com domain, as the person who was owning it at the time was making money off of someone else's work.
This is no different. NuSphere is capitalizing on MySQL's name (sure maybe they're well-known too, but not nearly as well as MySQL) and MySQL should be allowed to keep their name.
Quite frankly, I like the idea. Not just because I'm cheap, but because I want to know without a doubt that Steven Spielberg was trying to challenge himself with Jurassic Park 2, not that he just wanted another pile of money. Breaking down those walls will bring real art back to the world.
In an ideal world, that's great, I agree. There's some people I know that are in death metal bands, and one of them said, specifically "We wouldn't be playing death metal if we were in it for the money."
However, money is a necessity. Recording an album means renting a studio (if you want any decent quality) or owning your own. Making a movie like Jurrasic Park is no small ordeal. It requires a good deal of money and I doubt Steven Spielberg, or anybody else, for that matter would be willing to put forth that much money without having anything coming back.
You can bring up the argument of free software programmers, but most free software projects are done in their free time as a hobby, not as a full-time job (except in the cases of research institutions, but even there, the institution funds the project)
For ANY meaningful project to successfully be completed, it requires money, and people don't just give out money; that's why it has to be commercial.
Of course, make it too commercial, and you begin losing the artistic aspect of it (ie: mainstream radio).
It's a double-sided coin, no commercialization will make an inability to fund projects, and hence less projects.
Too much commercialization will lead to a lessened desire for new (read: unpopular) ideas.
1) We've been spoiled. For example, Napster made music free (to the masses); now people go around saying that all music should be free. Music should not be free, musicians spend long hours trying to perfect their sound, and it's a job for them. Yet, people can't accept that because they've become accustomed to getting free music. (Same goes with software, except it's a little different when the author intentionally releases it freely)
2) It's hard to pay for information, solely because it's intangible. Few people will readily pay for an online book. I know I won't. I don't have a problem with buying a book; I buy many books, but i want it in physical form (same goes with cds).
I'd have to say that's the biggest reason, that we've become used to things being free, it additionally serves as "fighting the corporate power" even though the majority of people "fighting the power" are doing it to save money.
Most geeks know what the internet was like before it hit the mainstrea; EVERYTHING was free (warez, porn, etc) similar to how Usenet is. Most geeks don't want to pay for information because we're used to not paying (in addition to wanting it free). The rest of society is jumping on the bandwagon, well, because they want a free ride.
i've never really listened to online stations...however there is a market for them:
1) people at work who can't bring a radio to their office
2) people who listen to unpopular types of music (most forms of metal, for instance) there's rarely any local radio stations that play real metal, so the only options are listen to cds or online radio...
3) people who are out-of-town and want to get their hometown news...
Here's the ads they can provide:
if male:
under 13: can't show any ads
13-17: local resellers of Sports Illustrated, Swimsuit Edition
18-30: local bars
31-40: local strip joints
41-60: the mall (to take your wife)
60-80: local golf courses
80+: local cemetaries
And you must admit it's a hell of a lot better than the kid trying to get started by cracking sites and turning into a script kiddie.
You're right. Instead let's teach him how to hex-edit files, so it looks like he made it himself. Yep, on the road to becoming a script-kiddie.
No I'm not saying they need to be taught how to break into websites. They shouldn't at all.
They should be taught how to program. I'd recommend everyone learning either C or asm as a first language; it makes you understand the computer, and how things work.
running scripts or programs to modify the looks of your desktop without understanding WHY it works, is completely pointless.
A third of a century later, Danny seems to think it holds up pretty well.
Yeah, you know; every now and then and we have a book that remains popular...Shakespeare, Dante's Divine Comedy, Milton's Paradise Lost, Homer's The Odyssey (not not Duff Beer), go even earlier, to the first known story, the Epic of Gilgamesh.
In the grand scheme of things, a third of century isn't that big of a deal.
When I buy a piece of software, I own it in the same sense that I own a book -- I can do whatever the fuck I want with it, except transcribe it and give the transcript away on the internet, or a comparable redistribution w/o the owner's consent.
right, except, as courts have shown, you didn't buy the software, you don't own the software. All you have is a license.
And when.NET comes into full-swing, it'll be subscription based. When you're leasing something, you don't have neraly all the rights as if you had bought it...
i have a stero hooked up to my soundcard, and i've got a set of mp3s constantly playing.
with the volume set to maximum, i can't hear the computer at all.
granted, i can't hear the phone or the doorbell either, but, hey i've gotta make sacrifices...
on the other hand, i quietpc would be really useful to make an all-in-one audio/video component.
for between 500-1000 you can easily make a machine that can replace a 100-disc changer (using high quality mp3s, ogg, or whatever), a video player (not only DVDs, but any movie format, as long as you have the codec), a tv recorder (using a tv-in card), a DSS satellite system (*nix hack released a few weeks ago), all without any development at all. With software development, you can make nearly anything, especially since the hardware interfaces to various other mediums have already been developed (optical audio, tv-out, infrared remotes, etc...)
For Linux to become poular with the mainstream, it's going to have to become:
1) extremely easy to use, especially older folks who can't or don't want to learn complicated systems.
2) very pretty. General society likes buying things that are colorful, and simply look nice.
However, it (Linux) was designed with the programmer/hardcore user in mind, to offer power and stability at the expense of ease of use and beauty.
Even though XWindows is easy to use and looks nice, going as far as being able to appease the mainstream will most likely turn off us geeks from using it.
How do you intend on making the interface easy to use and "colorful" while still maintaining a powerful command-line, and have each not interfere with the other.
"Yep, that girls douns like she has a nice body and big tits and yada yada"
how can something sound gorgeous? then again, there may have been screenshots, but i dunno since i didn't bother reading the article, as that would make me informed, and go against the slashdot code, or better yet, the slashcode.:)
I agree with you in that it can be used for good OR bad, well ANY software can.
However, I -do- think that the majority of society are idiots and would see this and think that all hackers are out to steal cable or whatever.
A kinda off-topic example:
At my last job I got a reputation as a hacker when I figured out how to make a program run past its expiration date...All I did was open up its INI file and about 3 lines down it said:
Expires=3/1/2000
I changed that line to: Expires=12/31/9999 and wala it worked....All the employees were dumbfounded that I had actually "cracked" a program.
even though I think this is truly cool, it's not going to help the case much with, hmm, the MPAA, or even trying to change the media's outlook that all Linux users are hackers and all hackers are bad.
Yes, this is great. As a programmer and a consumer, I find it highly interesting. Yet there is absolutely no way that this will go well with the government.
This can not only NOT PASS for fair use (now you want to watch using a copy of someone else's access card? This doesn't pass for fair use, as you can already watch satellite on your Linux box using the DirecTV receiver and a PCI TV card. This will be considered blatant satellite thievery. And where previously the market for stolen satellite signals was very expensive (reprogrammable H-cards, etc) now it's become extremely inexpensive.
now everything i post on slashdot is my own copyright
(goatse.cx)
cool now i own that website
(microsoft.com)
(time.com)...
[this is a stupid pointless not-funny joke that i felt putting up here because i've maxed out my karma and need to get back down to zero]
thank you
Slashdot Mirror
than the number of people who paid for an open format (CD)
and we all know where that went
Napster is dead, other client have come up; whatever they do will have no effect on P2P anymore.
We all know that, and so does Napster. So why are they building a new system?
To save their own ass; to appease the corporations...The only way Napster can still make some money is by selling itself to a company. Sure the business itself is not going to be profitable, BUT it is obvious that P2P -is- popular, just that corporations need to find a way to manage it to their own benefit.
(In Napster's POV) If Napster can partner with enough big music companies (ie: BMG) and begin the first commercial P2P system, and get a patent on it, they can still turn a profit in a long run via licensing fees (since we also know that as soon as Big Business finds out how to make money from P2P, they will....
'nuff said...
I'd mod tis up, but don't have any moderator points, so I'll just reply instead.
BUT, the creators of MySQL do and should be allowed to keep a trademark on their name. They put forth the original effort in writing the code, and should receive credit for it, regardless of whether its financial. By registering MySQL.org, NuSphere is getting the attention of people who weren't actually looking for the Gemini code, (had they been, they'd type in NuSphere.com)...
This happened about two years ago with Slashdot. Someone else had registered slashdot.com, made a framed page on which one frame led to slashdot.org and the other was a banner. Now I'm sure that everyone would agree that Slashdot should have been able to take over the slashdot.com domain, as the person who was owning it at the time was making money off of someone else's work.
This is no different. NuSphere is capitalizing on MySQL's name (sure maybe they're well-known too, but not nearly as well as MySQL) and MySQL should be allowed to keep their name.
just my panney's worth...
Quite frankly, I like the idea. Not just because I'm cheap, but because I want to know without a doubt that Steven Spielberg was trying to challenge himself with Jurassic Park 2, not that he just wanted another pile of money. Breaking down those walls will bring real art back to the world.
In an ideal world, that's great, I agree. There's some people I know that are in death metal bands, and one of them said, specifically "We wouldn't be playing death metal if we were in it for the money."
However, money is a necessity. Recording an album means renting a studio (if you want any decent quality) or owning your own. Making a movie like Jurrasic Park is no small ordeal. It requires a good deal of money and I doubt Steven Spielberg, or anybody else, for that matter would be willing to put forth that much money without having anything coming back.
You can bring up the argument of free software programmers, but most free software projects are done in their free time as a hobby, not as a full-time job (except in the cases of research institutions, but even there, the institution funds the project)
For ANY meaningful project to successfully be completed, it requires money, and people don't just give out money; that's why it has to be commercial.
Of course, make it too commercial, and you begin losing the artistic aspect of it (ie: mainstream radio).
It's a double-sided coin, no commercialization will make an inability to fund projects, and hence less projects.
Too much commercialization will lead to a lessened desire for new (read: unpopular) ideas.
A few of the competing devices are mentioned as well; you can almost smell companies like Cisco drooling to own voice transport.
since odds are we're not going to pay for it.
1) We've been spoiled. For example, Napster made music free (to the masses); now people go around saying that all music should be free. Music should not be free, musicians spend long hours trying to perfect their sound, and it's a job for them. Yet, people can't accept that because they've become accustomed to getting free music. (Same goes with software, except it's a little different when the author intentionally releases it freely)
2) It's hard to pay for information, solely because it's intangible. Few people will readily pay for an online book. I know I won't. I don't have a problem with buying a book; I buy many books, but i want it in physical form (same goes with cds).
I'd have to say that's the biggest reason, that we've become used to things being free, it additionally serves as "fighting the corporate power" even though the majority of people "fighting the power" are doing it to save money.
Most geeks know what the internet was like before it hit the mainstrea; EVERYTHING was free (warez, porn, etc) similar to how Usenet is. Most geeks don't want to pay for information because we're used to not paying (in addition to wanting it free). The rest of society is jumping on the bandwagon, well, because they want a free ride.
i've never really listened to online stations...however there is a market for them:
1) people at work who can't bring a radio to their office
2) people who listen to unpopular types of music (most forms of metal, for instance) there's rarely any local radio stations that play real metal, so the only options are listen to cds or online radio...
3) people who are out-of-town and want to get their hometown news...
think they can get that from my age, sex and ZIP?
Here's the ads they can provide:
if male:
under 13: can't show any ads
13-17: local resellers of Sports Illustrated, Swimsuit Edition
18-30: local bars
31-40: local strip joints
41-60: the mall (to take your wife)
60-80: local golf courses
80+: local cemetaries
for females:
all ages: local malls
imagine a beowulf cluster of these.....
waittta minute....
sorry wrong obligatory....
shoulda been:
lotsa more porn...a video for each of my monitors....
And you must admit it's a hell of a lot better than the kid trying to get started by cracking sites and turning into a script kiddie.
You're right. Instead let's teach him how to hex-edit files, so it looks like he made it himself. Yep, on the road to becoming a script-kiddie.
No I'm not saying they need to be taught how to break into websites. They shouldn't at all.
They should be taught how to program. I'd recommend everyone learning either C or asm as a first language; it makes you understand the computer, and how things work.
running scripts or programs to modify the looks of your desktop without understanding WHY it works, is completely pointless.
A third of a century later, Danny seems to think it holds up pretty well.
Yeah, you know; every now and then and we have a book that remains popular...Shakespeare, Dante's Divine Comedy, Milton's Paradise Lost, Homer's The Odyssey (not not Duff Beer), go even earlier, to the first known story, the Epic of Gilgamesh.
In the grand scheme of things, a third of century isn't that big of a deal.
Lucas is making it, can't watch it on my DVD player
oh wait, yes i can, that's what we've got China for
Big Brother isn't the government, it's the Organized crime underworld, otherwise known as The Mob
how nice...
When I buy a piece of software, I own it in the same sense that I own a book -- I can do whatever the fuck I want with it, except transcribe it and give the transcript away on the internet, or a comparable redistribution w/o the owner's consent.
.NET comes into full-swing, it'll be subscription based. When you're leasing something, you don't have neraly all the rights as if you had bought it...
right, except, as courts have shown, you didn't buy the software, you don't own the software. All you have is a license.
And when
i have a stero hooked up to my soundcard, and i've got a set of mp3s constantly playing.
with the volume set to maximum, i can't hear the computer at all.
granted, i can't hear the phone or the doorbell either, but, hey i've gotta make sacrifices...
on the other hand, i quietpc would be really useful to make an all-in-one audio/video component.
for between 500-1000 you can easily make a machine that can replace a 100-disc changer (using high quality mp3s, ogg, or whatever), a video player (not only DVDs, but any movie format, as long as you have the codec), a tv recorder (using a tv-in card), a DSS satellite system (*nix hack released a few weeks ago), all without any development at all. With software development, you can make nearly anything, especially since the hardware interfaces to various other mediums have already been developed (optical audio, tv-out, infrared remotes, etc...)
with Porn!
meant to say: Those are better, the "new blood"
songspy.com
freenet.sourceforge.net
winmx.com
gnutella.wego.com/
those
For Linux to become poular with the mainstream, it's going to have to become:
1) extremely easy to use, especially older folks who can't or don't want to learn complicated systems.
2) very pretty. General society likes buying things that are colorful, and simply look nice.
However, it (Linux) was designed with the programmer/hardcore user in mind, to offer power and stability at the expense of ease of use and beauty.
Even though XWindows is easy to use and looks nice, going as far as being able to appease the mainstream will most likely turn off us geeks from using it.
How do you intend on making the interface easy to use and "colorful" while still maintaining a powerful command-line, and have each not interfere with the other.
"Yep, that girls douns like she has a nice body and big tits and yada yada"
:)
how can something sound gorgeous? then again, there may have been screenshots, but i dunno since i didn't bother reading the article, as that would make me informed, and go against the slashdot code, or better yet, the slashcode.
I agree with you in that it can be used for good OR bad, well ANY software can.
However, I -do- think that the majority of society are idiots and would see this and think that all hackers are out to steal cable or whatever.
A kinda off-topic example:
At my last job I got a reputation as a hacker when I figured out how to make a program run past its expiration date...All I did was open up its INI file and about 3 lines down it said:
Expires=3/1/2000
I changed that line to: Expires=12/31/9999 and wala it worked....All the employees were dumbfounded that I had actually "cracked" a program.
even though I think this is truly cool, it's not going to help the case much with, hmm, the MPAA, or even trying to change the media's outlook that all Linux users are hackers and all hackers are bad.
Yes, this is great. As a programmer and a consumer, I find it highly interesting. Yet there is absolutely no way that this will go well with the government.
This can not only NOT PASS for fair use (now you want to watch using a copy of someone else's access card? This doesn't pass for fair use, as you can already watch satellite on your Linux box using the DirecTV receiver and a PCI TV card. This will be considered blatant satellite thievery. And where previously the market for stolen satellite signals was very expensive (reprogrammable H-cards, etc) now it's become extremely inexpensive.
Will definitely not help our case at all.
they ask you for information.
uhh....hmm...we're not AOLers here. We should KNOW BETTER than to give out ACTUAL INFORMATION.
Plain COMMON SENSE.
now everything i post on slashdot is my own copyright (goatse.cx) cool now i own that website (microsoft.com) (time.com) ...
[this is a stupid pointless not-funny joke that i felt putting up here because i've maxed out my karma and need to get back down to zero]
thank you
Right, and that was just the name they gave it so it would go through congress easily.
It's not violating copyrights, but rather breaking systems to protect copyrights.