The Power Pack are too young to act as professional adventurers, but they continue have exploits requiring the use of their superhuman powers when the occasionsarise
Alex took, the name "Gee" due to his power over gravity ("G-power"), Jack called himself "Mass Master" because he could take gaseous form or compress his mass to as to become tiny, Julie called herself Lightspeed became she could fly fast, leaving a trail of colored light behind her, and Katie became the Energizer, due to her ability to store energy and fire it from her body
I would paraphrase this and attempt to poke fun at the idea, but it's pretty awful in it self.
Shang-Chi Is this like the token Asian guy?
Your thinking of Samuri from the "super friends".
This clearly isn't your average token asian guy who knows kung fu who moved and got employed as a secret agent and likes to fish who's arch nemisis lives in China Town. The fact that he's from china, knows kung fu and likes to fish and happens to have an arch nemisis in Chinatown are totaly beside the point... and was only formaly employed by MI-6. The nunchukas are just a tasteful detail and clearly isn't intended as being stereotypical at all.
Scott Lang was an expert in electronics but for some reason couldn't make a buck. So he became a burglar but wasn't very good at it... he got caught and put in jail and got a job with some Marvel invented company that one would know if one ever bothered to read comic books. But he daughter was diagnosed with a terminal illness, probally something to do with all those green screen terminals Scott Lang was forced to used as he coudln't afford a real computer. The only doctor who can help was being helded by some other big evil company the name likely known by anyone who has bothered to read any marvel comics. So he decided to steal AntMan's outfit and magic shrinking gas. Fortunatly the real AntMan had a spair YellowJacket outfit and follows AntMan II and watches him confront the arch villin who's in the business of kidnaping doctors needed by wackos who like to dress up in costume, a common theme in the Marvel world. AntMan II rescues the good doctor who cures his daughter and just when he's about to step up and return the stupid AntMan outfit to AntMan... AntMan says he can keep it so long as he's a good boy.
Sells electronics by day, dresses up as an Ant by night... it's AntMan II!
So, from this I can establish the first AntMan was some guy with magic shrinking gas who liked to put on an ant costume get small and fight crime. And I wondered why I never really bought comic books.
1. FTP is a generic file transfer protocol. KaZaa is an application that allows searching for music (and movies? I'm not really familiar with it) and subsequently downloading it. So we can say KaZaa specializes in providing access to music (and movies?), whereas FTP doesn't specialize in any sort of file in particular.
KaZaa is an application that is designed to index a collection of files (perhpas even ID3 tags) and publish that list of files in a searchable database. How is this different from archie and veronica very easy rodent-oriented net-wide index of computerized archives.. How is this different from yahoo, google, and other search engines?
2. KaZaa was programmed in a time when the connection between peer-to-peer and copyright infringement was well-established. It is very unlikely that the authors weren't aware of that fact. Thus, the authors of KaZaa probably knew that their software would be used for copyright infringement.
So would Firefox be more accountable than Netscape or Mosiac because it came later for any copyright infringement that goes on the WWW.
3. The files accessed through KaZaa come from other users of the system. There are many of those. Files accessed through FTP come from a few servers. FTP server admins have been known to take down offending material when made aware of its existance. The hopes of something similar happening to offending material shared by KaZaa users is futile. The only way to prevent rampant copyright infringement would be through the software.
There is nothing stopping anyone from hosting a FTP site on their own host machine. Or even http sever. Heck HTTP is even worse because if you have copyrighted materials in a directory designated no robots you run the risk of having your files indexed and accessable by anyone on the planet.
4. Although the authors were aware (if not before writing it, then certainly after release) that their software was used for rampant copyright infringement, and despite the fact that they are the only ones who can do something about it, they have not taken any steps to prevent the abuse.
There is presently no sutable system to establish the wish of the copyright holder. There is no centralized database offered by the RIAA nor MPAA that lists material that sharing is not permited. Given that many artists and peformers are pro-p2p and absolutly no way presently to establish the wish of a given artest, who's responciblity is it?
Take porno for instance. You can use KaZaa's network to download porno, much of it in 5, 10, or 20meg little bipverts that usually involve a cum-shot facial deal with a url in bold friendly letters. These free vids serve to prmote services that typicaly offer full lenth videos that you can download off their respective sites. This is a legit application of p2p networks.
If the RIAA wants to protect musician's rights, they have to create a centralized database that clearly list the copyright holder's wish on how they want music distributed. This is the only way to protect the rights of those who don't want to use P2P networks and those who expressly desire it. This is their job.
Does that make them guilty? Perhaps; time will tell. Does finding them guilty imply that the authors of the FTP protocol are guilty? I don't think so. FTP clearly wasn't originally envisioned to be used for rampant copyright infringement
So, are you saying if Kazza employed FTP protocal rather than it's own crappy protocal then they would be less guilty? Anonymous FTP was established without thought it might be used for piracy? This is respectfully a laugh. What about Ward Christian Protocal aka X-modem in the 1980s? How about Kermit, Y-modem or Z-modem. You can believe that these were written without thinking they might be used for copyright infringement... but you would be deluding yourself.
And thats not even half the time the story has been posted. It does the rounds on slashdot quite regularly. It should be added to slashot posting spam filters or something. Great work of fiction, isn't it?
Well, it might be fiction but it's close to fact. The kid part is somewhat far fetched but I can believe that a kid with a "good christian upbrining" was taught to share. The problem is I have seen record store owners pretty irate and yelling at kids for various reasons. None of them are still in business.
Piracy is nothing new... been around since home recording has been a legit option. Now if you actually remember going to the record store, or hell even a video store, the big ones typicaly offered no only recorded media but recordable medium. For a time... the local Tower Records was the only place I could buy 74min and 100min cassettes the perfect size for your typical album. So I imagine that a media store owner could go out of his way to chase away their customers. For music, you could get away with saying they were for people who wanted to play their music in the car that only has a cassette deck. This would be reasonable. But VHS tapes and now DVD-Rs at the video store?
My business faces ruin. CD sales have dropped through the floor. People aren't buying half as many CDs as they did just a year ago.
While this is a troll, i'll respond anyway.
I actually know of a man who went out of his way to sell christian records... as in vinyl and tapes. This was a while ago when CDs were new. And he discovered that his business was failing and this being a while ago this was in the age of 2400bps modems so the guy didn't have the luxury of blaming p2p networks. I think he blamed the Christian chain shops in the local Malls but in the end the cause didn't really matter. The simple fact of the matter was there was not really a demand for Christian music. Needing to make a buck... he decided to stop offering Christian music and started offering porno. New and used books, videos, mags, the works. Before he knew it, he had a small chain of smut shops and was making a decent living.
So the point is, if your business isn't working, it's time to find another business... it's only common sense.
When I was younger, it was kind of a thing to do. Go and spend an hour or two meandering around the CD store looking through racks and racks and racks of CDs. In today's world I can't prioritize that kind of time to browsing through music. In the last year I've bought about 10 CDs and it took me less than an hour over the course of the whole year to do it.
I totally agree. I remember taking a vacation in Florida and hitting the Virgin store at downtown Disney. It was a huge record store filled with wonder and tracks and all sorts of wonderful things. I browsed around, noted somethings that I wanted here and there and then asked my self... why am I bothering? I guess it was "nice" the fact that this store stocked some vinyl specificly 12 inch remixes of "The Ketchup Song" but there really wasn't a single thing they were offering that I couldn't get online. Once this idea hit me well I hit the Lego store, a store that was clearly infinatly cooler than the Virgin store. You could play with the legos... the sample offering of music was very very limited.
While i'm all for record stores esp indy ones where you can hang out and listen to music and actually get an idea of what they are offering... i'm really more likely to be exposed to music online, and i'm more likely to actually buy something online. It's the sad truth... if you run an indy record shop and don't have any online presence... well sorry.
Their ink has built in expiration dates and region coding. Epson has built in expiration dates too. In either case, the printer will not let you use the cartridge beyond the date specified. I'm not sure about Brother's inks. Only one I know of without lockout chips are the Canon series. Look at the ink for a Canon iP4000 or even the i9900. No chips whatsoever.
Your information, while technicaly accurate, is out of date. The Pixma ip4200 is a similar style tank, but has a chip on it. Where was that damn link
Now in theory the new chips *MIGHT* only keep track of ink use, and not actually stop your printer from printing, but franky I have no clue as I don't own one nor do I know if anyone else has one. As a bonus they are using new ink, ink which you "could" get in the BCI-7 tank which is near as i'm aware the same size as the BCI6, but according to support anyway the new inks in America and Europe the CLI-8 (BCI-8 was taken by the Canon Aspen printer same as sold under the apple label) and PGI-5 black won't fit in the current generation printers meaning if you want the new enhanced product you gotta buy a new printer or order the inks from japan.
If what I suspect is true... and you can continue to print when the chips read empty... it makes them less evil than epson.
You can say Canon were among the last to offered chipped cartridges.... this was true. This is no longer true, just check out the new fall line.
So is Lexmark going to pay for my shipping costs to get my used cartrigdes back to them?
Yes, they do... Pardon the double post but I took the time to google prebates.
It's easy and free! Just put the empty Prebate cartridge in the box, seal it with the prepaid UPS label provided and either drop it off at an authorized UPS service center or give it to a UPS carrier at your next scheduled pick up. Please do not call UPS to schedule a pick up.
But on the other hand
Q. Are Prebate cartridges new cartridges or are they remanufactured/refilled cartridges?
A. Prebate cartridges are newly manufactured and contain 100 percent new parts. Q. How do I know the Prebate cartridge isn't simply a refill? A. Lexmark guarantees that Prebate cartridges are newly manufactured cartridges produced with 100 percent new components.
So, no law will prevent you from refilling it yourself; however a commercial venture can't do it.
Why not? The customer might be in violation of the "contract" if they toss that ink cart into someone else's recycle bin, but a comercial venture is under no such license agreement.
Whatever happened to the sensible days? How is this supposed to be enforced anyway? Does this give the ink cartridge company the right to spy on me in my own home so as to make sure I'm not *gasp* refilling their cartridges?!
I know the drivers the the dell pritners made by lexmark report home from time to time. I don't have any idea what they report back, but I could imagine that if a one time use cart had a unique id number which they likely do jumped from empty to full i'm sure it's possible this is reported back to them.
Lexmark discounts certain cartridges with the understanding that the user will return the spent cartridges to Lexmark.
Maybe they should stop doing that.
What is the law on milk jugs?
I know of a few places that still offer milk in glass bottles. It costs a little more to buy the milk in a glass bottle but they offer a discount if you bring the bottle back to the store making the end cost being roughly equal to that of buying milk in plastic jugs. Near as i'm aware I'm under no legal or moral obligation to return the milk bottle... after all I bought it. But returning it will reduce my cost in milk to about $2.00/gal rather than $4.00/gal.
Needless to say this business model only works when the store is near enough to the distribution center or diary to keep the return costs minimal... otherwise it's generally more cost effective to offer milk in a disposable carton or jug making the glass bottle an oddity.
More to the point, many Americans could just start using cars which are more fuel efficient. And they won't neccesarily even have to be small cars. You can have a huge people carrier with a 2 litre diesel engine that does 40 to 50 mpg.
Three points
1. Diesel versions of autos can't be sold everywhere in america.
2. While I'm willing to believe that a passanger auto with a 1.6 to 2.0l could get 40 to 50 mpg... you need something larger to power many SUVs. While the diesel is more efficent in larger vehicels, we're talking 22 to 24mpg rather than 15mpg. I remember a toyota light passanger truck that had a 2ishl (r series engine) diesel engine that got 25 to 30mpg.
3. The cost of a diesel is more than a petrol auto. For example the VW new Beetle TDI costs $1200 or so more than the petrol version, and is one of the cheaper new diesels. Going with a japanese import on the other hand where diesel isn't an option at all would save you $5000ish in some cases. Now that fuel in the states is starting to hit $3ish/gal it's very possible you can make back your investment in the VW Beetle TDI vs the petrol version in a year. But this falls apart when you consider autos priced below $15000 where diesel is just not an option.
If talking trucks, you often have to go with the heavy duty version to even get a diesel, not an option in the 1/2 ton or 1/4 ton versions. The difference is $5000 typicaly speaking.
And the SUVs, is diesel even an option? It's a good idea... my sister has a landcruser with a freaking straight 6, an engine so underpowered that fuel economy is inadquate in contrast to a v8 in the same class. That sucker would be nice in a diesel but I don't know if that is an option at all.
To sum up... diesels are nice if they are legal where you live, if you can get them, but you'll spend more for them.
I don't know exactly how popular car DVD players are... I know they exist and some larger vehicels offer DVD players and screens as an option. Portable DVD players are available as well with tiny screens.
So if Blu-Ray requires some form of connection to a home base to operate, how the hell could they operate under the following conditions.
1. Car players 2. Handheld players 3. People who ditch their landlines in favor of mobile phones.
Re:any way for me to play it? cedega maybe?
on
Cyan Worlds Closes
·
· Score: 1
I've never played any of the Myst series. I would like to, but I have moved completely to Linux. Is there any way for me to play them?
All Myst I requires is a 386. I can't remember if I played it on one with or without a IIT math/co, but all one needs is a very lame machine by today's standards and windows 3.1. In fact, I played it on an ISA graphics adapter and the only "problem" playing was the fact that transisions where slugish, but aside from that it was 100% playable on a 386-40 or 486-33. IIRC there were issues playing myst on WinNT and Win2K... Cyan was none to hip to the idea of supporting what they claimed to be a professional OS.
Keep in mind that Myst I was released during a time period that not all systems had math co processors, and most of the graphics IIRC were not compressed hince the need for a full CD for a technicaly simple game, so simple a 68030 based mac run it very well.
Riven, which I assume is myst II, i've always been confused on this issue requires a Pentium 100 and is perfectly playable on a pentium 200, there are reports of it being playable on high end 486 machines, but I believe riven requires win95.
Myst III requires a pentium II but I seem to remember it also worked perfectly fine on a pentium I 200.
So... in other words... if you really really really want to play these games you can pickup a 2nd hand machine, which these days i'm seeing $20 pentium III 450s in valuevillage and goodwill and have the ability to play at least 3 out of the 5 games. 4 and 5 might run under 98se, but reccomend at least a 800mhz pentium III.
Even at 13 or 14 that damn game baffled the hell out of me and my parents (we were deeply sucked into games like monkey island and loom though).
Why on earth did people play this game where the minimum player requirements were aparently an IQ of 180+ and a brain the size of a small planet!
The same reason people to crossword puzzles. It provides a chalange. If you complete Quake II, that's nice. But you complete Myst... that's something to be proud of.
It reminds me of the realy text adventures by Scott Adams. These things you typicaly couldn't complete in a day. My usual method was to play for a week or so, put it aside when I couldn't figure something out... then later on a little lightbulb would light up and figure out a little piece of the puzzle and then return to the game. The key difference with text adventures is the fact that the difficulty wasn't always figuring out a puzzle but rather figuring out how to phrase things in a way the game could understand. This was my problem with Scott Adams games (how do I say put bubblegum on the stick in only two words).
Probally the best thing about Myst is the fact, other than the surreal music sucked you into the game, was the fact that it could be enjoyed by two or more people at the same time trying to figure out these puzzles. Given the choice between watching "Must See TV"(tm) or what is basicly an interative story that requires thought to figure out... i'd pick the interactive story.
On a side note... Myst was the game that encouranged me to actually buy a freaking CD-rom drive, PCI video card, and something a 16bit sound card. Before that I didn't have much need for a rom drive as anything I needed I could get on floppy.
I've had a similar thing happen to me, although the company was not so big (it was just a single person). I think the idea that they wanted to link to him was pretty cool, because it also promotes his game, but he was right -- they should download it and host it on their site and give more linkback info to him so that people know they didn't create it themselves. It's always a funny sight to find simple vulnerabilities on the net.
So you would propose violating the copyright... and actually making a copy without permision? Linking in this case can be argued hot or otherwise... I'd lean tward not since the game was spawned in a new window and game clearly linked to it's own site and had correct contact info.
There are people Educated in those matters, Laws are here to be followed and not to be broken as moder society tends to put it. You could argue that courts are unfair and that people who pass out sentences are not qualified to do so and so on, but the problem remains,they did something ilegal and should be accounteable for that, they are kids, agree so they shouldnt go to jail , Agree ! but never the less should be punished for what they did.
Justice is absolute. If they were there would be no need for lawyers, judges, and juries. The concept of justice is not an absolute but a creation of a system that serve the public good.
Perhaps these kids should be published for what they did... which was basicly passing around the password for their laptops to remove software that would permit remote viewing and installing of message software.
The sys admins need to be punished for their inaction and putting all this information on the same network creating an attractive nuince. A locked liquor case with the keys in plain site, a gun box with the combo written clearly on the box, a huge stack of playboys under the bed, and putting all the passwords to the network in an unsecured location. This is DUMB!
But either way, I don't see this as even being a case for a criminal justice system at all. In fact, I see the criminal justice system as being used as a vehicle to create scapegoats so those that are really accountable could have deniablity, and protection from civil lawsuits. This makes the school no better than the RIAA.
I've only seen Linspire once on a Fry el cheepo machine. When trying to add on a wireless adapter I navigated to their software page and while what I needed was offered on their software update, access required a subscription.
If they REALLY wanted to do it they could still "hotwire" the newer cars by bringing a seperate matching key/column computer and splicing it into the car but why bother with this hassle when you can just tow?
If you are in the business of chopping up cars, this is reasonable. But if you are just some jackass who wants to take a joy ride... hot wiring, or hunting around for the magnetic extra key box box is a better solution.
A thief who steals my CDs doesn't _own_ them. He has no right at all to listen to the music on them. Therefore, he is guilty both of theft and of copyright infringement.
If physical ownership, i.e. having them, is the license to play then they have every right to listen to them. We're not talking about a product that you register, or has anything resembling serial numbers typicaly speaking. We're talking about a disc that is mass produced in huge quanities.
Unfortunatly, you don't have the right to backup the disc from someone else... it's not your disc. A fair backup is material you own that you backed up. I personaly wouldn't give a shit.. but that doesn't change the fact that you are commiting a violation of the copyright.
Just because I can duplicate a CD doesn't mean I have duplicated the right to listen to the music
This is true, but if you backup something you own, this can be considered fair use. You have physical ownership of a product as a safegard against damage or theft. You made the backup of something you phsyicaly own at the time you physicaly owned it.
Turn this argument around: Just because someone stole my physical CD doesn't mean I've lost the right to listen to the music.
But you lost the music... and you don't have the right to copy it from someone else. At least with a software product there is at the very least a license key that is something that resembles proof of ownership, and while a copy from someone else would still be copyright infringement... so long as you have proof i.e. that license... no one would give a shit. But CDs don't have the same provision.. they should but they don't. I imagine that if you still had the case you could reasonably argue that you bought it, some jackass stole it, and no one would really give a shit. But that doesn't change the fact that making a copy from someone else isn't fair use.
Hypothetical: Given that I am the copyright owner of a musical work and a sound recording and I want my work to be played on commercial FM radio, where do I start?
Anyhow, its not like I don't see where your coming from but I think its over simplifying the issue, I'm sure even Madonna would get pissed after the 100,000th sweaty kid told her he'd downloaded all her music for free and she might have to find a another means to support herself.
Then the solution is obvious.... don't share or download her music. She made it VERY clear she doesn't approve of file sharing. You can go one step further and not buy anything by Madonna. For me it's not all that hard as i've never been a Madonna fan. I'm sure like other big name artists they'll raise a foot and say "I don't care if you don't buy an album from me" and if so we are agreed. I can not in good conscience support any public figure who's politics I can not agree with, but at the same time I can't i'd ever buy anything by Madonna anyway. Once and a while she has a song that's decent usually written by someone else, but I just can't stand her as a peformer.
But I highly doubt that Madonna would have to find another means of supporting her self. For example in 2002 she earned 20 millionish for using her peformance of "Ray of Light" and another 45ish million extanding her Warner Brothers contract and her business "Drowned World Tours" Not to speak of 7 million in a 1/3 ownership Maverick as of 2002, and publishing royalties. I'm sure my numbers are not 100% accurate, but needless to say I don't think Madonna has to worry about finding a new line of work... at this point in her career she could support her self by farting to the tune of Yankie Doodle Dandy.
Yes, but are there LEGAL means of having a second copy handed to you by the RIAA?
Nope. Disney is a different story... from my understanding you can get discs replaced for a smallish fee. They are not as spiffy as the box set... you lose the color graphics on the disc, but at least they do this.
There is auto insurance that covers theft. Those I know who have it get a check cut by their agents who in turn buy their music back from the nearest pawn shop.
I don't think so. This is like arresting people for not paying taxes when you don't give them the means of getting a job.
No it isn't. It's like getting your tapes stolen and making a copy from someone else's copy. While you feel justified... it's still a copyright violaton.
So, if it's the same data you're recovering by file sharing, where's the copyright violation?
You do have the right to make backups of what you own. This is fair and reasonable. But because music isn't licensed loss of the physical product is loss of ownership. You don't own it anymore... so the moment you copy it from elsewhere someone is commiting a copyright violation.
It's the case of two people who have separately bought copies of the same piece of information, interchange such information in the case of a loss (such as having a RAID array).
This is nothing like a RAID array. Nothing at all.
So, if there are NO legal means of recovering what rightfully belongs to you, there's no other choice than doing it "illegally".
I'm not arguing the ethics... it doesn't change the fact that if you take the time to copy something you don't own without the express permission from the copyright holder... you have commited a violation of the copyright.
But there is a legal means of recovering from a loss, insurrance. Car insurance, renters insurance, home owners insurance. More unreliable is marking your media with an indelible marker. This way there is a chance in hell the police might beable to recover your property. It's not fair but that's life.
Which is the aburd that I'm trying to point out: The laws are UNFAIR. And an unfair (AND illogical) law defies the very purpose of Law itself.
The law is unfair. They are playing both sides of the coin. One the one hand they claim music is licensed and on the other hand they claim you buy it. I agree that the law should be changed so that music is licensed and format shifting is 100% legal. No more hiding behind that "well you might end up with a better copy" argument. I would agree that it would be "nice" to be able to buy a license to play media. This way if your media is rendered unplayable there is no quesiton legal or otherwise that you can make copy from another source. And for people like your self who have things stolen... that would be nice.
So rather than trying to argue the point with me about the subject... do everything in your power to change the law, or the attidues involving the sales of media. Because no matter which way you look at it, using someone else's media to make a copy for something you lost is a copyright violation. You might feel justified, and someone like my self really doesn't give a shit, but it's still a copyright violation.
Or better yet... learn from your prior mistake and backup what you own on CD-R or DVD-R. This way if your collection gets stolen.. they steal a bunch of worthless discs.
Slashdot Mirror
Power Pack
Never heard of them.
http://www.marveldirectory.com/teams/powerpack.ht
I would paraphrase this and attempt to poke fun at the idea, but it's pretty awful in it self.
Shang-Chi
Is this like the token Asian guy?
Your thinking of Samuri from the "super friends".
This clearly isn't your average token asian guy who knows kung fu who moved and got employed as a secret agent and likes to fish who's arch nemisis lives in China Town. The fact that he's from china, knows kung fu and likes to fish and happens to have an arch nemisis in Chinatown are totaly beside the point... and was only formaly employed by MI-6. The nunchukas are just a tasteful detail and clearly isn't intended as being stereotypical at all.
http://www.marveldirectory.com/individuals/s/shan
http://www.marveldirectory.com/individuals/a/antma nii.htm
Let me paraphrase the marvel directory.
Scott Lang was an expert in electronics but for some reason couldn't make a buck. So he became a burglar but wasn't very good at it... he got caught and put in jail and got a job with some Marvel invented company that one would know if one ever bothered to read comic books. But he daughter was diagnosed with a terminal illness, probally something to do with all those green screen terminals Scott Lang was forced to used as he coudln't afford a real computer. The only doctor who can help was being helded by some other big evil company the name likely known by anyone who has bothered to read any marvel comics. So he decided to steal AntMan's outfit and magic shrinking gas. Fortunatly the real AntMan had a spair YellowJacket outfit and follows AntMan II and watches him confront the arch villin who's in the business of kidnaping doctors needed by wackos who like to dress up in costume, a common theme in the Marvel world. AntMan II rescues the good doctor who cures his daughter and just when he's about to step up and return the stupid AntMan outfit to AntMan... AntMan says he can keep it so long as he's a good boy.
Sells electronics by day, dresses up as an Ant by night... it's AntMan II!
So, from this I can establish the first AntMan was some guy with magic shrinking gas who liked to put on an ant costume get small and fight crime. And I wondered why I never really bought comic books.
1. FTP is a generic file transfer protocol. KaZaa is an application that allows searching for music (and movies? I'm not really familiar with it) and subsequently downloading it. So we can say KaZaa specializes in providing access to music (and movies?), whereas FTP doesn't specialize in any sort of file in particular.
KaZaa is an application that is designed to index a collection of files (perhpas even ID3 tags) and publish that list of files in a searchable database. How is this different from archie and veronica
very easy rodent-oriented net-wide index of computerized archives.. How is this different from yahoo, google, and other search engines?
2. KaZaa was programmed in a time when the connection between peer-to-peer and copyright infringement was well-established. It is very unlikely that the authors weren't aware of that fact. Thus, the authors of KaZaa probably knew that their software would be used for copyright infringement.
So would Firefox be more accountable than Netscape or Mosiac because it came later for any copyright infringement that goes on the WWW.
3. The files accessed through KaZaa come from other users of the system. There are many of those. Files accessed through FTP come from a few servers. FTP server admins have been known to take down offending material when made aware of its existance. The hopes of something similar happening to offending material shared by KaZaa users is futile. The only way to prevent rampant copyright infringement would be through the software.
There is nothing stopping anyone from hosting a FTP site on their own host machine. Or even http sever. Heck HTTP is even worse because if you have copyrighted materials in a directory designated no robots you run the risk of having your files indexed and accessable by anyone on the planet.
4. Although the authors were aware (if not before writing it, then certainly after release) that their software was used for rampant copyright infringement, and despite the fact that they are the only ones who can do something about it, they have not taken any steps to prevent the abuse.
There is presently no sutable system to establish the wish of the copyright holder. There is no centralized database offered by the RIAA nor MPAA that lists material that sharing is not permited. Given that many artists and peformers are pro-p2p and absolutly no way presently to establish the wish of a given artest, who's responciblity is it?
Take porno for instance. You can use KaZaa's network to download porno, much of it in 5, 10, or 20meg little bipverts that usually involve a cum-shot facial deal with a url in bold friendly letters. These free vids serve to prmote services that typicaly offer full lenth videos that you can download off their respective sites. This is a legit application of p2p networks.
If the RIAA wants to protect musician's rights, they have to create a centralized database that clearly list the copyright holder's wish on how they want music distributed. This is the only way to protect the rights of those who don't want to use P2P networks and those who expressly desire it. This is their job.
Does that make them guilty? Perhaps; time will tell. Does finding them guilty imply that the authors of the FTP protocol are guilty? I don't think so. FTP clearly wasn't originally envisioned to be used for rampant copyright infringement
So, are you saying if Kazza employed FTP protocal rather than it's own crappy protocal then they would be less guilty? Anonymous FTP was established without thought it might be used for piracy? This is respectfully a laugh. What about Ward Christian Protocal aka X-modem in the 1980s? How about Kermit, Y-modem or Z-modem. You can believe that these were written without thinking they might be used for copyright infringement... but you would be deluding yourself.
And thats not even half the time the story has been posted. It does the rounds on slashdot quite regularly. It should be added to slashot posting spam filters or something. Great work of fiction, isn't it?
Well, it might be fiction but it's close to fact. The kid part is somewhat far fetched but I can believe that a kid with a "good christian upbrining" was taught to share. The problem is I have seen record store owners pretty irate and yelling at kids for various reasons. None of them are still in business.
Piracy is nothing new... been around since home recording has been a legit option. Now if you actually remember going to the record store, or hell even a video store, the big ones typicaly offered no only recorded media but recordable medium. For a time... the local Tower Records was the only place I could buy 74min and 100min cassettes the perfect size for your typical album.
So I imagine that a media store owner could go out of his way to chase away their customers. For music, you could get away with saying they were for people who wanted to play their music in the car that only has a cassette deck. This would be reasonable. But VHS tapes and now DVD-Rs at the video store?
My business faces ruin. CD sales have dropped through the floor. People aren't buying half as many CDs as they did just a year ago.
While this is a troll, i'll respond anyway.
I actually know of a man who went out of his way to sell christian records... as in vinyl and tapes. This was a while ago when CDs were new. And he discovered that his business was failing and this being a while ago this was in the age of 2400bps modems so the guy didn't have the luxury of blaming p2p networks. I think he blamed the Christian chain shops in the local Malls but in the end the cause didn't really matter. The simple fact of the matter was there was not really a demand for Christian music. Needing to make a buck... he decided to stop offering Christian music and started offering porno. New and used books, videos, mags, the works. Before he knew it, he had a small chain of smut shops and was making a decent living.
So the point is, if your business isn't working, it's time to find another business... it's only common sense.
When I was younger, it was kind of a thing to do. Go and spend an hour or two meandering around the CD store looking through racks and racks and racks of CDs. In today's world I can't prioritize that kind of time to browsing through music. In the last year I've bought about 10 CDs and it took me less than an hour over the course of the whole year to do it.
I totally agree. I remember taking a vacation in Florida and hitting the Virgin store at downtown Disney. It was a huge record store filled with wonder and tracks and all sorts of wonderful things. I browsed around, noted somethings that I wanted here and there and then asked my self... why am I bothering? I guess it was "nice" the fact that this store stocked some vinyl specificly 12 inch remixes of "The Ketchup Song" but there really wasn't a single thing they were offering that I couldn't get online. Once this idea hit me well I hit the Lego store, a store that was clearly infinatly cooler than the Virgin store. You could play with the legos... the sample offering of music was very very limited.
While i'm all for record stores esp indy ones where you can hang out and listen to music and actually get an idea of what they are offering... i'm really more likely to be exposed to music online, and i'm more likely to actually buy something online. It's the sad truth... if you run an indy record shop and don't have any online presence... well sorry.
Their ink has built in expiration dates and region coding. Epson has built in expiration dates too. In either case, the printer will not let you use the cartridge beyond the date specified. I'm not sure about Brother's inks.
Only one I know of without lockout chips are the Canon series. Look at the ink for a Canon iP4000 or even the i9900. No chips whatsoever.
Your information, while technicaly accurate, is out of date. The Pixma ip4200 is a similar style tank, but has a chip on it. Where was that damn link
http://www.heise.de/english/newsticker/news/63332
Now in theory the new chips *MIGHT* only keep track of ink use, and not actually stop your printer from printing, but franky I have no clue as I don't own one nor do I know if anyone else has one. As a bonus they are using new ink, ink which you "could" get in the BCI-7 tank which is near as i'm aware the same size as the BCI6, but according to support anyway the new inks in America and Europe the CLI-8 (BCI-8 was taken by the Canon Aspen printer same as sold under the apple label) and PGI-5 black won't fit in the current generation printers meaning if you want the new enhanced product you gotta buy a new printer or order the inks from japan.
If what I suspect is true... and you can continue to print when the chips read empty... it makes them less evil than epson.
You can say Canon were among the last to offered chipped cartridges.... this was true. This is no longer true, just check out the new fall line.
Myself, I'm glad I live in the EU where the obligation to "reduce, reuse, recycle" trumps the right to gouge the people who pay your wages for money.
The funny thing is... these cartriges come with a shipping label and are sent back to lexmark which are in theory disassembled reused or recycled.
Unfortunatly sometimes recycled means burned and recycled into engery which to me isn't really recycling at all.
Yes, they do... Pardon the double post but I took the time to google prebates.
But on the other hand
It's little different than Epson's recycling program. They set fire to their cartridges and "recycle" them into engery.
http://www.epson.com/cmc_upload/pdf/FundingFactor
This would explain why when you ask the people at office depot "how are they recycled" they say simply "don't ask".
So, no law will prevent you from refilling it yourself; however a commercial venture can't do it.
Why not? The customer might be in violation of the "contract" if they toss that ink cart into someone else's recycle bin, but a comercial venture is under no such license agreement.
Whatever happened to the sensible days? How is this supposed to be enforced anyway? Does this give the ink cartridge company the right to spy on me in my own home so as to make sure I'm not *gasp* refilling their cartridges?!
I know the drivers the the dell pritners made by lexmark report home from time to time. I don't have any idea what they report back, but I could imagine that if a one time use cart had a unique id number which they likely do jumped from empty to full i'm sure it's possible this is reported back to them.
Maybe they should stop doing that.
What is the law on milk jugs?
I know of a few places that still offer milk in glass bottles. It costs a little more to buy the milk in a glass bottle but they offer a discount if you bring the bottle back to the store making the end cost being roughly equal to that of buying milk in plastic jugs. Near as i'm aware I'm under no legal or moral obligation to return the milk bottle... after all I bought it. But returning it will reduce my cost in milk to about $2.00/gal rather than $4.00/gal.
Needless to say this business model only works when the store is near enough to the distribution center or diary to keep the return costs minimal... otherwise it's generally more cost effective to offer milk in a disposable carton or jug making the glass bottle an oddity.
More to the point, many Americans could just start using cars which are more fuel efficient. And they won't neccesarily even have to be small cars. You can have a huge people carrier with a 2 litre diesel engine that does 40 to 50 mpg.
Three points
1. Diesel versions of autos can't be sold everywhere in america.
2. While I'm willing to believe that a passanger auto with a 1.6 to 2.0l could get 40 to 50 mpg... you need something larger to power many SUVs. While the diesel is more efficent in larger vehicels, we're talking 22 to 24mpg rather than 15mpg. I remember a toyota light passanger truck that had a 2ishl (r series engine) diesel engine that got 25 to 30mpg.
3. The cost of a diesel is more than a petrol auto. For example the VW new Beetle TDI costs $1200 or so more than the petrol version, and is one of the cheaper new diesels. Going with a japanese import on the other hand where diesel isn't an option at all would save you $5000ish in some cases. Now that fuel in the states is starting to hit $3ish/gal it's very possible you can make back your investment in the VW Beetle TDI vs the petrol version in a year. But this falls apart when you consider autos priced below $15000 where diesel is just not an option.
If talking trucks, you often have to go with the heavy duty version to even get a diesel, not an option in the 1/2 ton or 1/4 ton versions. The difference is $5000 typicaly speaking.
And the SUVs, is diesel even an option? It's a good idea... my sister has a landcruser with a freaking straight 6, an engine so underpowered that fuel economy is inadquate in contrast to a v8 in the same class. That sucker would be nice in a diesel but I don't know if that is an option at all.
To sum up... diesels are nice if they are legal where you live, if you can get them, but you'll spend more for them.
I don't know exactly how popular car DVD players are... I know they exist and some larger vehicels offer DVD players and screens as an option. Portable DVD players are available as well with tiny screens.
So if Blu-Ray requires some form of connection to a home base to operate, how the hell could they operate under the following conditions.
1. Car players
2. Handheld players
3. People who ditch their landlines in favor of mobile phones.
I've never played any of the Myst series. I would like to, but I have moved completely to Linux. Is there any way for me to play them?
All Myst I requires is a 386. I can't remember if I played it on one with or without a IIT math/co, but all one needs is a very lame machine by today's standards and windows 3.1. In fact, I played it on an ISA graphics adapter and the only "problem" playing was the fact that transisions where slugish, but aside from that it was 100% playable on a 386-40 or 486-33. IIRC there were issues playing myst on WinNT and Win2K... Cyan was none to hip to the idea of supporting what they claimed to be a professional OS.
Keep in mind that Myst I was released during a time period that not all systems had math co processors, and most of the graphics IIRC were not compressed hince the need for a full CD for a technicaly simple game, so simple a 68030 based mac run it very well.
Riven, which I assume is myst II, i've always been confused on this issue requires a Pentium 100 and is perfectly playable on a pentium 200, there are reports of it being playable on high end 486 machines, but I believe riven requires win95.
Myst III requires a pentium II but I seem to remember it also worked perfectly fine on a pentium I 200.
So... in other words... if you really really really want to play these games you can pickup a 2nd hand machine, which these days i'm seeing $20 pentium III 450s in valuevillage and goodwill and have the ability to play at least 3 out of the 5 games. 4 and 5 might run under 98se, but reccomend at least a 800mhz pentium III.
Even at 13 or 14 that damn game baffled the hell out of me and my parents (we were deeply sucked into games like monkey island and loom though).
Why on earth did people play this game where the minimum player requirements were aparently an IQ of 180+ and a brain the size of a small planet!
The same reason people to crossword puzzles. It provides a chalange. If you complete Quake II, that's nice. But you complete Myst... that's something to be proud of.
It reminds me of the realy text adventures by Scott Adams. These things you typicaly couldn't complete in a day. My usual method was to play for a week or so, put it aside when I couldn't figure something out... then later on a little lightbulb would light up and figure out a little piece of the puzzle and then return to the game. The key difference with text adventures is the fact that the difficulty wasn't always figuring out a puzzle but rather figuring out how to phrase things in a way the game could understand. This was my problem with Scott Adams games (how do I say put bubblegum on the stick in only two words).
Probally the best thing about Myst is the fact, other than the surreal music sucked you into the game, was the fact that it could be enjoyed by two or more people at the same time trying to figure out these puzzles. Given the choice between watching "Must See TV"(tm) or what is basicly an interative story that requires thought to figure out... i'd pick the interactive story.
On a side note... Myst was the game that encouranged me to actually buy a freaking CD-rom drive, PCI video card, and something a 16bit sound card. Before that I didn't have much need for a rom drive as anything I needed I could get on floppy.
I've had a similar thing happen to me, although the company was not so big (it was just a single person). I think the idea that they wanted to link to him was pretty cool, because it also promotes his game, but he was right -- they should download it and host it on their site and give more linkback info to him so that people know they didn't create it themselves. It's always a funny sight to find simple vulnerabilities on the net.
So you would propose violating the copyright... and actually making a copy without permision? Linking in this case can be argued hot or otherwise... I'd lean tward not since the game was spawned in a new window and game clearly linked to it's own site and had correct contact info.
There are people Educated in those matters, Laws are here to be followed and not to be broken as moder society tends to put it. You could argue that courts are unfair and that people who pass out sentences are not qualified to do so and so on, but the problem remains,they did something ilegal and should be accounteable for that, they are kids, agree so they shouldnt go to jail , Agree ! but never the less should be punished for what they did.
Justice is absolute. If they were there would be no need for lawyers, judges, and juries. The concept of justice is not an absolute but a creation of a system that serve the public good.
Perhaps these kids should be published for what they did... which was basicly passing around the password for their laptops to remove software that would permit remote viewing and installing of message software.
The sys admins need to be punished for their inaction and putting all this information on the same network creating an attractive nuince. A locked liquor case with the keys in plain site, a gun box with the combo written clearly on the box, a huge stack of playboys under the bed, and putting all the passwords to the network in an unsecured location. This is DUMB!
But either way, I don't see this as even being a case for a criminal justice system at all. In fact, I see the criminal justice system as being used as a vehicle to create scapegoats so those that are really accountable could have deniablity, and protection from civil lawsuits. This makes the school no better than the RIAA.
I've only seen Linspire once on a Fry el cheepo machine. When trying to add on a wireless adapter I navigated to their software page and while what I needed was offered on their software update, access required a subscription.
Does this coupon only apply to the software?
If they REALLY wanted to do it they could still "hotwire" the newer cars by bringing a seperate matching key/column computer and splicing it into the car but why bother with this hassle when you can just tow?
If you are in the business of chopping up cars, this is reasonable. But if you are just some jackass who wants to take a joy ride... hot wiring, or hunting around for the magnetic extra key box box is a better solution.
A thief who steals my CDs doesn't _own_ them. He has no right at all to listen to the music on them. Therefore, he is guilty both of theft and of copyright infringement.
If physical ownership, i.e. having them, is the license to play then they have every right to listen to them. We're not talking about a product that you register, or has anything resembling serial numbers typicaly speaking. We're talking about a disc that is mass produced in huge quanities.
Unfortunatly, you don't have the right to backup the disc from someone else... it's not your disc. A fair backup is material you own that you backed up. I personaly wouldn't give a shit.. but that doesn't change the fact that you are commiting a violation of the copyright.
Just because I can duplicate a CD doesn't mean I have duplicated the right to listen to the music
This is true, but if you backup something you own, this can be considered fair use. You have physical ownership of a product as a safegard against damage or theft. You made the backup of something you phsyicaly own at the time you physicaly owned it.
Turn this argument around: Just because someone stole my physical CD doesn't mean I've lost the right to listen to the music.
But you lost the music... and you don't have the right to copy it from someone else. At least with a software product there is at the very least a license key that is something that resembles proof of ownership, and while a copy from someone else would still be copyright infringement... so long as you have proof i.e. that license... no one would give a shit. But CDs don't have the same provision.. they should but they don't. I imagine that if you still had the case you could reasonably argue that you bought it, some jackass stole it, and no one would really give a shit. But that doesn't change the fact that making a copy from someone else isn't fair use.
Hypothetical: Given that I am the copyright owner of a musical work and a sound recording and I want my work to be played on commercial FM radio, where do I start?
College radio?
Anyhow, its not like I don't see where your coming from but I think its over simplifying the issue, I'm sure even Madonna would get pissed after the 100,000th sweaty kid told her he'd downloaded all her music for free and she might have to find a another means to support herself.
Then the solution is obvious.... don't share or download her music. She made it VERY clear she doesn't approve of file sharing. You can go one step further and not buy anything by Madonna. For me it's not all that hard as i've never been a Madonna fan. I'm sure like other big name artists they'll raise a foot and say "I don't care if you don't buy an album from me" and if so we are agreed. I can not in good conscience support any public figure who's politics I can not agree with, but at the same time I can't i'd ever buy anything by Madonna anyway. Once and a while she has a song that's decent usually written by someone else, but I just can't stand her as a peformer.
But I highly doubt that Madonna would have to find another means of supporting her self. For example in 2002 she earned 20 millionish for using her peformance of "Ray of Light" and another 45ish million extanding her Warner Brothers contract and her business "Drowned World Tours" Not to speak of 7 million in a 1/3 ownership Maverick as of 2002, and publishing royalties. I'm sure my numbers are not 100% accurate, but needless to say I don't think Madonna has to worry about finding a new line of work... at this point in her career she could support her self by farting to the tune of Yankie Doodle Dandy.
Yes, but are there LEGAL means of having a second copy handed to you by the RIAA?
Nope. Disney is a different story... from my understanding you can get discs replaced for a smallish fee. They are not as spiffy as the box set... you lose the color graphics on the disc, but at least they do this.
There is auto insurance that covers theft. Those I know who have it get a check cut by their agents who in turn buy their music back from the nearest pawn shop.
I don't think so. This is like arresting people for not paying taxes when you don't give them the means of getting a job.
No it isn't. It's like getting your tapes stolen and making a copy from someone else's copy. While you feel justified... it's still a copyright violaton.
So, if it's the same data you're recovering by file sharing, where's the copyright violation?
You do have the right to make backups of what you own. This is fair and reasonable. But because music isn't licensed loss of the physical product is loss of ownership. You don't own it anymore... so the moment you copy it from elsewhere someone is commiting a copyright violation.
It's the case of two people who have separately bought copies of the same piece of information, interchange such information in the case of a loss (such as having a RAID array).
This is nothing like a RAID array. Nothing at all.
So, if there are NO legal means of recovering what rightfully belongs to you, there's no other choice than doing it "illegally".
I'm not arguing the ethics... it doesn't change the fact that if you take the time to copy something you don't own without the express permission from the copyright holder... you have commited a violation of the copyright.
But there is a legal means of recovering from a loss, insurrance. Car insurance, renters insurance, home owners insurance. More unreliable is marking your media with an indelible marker. This way there is a chance in hell the police might beable to recover your property. It's not fair but that's life.
Which is the aburd that I'm trying to point out: The laws are UNFAIR. And an unfair (AND illogical) law defies the very purpose of Law itself.
The law is unfair. They are playing both sides of the coin. One the one hand they claim music is licensed and on the other hand they claim you buy it. I agree that the law should be changed so that music is licensed and format shifting is 100% legal. No more hiding behind that "well you might end up with a better copy" argument. I would agree that it would be "nice" to be able to buy a license to play media. This way if your media is rendered unplayable there is no quesiton legal or otherwise that you can make copy from another source. And for people like your self who have things stolen... that would be nice.
So rather than trying to argue the point with me about the subject... do everything in your power to change the law, or the attidues involving the sales of media. Because no matter which way you look at it, using someone else's media to make a copy for something you lost is a copyright violation. You might feel justified, and someone like my self really doesn't give a shit, but it's still a copyright violation.
Or better yet... learn from your prior mistake and backup what you own on CD-R or DVD-R. This way if your collection gets stolen.. they steal a bunch of worthless discs.