The idea is that a console without protection is a console that any idiot with a compiler and a CD burner can make games for. If your console gets flooded with a shitload of crappy indy games on the store shelves, your console dies (ref: Atari 2600).
Right. But the protection is there. You still have to get around it with a chip. Since the majority of Xboxes aren't chipped, I don't think any 3rd party game companies would bother creating games for it. I don't think that it should be totally open, but to continue to try and foil the hackers that want to hack on the box is stupid. Besides, even if it were open, and anyone could make a crappy game for it, it shouldn't be ILLEGAL to do so. I understand wanting to protect their investement, but don't make modding illegal.
I don't care so much about the increased resolution, my system is not that great to notice. But I will tell you, Bjork's Vespertine sounds WAY better on the DVD-A in 5.1 than on the CD in stereo.
If that is true, then they should offer music in that format. If it is better, and people want it, they will adopt it. But don't force it down our throats. Let your customers decide. And don't polish a turd and tell me it's a Baby Ruth. There is no way in holy hell that they are pushing these formats for the good of the consumer. Why would they start caring about the consumer now? It has nothing to do with the consumer or the music. It never has.
...The difference is that it costs money for a company to produce a car.
When did it become free to produce an album? Because if something has changed recently, I have a couple of songs I'd like to put down on vinyl.
I wasn't talking about new music as much as archived stuff.
... We are talking about music that has been created, and is just sitting doing nothing.
No. What we're talking about is a group of companies and individuals that hold the rights to hundreds of songs and albums. It's their property. And they don't want people downloading it for free.
Sorry, that is hoarding. The whole copyright issue (aka the Mickey Mouse law) is a whole different issue. Although it is somewhat related.
An entire industry survives because people have always PAID for music. What has changed? With the advent of P2P, why is it ok to not pay for music, movies, or software?
It isn't. As it stands now, it is illegal. But that doesn't mean it is right. And it sure doesn't mean that P2P is an illegal application. THAT is what the RIAA wants, to shut it down. They are backing laws to allow only approved digital devices to access digital content. The way they are trying to enforce the law is WRONG. The fact of the matter is, there is an entire market of people out there who are downloading music. Should I give up my fair use rights in order for the RIAA to stop them? Hell no. They want to incorporate DRM to stop me from doing something that is legal. If P2P goes away tomorrow, I don't care. But I want to be able to have my MP3 server in my house, and burn CDs for my car. The RIAA doesn't want that.
...They don't make it available because they are too busy pushing the "next great thing".
$899 to $12.99 will get you just about any CD from an artist's back catalogue.
How many people actually do that? Like I said, I would like to have some of those old albums, but I won't pay $12.99 for them. Nevermind the price fixing of CDs, and WHY they cost that much (they don't). It isn't worth my money. The record companies could make all of those songs available . It satisfies the fans, they make MORE money than if they just sit and nobody buys them. I don't see a good reason to not do it. They would still own the copyright on them, they aren't losing anything. It gets people interested in music, which is their business.
... To the RIAA, it means "Pirates! We must stop them!"
Granted the RIAA goes WAY too far in trying to enforce its monopoly. However, can you blame them?
Yes, I can. It infringes on my fair use of a product that I bought. That is all I want. Being able to buy old songs cheaply would be nice, and it is something that they could certainly do. As long as they don't infringe on my rights, I don't care if they go after people who are stealing their music.
P2P networks are distributing, for free, copyrighted works. If the same P2P networks distributed pirated (i.e. ripped) copies of Unreal 2003 wouldn't that be stealing? It's someone's intellectual property. A group of individuals sat down and worked from someone's idea to create a video game. What's the difference?
Well, the whole concept of intellectual property is something I won't go into here. I personally think that it is OK, but as usual, someone has to Disney it up. If it was just about intellectual property, I don't think this would be such a big deal. It goes way beyond that. They are pushing for legislation to suit their business needs, and it is going to F up everbody else in the process.
...It is about the RIAA and record labels wanting to maintain their control over music.
It's there [sic] music! They own it. Copyright holders OWN it. They can do whatever they want with it. Just because a certain song or album brings back fond childhood memories, doesn't mean you own the song and can do with it what you please.
If I owned Led Zeppelin IV on 8-track, I bought the music. If I borrowed that CD from a friend and ripped it, is that stealing? Are they selling me the music, or the right to listen to that particular media?
... Instead of trying to kill online file trading, they should make it not worthwhile by offering a better product.
Now, I've ranted and raved throughout this little diatribe and I apologize if I've offended you. When I got to this part I smiled. You have hit the capitalist nail on the head.
Not at all. All of my rants are because the RIAA holds a monopoly, and refused to acknowledge that there is a market out there for digital music. Yes, I am being selfish by saying that I want cheap, maybe even free, music. Why is that so bad? Just because the recording artist sold their soul to get an album produced doesn't mean that it is right. Don't assume that just because something is illegal it is wrong. Maybe the basic assumption behind WHY something is deemed illegal is wrong.
I don't argue these things because I am a cheap ass and like sticking it to tha man. I think there is something fundamentally wrong with the way the RIAA and record companies run their business, and the way they treat artists. Not to mention how they stick it to their customers. That's me. I am just standing up for myself.
You know I would buy an AC Cobra if it was offered at a reasonable price. However, Ford and current private owners refuse to lower the price to one which I can afford; so they're hoarding them too!
Am I justified in going out and "acquiring" one through other-than-legal means?
I applaud your "stand up and be heard" rhetoric, however I have to call into question your self-promoting ethics. Just because the labels and distributors price music above what we may think is fair, doesn't give us justification to steal. Just because studios and theatre chains price admission above what we think is fair, doesn't give us the right to download a pirated copy or sneak in through the backdoor.
The difference is that it costs money for a company to produce a car. We are talking about music that has been created, and is just sitting doing nothing. They don't make it available because they are too busy pushing the "next great thing". I know I have crossed the line, but that was because there was no alternative. To the positive thinker, that means "there is an untapped market out there that people are swarming around". To the RIAA, it means "Pirates! We must stop them!"
This goes well beyond me and you. It is about the RIAA and record labels wanting to maintain their control over music. There is absolutely no doubt that online music is an incredible force. So instead of embracing it, and giving back to the fans that lined their pockets for so many years, they simply want to exert more control over them. Instead of trying to kill online file trading, they should make it not worthwhile by offering a better product. Why bootleg video cassettes when a DVD costs the same or less? Because it is a better product. They aren't hearing the message that is being screamed in their ear.
Sorry, this doesn't fly. I don't know anyone who says "yeah, the quality of a CD just isn't there, I wish there was something better."
No, dumbasses at the RIAA et al, people want portability and freedom. Why don't they get this yet? How many songs are downloaded/ripped to a LOWER quality format (128kbit) for the sake of convenience?
This just proves that they either just don't get it, or they are fearing that they are losing that sweet sweet control that they have had for so long. Or both.
OK, here it is. You want to get the music fans back? Take the incredibly massive archives of music that you "own", digitize them, and offer the files at a reasonable price. How many Ratt CDs have you sold over the past 10 years? But you know what - if I could get all those songs at $0.15 per song I would do it. That was my high-school years. Offer ridiculous compilation albums in MP3 format. "Top 100 songs of the 80s" for $20. Customize, you pick 100 songs for $20. I am not talking the latest releases, how about anything older than 5 years old. Those songs are just sitting there. Generate some interest in music instead of bitching and moaning that nobody is interested in the drivel that you put out. Hell, offer a CD full of old MP3s with every new CD that you buy. Something! Anything! Just stop trying to control your customers with force.
How come I can think up several plausible solutions off the top of my head, but they are blind to the fact that digital file formats for music are here to stay?
No. Very few consumers -- other than those addicted to piracy on general principles, or who get a kick out of feeling like they're getting away with something -- will ever install or use mod chips. The copy protection isn't there to prevent you from playing pirated games. The real target of copy protection in consoles is -- other game companies.
For every PS2 game made, Sony gets a cut. For every Gamecube game made, Nintendo gets a cut. For every Xbox game made, Microsoft gets a cut. The copy protection on these consoles is the console manufacturer's way of making sure that they are not squeezed out of the transactions between the game developers and the consumer, the way Atari was with 3rd-party 2600 games.
Now wait - you say that modding the game console is a niche market (which it is) and that not a whole lot of people do it. I agree with this. So how are the game companies protecting their investments against 3rd party games? Niche markets don't drive game development. So any 3rd party game that was made would only be able to be played on a modded system. No game company is going to go to that trouble.
I don't really see big deal about mod chips. Now that there are legitimate uses (FAIR uses) for them, hopefully someone will market them as such. As long as it is marketed and sold as a legitimate use device (such as the GNU/Linux Xbox Chip) could MS go after the sellers? It isn't like you are installing another game system, it is a totally different environment. So it wouldn't even be about stifling the competition. Maybe that is what Microsoft doesn't understand.:-)
If AOL tanks, it would be quite a bad thing, IMO, for several reasons:
More clueless users on my ISP (and yours)
Microsoft loses an "opponent" who has the backing to take them on when it comes to some issues
More clueless users on MSN
No matter what you say about AOLs clients, we have all know about "you've got mail", AIM, etc. Imagine if they go under and a large percentage of those customers go to MSN. While I don't particularly like AOL/Time Warner, they are almost a necessary evil to keep other evils in check.
The problem is that there is a fine line of distinction with taking "intellectual property". The whole fair use mess is a tough nut to crack. Yes, I have downloaded songs before. But I really don't like much of what is out now. I used to own a lot of tapes which have since broken or worn out. If I find a good version on the net, should I be entitled to download it? I think that is fair use. I bought it once before, I should still own it. (or is it just the media we own?) Same reason that I have downloaded some of the artists whose CDs got ruined.
Then I have this gray line, where I have downloaded songs, or had people give them to me, that were from my era. One guy is collecting the Top 10 songs from every week during the 80s. It is nostalgia more than anything. Am I going to go out and buy all of those CDs, just to get the songs I want? No way. So technically I haven't purchased them, but there is no real viable alternative. If the record companies offered older songs at a reasonable price, I would buy them. They don't, they are hoarding what they "own". Everyone else has embraced digital music except the people who control the music industry. They really need to wake up.
Third is the outright stealing. I wanted to hear Eminem's new album, so I downloaded it. I listened to it a couple of times, and now it sits. I decided I didn't want to buy it, but I haven't deleted the files. I think this falls in the "wrong" category. But I rarely do this.
I refuse to download movies, just because I don't think it is right. I'll pay to see something I want to see. I like good movies, so I try to avoid crap anyway, which is why I still haven't seen Episode II. Why would I download it if I didn't even go to a theater to watch it? Even Lucas deserves to get paid for his hard work, but I don't think he deserves to get paid for this one (at least not by me). I usually go by the consensus of reviewers that I like, and recommendations from friends. Or maybe I'll rent it if it looks interesting.
Come on people, it is up to us to draw the line when it comes to piracy, because if we don't someone else will. And I doubt that line will be very forgiving. If you morally believe that things like music and movies should be free, so be it. Then stand up for those beliefs. Don't download stuff just because you can, and because it is "free". Pretending to be some type of freedom activist just to get free stuff makes you an idiot.
OMFG, that was hilarious! The underlying message was "Microsoft makes switching from bad ol' expensive Macintosh to their happy, puppy friendly technologically superior Windows XP platform so easy, even a dumb girl like me can do it. Tee-hee."
How low can you get? Does anyone really BELIEVE this story? I sure hope not.
But at the end of the article, there are forms in PDF and Word (natch) where you can send in YOUR experiences with Windows. Come on Slashdotters, fill them out and send them in! PDF and Word
Here is the text of the document. It gets better...
Show Off Your Skills
Are you a whiz at using a Microsoft product at home or in the office? Are you the one everyone comes to when they need to know how to do something? If so, we'd love to see what you can do.
A whiz? ha ahaha I think they mean wiz. Oh brother.
We're collecting ideas for articles on the Microsoft Insider Web site. Some of your work or submissions may be included in a gallery on the site, featured in press releases, or developed into how-to articles.
This just in: Microsoft invents user-friendly HOWTO documents.
Note: We will not feature any of your work without first receiving your permission.
And having you sign away the rights to any experience you may have, or have had in the past to the sole ownership of Microsoft.
To participate, please send us:
Your first and last name
Name of your company or organization (if applicable)
Brief description of your company or organization, including industry and size
Brief description of which Microsoft product you use and how you use it
Personal contact information, including address, phone number and e-mail address
Samples of your work--either hard copies of your marketing materials or a Web site address where we can view your work. Please be sure to include any user names or passwords that might be needed.
WTF???
You can submit your sample(s) one of two ways:
1. For online materials, send an e-mail message with the subject line Microsoft Publisher Customer Stories to insider@microsoft.com. (Note: Please do not send any attachments over 1 megabyte in size.)
Or with any malicious VBscripts attached
2. For printed materials, send hard copies to:
Microsoft Insider Customer Stories
Microsoft Corporation
9931 Willows Road
Redmond, WA 98052
Microsoft will not share the information you provide with third parties without your permission except where necessary to complete the services or transactions you have requested, or as required by law.
What have you done for me lately? :-)
on
Ask Donald Becker
·
· Score: 5, Interesting
Donald, as the founder and CTO of Scyld, as well as a member of the board of directors, do you still get to hack, or is your time all taken up with business? Do you ever get the itch to get back to hacking code? If so, what are you working on?
In many respects, Linux isn't so much a "newer operating environment" - its pedigree is Unix, and it owes much of its core to long- established developments for much older systems. To say that it is "even newer than Windows" and to cite this as evidence that Linux is therefore less secure than Windows is rather irresponsible, to say the least.
To get even more picky, Windows is used as a generic term. Most GNU/Linux distros are older than Windows XP or 2000. Some Linux and BSD distros are older than Windows NT. The core security model of all *nix systems is much older than any Windows security model.
I didn't think much of this article, basically because it didn't really say anything.
Is there any other party that might be winning? Well, yes. Microsoft. But you already knew that. And hey, they even have a version control system.
Take what I am about to say with a grain of salt. I am no conspiracy theorist, but in the last 5 years I have seen so many shady actions by big companies, one in particular, nothing would surprise me.
You really have to wonder if Microsoft has their eye on BK, as a financial investment. They could afford to purchase BitKeeper, and from the sound of McVoy, he is no friend of Open Source and would jump at the chance to make a buck. So MS owns BK, maybe quietly, and starts doing their EULA magic on it, hoping nobody will notice. Whoops, suddenly MS owns the rights to the Linux kernel. Frogs, locusts, moon turns red, etc etc.
Yeah, pretty far fetched, but it would be worth a shot, don't you think? What would MS have to lose? Reputation? Hah. They might be taken to court? Ooooooo, scary. If they can thumb their nose to the DOJ, do you think anyone else will scare them in the courts?
When you give a speech, do you start out with:
Webster's dictionary defines...
Honestly, no offense to you personally,
but quoting a dictionary is one of the most ignorant forms of educated argument you can make. Dictionaries are collections of what the dictionary writers think they know. Just because the American public misuses a term doesn't mean it is correct. Would you say that the words "your" and "you're" are interchangeable, since most people use them interchangeably? Dictionaries are to information what encyclopedias are to research books, or cliff's notes to literature. It is meant to be a starting point. Just because it is in a dictionary doesn't make it so.
Browsing at threshold +3, 37 comments into the discussion so far, and... I can't spot a single sympathetic comment. Most of us are all laughing at this guy's death in some kind of cynical Darwinistic smugness.
The games probably aren't killing anyone, but they've sure done a good job of de-sensitizing a few people...
Welcome to our society. That is kind of crappy, but honestly, what do you expect? Should I mourn for every death that I hear about? Do you know how many deaths I hear about on a daily basis? Should I feel sorry for this person, when there are thousands of other people dying every single day, for no fault of their own?
This story made the news because it was sensational. Then it is posted to a bunch of online dorks. What the hell do you expect? Black banners on the front page? I don't think games have desensitized me, I think this world has desensitized me - and I don't necessarily think it is a bad thing. If I reacted honestly and openly to every single bad piece of news that I hear, I would be an emotional wreck and wouldn't be able to function on a daily basis.
So this story was not posted, or even created, for sympathy. It was put here because it is sensational, and so people could say "wow". That is all. I don't feel sorry for the guy, he was someone halfway across the world from me, a nearly nameless person who died in an unusual way. So what? If you think that death itself is something that we should mourn, then you are going to be one very sad person your entire life.
This statement makes no sense. Why would MS support Linux - their sworn enemy? Why would they make it easy for people to buy their hardware and run Linux on it?
I don't think anyone expects them to embrace the GNU/Linux community on the Xbox issue. What is WRONG is that they are using lawyers as their minions. If it were a technically sound product, they wouldn't CARE about modders because they would know that it wouldn't affect their sales at all.
Let's look at this - a lot of people say "Why would I want to run GNU/Linux on an Xbox?" There is no secret reason, it is just because you can. That is what hacking is all about. Nobody can honestly tell me that the market for mod chips is big enough to make a dent in future sales. It is a niche community, and a small one. Microsoft shouldn't give a rat's ass about it. But they do, because it is something they don't control. This isn't about playing pirated games, or running another OS on the Xbox, it is about control. Microsoft wants to Own It All . Period. And they are using "the law" to assist them. Something is weird here, because as a lot of people have pointed out, they probably woulnd't buy an Xbox just to run GNU/Linux - so why does Microsoft care if they do it?
Yes, you can play pirated games on a modded Xbox. but there are perfectly legal reasons for wanting a modded box. This has been proven that it is possible, and that there is interest in it. I can't imagine that even pirated games would make a dent in legitimate sales.
Modding an Xbox is not wrong, and if it is illegal it shouldn't be. What the hell has happened to common sense? This is just another example of Microsoft "not getting it". They are not a software, or a technology company. They have firmly moved into the ranks of a control business. The RIAA and the MPAA have welcomed them in with open arms.
I can tell you, as a former telemarketer (many years ago and I needed money:-)), that they NEVER give their real names. Each person has a script with a fake name written on top that they are supposed to use whenever someone asks them their name. This is just an older version of fake headers.
So I'll add to my list of questions: Is that your real name or the one you are supposed to give me if I ask?:-)
dismay: The title of the article says "hacking" when it means "cracking".
delight: The text of the article gets the term right, saying that their smart cards were "cracked".
dismay: The text then misuses the term again, saying Echostar was hacked.
Come on folks, if a site that supposedly is "news for nerds" can't get the term right, how is anyone else expected to? (and don't give me the BS that hacking and cracking are the same thing)
I had a new take on dealing with telemarketers. Instead of my usual (talking to them for a second, then just putting the phone down), I was going to ask them their name, then while they went through their routine I was going to start looking them up on the internet. (DSL is great). But my wife scolded me for that idea, saying that no good would come of it, except for my sick enjoyment.
So I keep a pad of paper by the phone. When they call, I ask the person their full name, and I have them spell it. I ask them the name of their company. Then I politely say "I want you to take me off of your list, and never call here again". They are used to dealing with aholes, but they aren't so used to dealing with someone who takes down all their info and speaks nicely but firmly with them. They get a little freaked when you ask for their name, but they usually give it to you. Now THEY are tied to the call, so they have a vested interest in not pissing you off. As we all know, people are a lot more bold when they are Anonymous Cowards.
Check out Knoppix . Put in at least 128MB of memory (it runs on a ramdisk, ditch the hard drives, and boot them up on CDs. It comes with amazing auto-hardware-detection, and has Mozilla, OpenOffice, and many other programs. I use this currently on a discless machine to play MP3s through my stereo. It really is a nice distro. I think you can even mod the distro, but I haven't tried it yet.
Even if its nice and fun that they have made it possible why would i want to run linux on X-box? All they really do is helping MS finetuning their DRM system before it gets to he PC. It will be a cold day in hell before i buy an Xbox.
I agree, I wouldn't buy one either. But think about this: before Linux (I'll assume GNU/Linux, since it is now a distro) was ported to the Xbox, there was no reason to have a mod chip other than to play pirated games. Now people are hacking it (in the truest sense of the word) and are finding other fun uses for THE HARDWARE THAT THEY BOUGHT. I emphasize that because Microsoft just shut down a company that sold mod chips. They have no right to do this. Once you buy hardware, you own it. Now they might be able to convince a judge that the only reason to have a mod chip is to play pirated games, therefore robbing Microsoft of their money. But with the porting of Linux, it proves that there are non-illegal reasons to want to buy a mod chip.
Not that I think that it will stop Microsoft from bullying people, but it is a start. If you couldn't run the Linux kernel on the Xbox, there would be no other reason to buy a mod chip.
Besides, I think it is cool that people have the skills to do this kind of thing. It is interesting, and proves the power of the "little guy".
WTF is going on? The original picture I linked to has been changed to the one that is on the kaii website! The one I had originally linked to looked totally different, and even had the company's logo on it. It looked a lot more like a palm with a rounded bottom.
So linuxdevices will change an archived story? I can only guess that the company who makes it contacted them. WTF is going on?!
Slashdot Mirror
Right. But the protection is there. You still have to get around it with a chip. Since the majority of Xboxes aren't chipped, I don't think any 3rd party game companies would bother creating games for it. I don't think that it should be totally open, but to continue to try and foil the hackers that want to hack on the box is stupid. Besides, even if it were open, and anyone could make a crappy game for it, it shouldn't be ILLEGAL to do so. I understand wanting to protect their investement, but don't make modding illegal.
If that is true, then they should offer music in that format. If it is better, and people want it, they will adopt it. But don't force it down our throats. Let your customers decide. And don't polish a turd and tell me it's a Baby Ruth. There is no way in holy hell that they are pushing these formats for the good of the consumer. Why would they start caring about the consumer now? It has nothing to do with the consumer or the music. It never has.
When did it become free to produce an album? Because if something has changed recently, I have a couple of songs I'd like to put down on vinyl. I wasn't talking about new music as much as archived stuff.
No. What we're talking about is a group of companies and individuals that hold the rights to hundreds of songs and albums. It's their property. And they don't want people downloading it for free.
Sorry, that is hoarding. The whole copyright issue (aka the Mickey Mouse law) is a whole different issue. Although it is somewhat related.
An entire industry survives because people have always PAID for music. What has changed? With the advent of P2P, why is it ok to not pay for music, movies, or software?
It isn't. As it stands now, it is illegal. But that doesn't mean it is right. And it sure doesn't mean that P2P is an illegal application. THAT is what the RIAA wants, to shut it down. They are backing laws to allow only approved digital devices to access digital content. The way they are trying to enforce the law is WRONG. The fact of the matter is, there is an entire market of people out there who are downloading music. Should I give up my fair use rights in order for the RIAA to stop them? Hell no. They want to incorporate DRM to stop me from doing something that is legal. If P2P goes away tomorrow, I don't care. But I want to be able to have my MP3 server in my house, and burn CDs for my car. The RIAA doesn't want that.
Granted the RIAA goes WAY too far in trying to enforce its monopoly. However, can you blame them?
Yes, I can. It infringes on my fair use of a product that I bought. That is all I want. Being able to buy old songs cheaply would be nice, and it is something that they could certainly do. As long as they don't infringe on my rights, I don't care if they go after people who are stealing their music.
P2P networks are distributing, for free, copyrighted works. If the same P2P networks distributed pirated (i.e. ripped) copies of Unreal 2003 wouldn't that be stealing? It's someone's intellectual property. A group of individuals sat down and worked from someone's idea to create a video game. What's the difference?
Well, the whole concept of intellectual property is something I won't go into here. I personally think that it is OK, but as usual, someone has to Disney it up. If it was just about intellectual property, I don't think this would be such a big deal. It goes way beyond that. They are pushing for legislation to suit their business needs, and it is going to F up everbody else in the process.
It's there [sic] music! They own it. Copyright holders OWN it. They can do whatever they want with it. Just because a certain song or album brings back fond childhood memories, doesn't mean you own the song and can do with it what you please.
If I owned Led Zeppelin IV on 8-track, I bought the music. If I borrowed that CD from a friend and ripped it, is that stealing? Are they selling me the music, or the right to listen to that particular media?
Now, I've ranted and raved throughout this little diatribe and I apologize if I've offended you. When I got to this part I smiled. You have hit the capitalist nail on the head.
Not at all. All of my rants are because the RIAA holds a monopoly, and refused to acknowledge that there is a market out there for digital music. Yes, I am being selfish by saying that I want cheap, maybe even free, music. Why is that so bad? Just because the recording artist sold their soul to get an album produced doesn't mean that it is right. Don't assume that just because something is illegal it is wrong. Maybe the basic assumption behind WHY something is deemed illegal is wrong.
I don't argue these things because I am a cheap ass and like sticking it to tha man. I think there is something fundamentally wrong with the way the RIAA and record companies run their business, and the way they treat artists. Not to mention how they stick it to their customers. That's me. I am just standing up for myself.
The difference is that it costs money for a company to produce a car. We are talking about music that has been created, and is just sitting doing nothing. They don't make it available because they are too busy pushing the "next great thing". I know I have crossed the line, but that was because there was no alternative. To the positive thinker, that means "there is an untapped market out there that people are swarming around". To the RIAA, it means "Pirates! We must stop them!"
This goes well beyond me and you. It is about the RIAA and record labels wanting to maintain their control over music. There is absolutely no doubt that online music is an incredible force. So instead of embracing it, and giving back to the fans that lined their pockets for so many years, they simply want to exert more control over them. Instead of trying to kill online file trading, they should make it not worthwhile by offering a better product. Why bootleg video cassettes when a DVD costs the same or less? Because it is a better product. They aren't hearing the message that is being screamed in their ear.
No, dumbasses at the RIAA et al, people want portability and freedom. Why don't they get this yet? How many songs are downloaded/ripped to a LOWER quality format (128kbit) for the sake of convenience?
This just proves that they either just don't get it, or they are fearing that they are losing that sweet sweet control that they have had for so long. Or both.
OK, here it is. You want to get the music fans back? Take the incredibly massive archives of music that you "own", digitize them, and offer the files at a reasonable price. How many Ratt CDs have you sold over the past 10 years? But you know what - if I could get all those songs at $0.15 per song I would do it. That was my high-school years. Offer ridiculous compilation albums in MP3 format. "Top 100 songs of the 80s" for $20. Customize, you pick 100 songs for $20. I am not talking the latest releases, how about anything older than 5 years old. Those songs are just sitting there. Generate some interest in music instead of bitching and moaning that nobody is interested in the drivel that you put out. Hell, offer a CD full of old MP3s with every new CD that you buy. Something! Anything! Just stop trying to control your customers with force.
How come I can think up several plausible solutions off the top of my head, but they are blind to the fact that digital file formats for music are here to stay?
For every PS2 game made, Sony gets a cut. For every Gamecube game made, Nintendo gets a cut. For every Xbox game made, Microsoft gets a cut. The copy protection on these consoles is the console manufacturer's way of making sure that they are not squeezed out of the transactions between the game developers and the consumer, the way Atari was with 3rd-party 2600 games.
Now wait - you say that modding the game console is a niche market (which it is) and that not a whole lot of people do it. I agree with this. So how are the game companies protecting their investments against 3rd party games? Niche markets don't drive game development. So any 3rd party game that was made would only be able to be played on a modded system. No game company is going to go to that trouble.
I don't really see big deal about mod chips. Now that there are legitimate uses (FAIR uses) for them, hopefully someone will market them as such. As long as it is marketed and sold as a legitimate use device (such as the GNU/Linux Xbox Chip) could MS go after the sellers? It isn't like you are installing another game system, it is a totally different environment. So it wouldn't even be about stifling the competition. Maybe that is what Microsoft doesn't understand. :-)
More clueless users on my ISP (and yours)
Microsoft loses an "opponent" who has the backing to take them on when it comes to some issues
More clueless users on MSN
No matter what you say about AOLs clients, we have all know about "you've got mail", AIM, etc. Imagine if they go under and a large percentage of those customers go to MSN. While I don't particularly like AOL/Time Warner, they are almost a necessary evil to keep other evils in check.
Rosie O'Donnell
Ackkkk! Definitely one game that would be hard to finish. Wouldn't want to brag about winning, or losing.
Then I have this gray line, where I have downloaded songs, or had people give them to me, that were from my era. One guy is collecting the Top 10 songs from every week during the 80s. It is nostalgia more than anything. Am I going to go out and buy all of those CDs, just to get the songs I want? No way. So technically I haven't purchased them, but there is no real viable alternative. If the record companies offered older songs at a reasonable price, I would buy them. They don't, they are hoarding what they "own". Everyone else has embraced digital music except the people who control the music industry. They really need to wake up.
Third is the outright stealing. I wanted to hear Eminem's new album, so I downloaded it. I listened to it a couple of times, and now it sits. I decided I didn't want to buy it, but I haven't deleted the files. I think this falls in the "wrong" category. But I rarely do this.
I refuse to download movies, just because I don't think it is right. I'll pay to see something I want to see. I like good movies, so I try to avoid crap anyway, which is why I still haven't seen Episode II. Why would I download it if I didn't even go to a theater to watch it? Even Lucas deserves to get paid for his hard work, but I don't think he deserves to get paid for this one (at least not by me). I usually go by the consensus of reviewers that I like, and recommendations from friends. Or maybe I'll rent it if it looks interesting.
Come on people, it is up to us to draw the line when it comes to piracy, because if we don't someone else will. And I doubt that line will be very forgiving. If you morally believe that things like music and movies should be free, so be it. Then stand up for those beliefs. Don't download stuff just because you can, and because it is "free". Pretending to be some type of freedom activist just to get free stuff makes you an idiot.
How low can you get? Does anyone really BELIEVE this story? I sure hope not.
But at the end of the article, there are forms in PDF and Word (natch) where you can send in YOUR experiences with Windows. Come on Slashdotters, fill them out and send them in! PDF and Word
Here is the text of the document. It gets better...
Show Off Your Skills
Are you a whiz at using a Microsoft product at home or in the office? Are you the one everyone comes to when they need to know how to do something? If so, we'd love to see what you can do.
A whiz? ha ahaha I think they mean wiz. Oh brother.
We're collecting ideas for articles on the Microsoft Insider Web site. Some of your work or submissions may be included in a gallery on the site, featured in press releases, or developed into how-to articles.
This just in: Microsoft invents user-friendly HOWTO documents.
Note: We will not feature any of your work without first receiving your permission.
And having you sign away the rights to any experience you may have, or have had in the past to the sole ownership of Microsoft.
To participate, please send us:
Your first and last name
Name of your company or organization (if applicable)
Brief description of your company or organization, including industry and size
Brief description of which Microsoft product you use and how you use it
Personal contact information, including address, phone number and e-mail address
Samples of your work--either hard copies of your marketing materials or a Web site address where we can view your work. Please be sure to include any user names or passwords that might be needed.
WTF???
You can submit your sample(s) one of two ways:
1. For online materials, send an e-mail message with the subject line Microsoft Publisher Customer Stories to insider@microsoft.com. (Note: Please do not send any attachments over 1 megabyte in size.)
Or with any malicious VBscripts attached
2. For printed materials, send hard copies to:
Microsoft Insider Customer Stories Microsoft Corporation 9931 Willows Road Redmond, WA 98052 Microsoft will not share the information you provide with third parties without your permission except where necessary to complete the services or transactions you have requested, or as required by law.
Donald, as the founder and CTO of Scyld, as well as a member of the board of directors, do you still get to hack, or is your time all taken up with business? Do you ever get the itch to get back to hacking code? If so, what are you working on?
To get even more picky, Windows is used as a generic term. Most GNU/Linux distros are older than Windows XP or 2000. Some Linux and BSD distros are older than Windows NT. The core security model of all *nix systems is much older than any Windows security model.
I didn't think much of this article, basically because it didn't really say anything.
Take what I am about to say with a grain of salt. I am no conspiracy theorist, but in the last 5 years I have seen so many shady actions by big companies, one in particular, nothing would surprise me.
You really have to wonder if Microsoft has their eye on BK, as a financial investment. They could afford to purchase BitKeeper, and from the sound of McVoy, he is no friend of Open Source and would jump at the chance to make a buck. So MS owns BK, maybe quietly, and starts doing their EULA magic on it, hoping nobody will notice. Whoops, suddenly MS owns the rights to the Linux kernel. Frogs, locusts, moon turns red, etc etc.
Yeah, pretty far fetched, but it would be worth a shot, don't you think? What would MS have to lose? Reputation? Hah. They might be taken to court? Ooooooo, scary. If they can thumb their nose to the DOJ, do you think anyone else will scare them in the courts?
Yeah, I am probably just paranoid.
Webster's dictionary defines...
Honestly, no offense to you personally, but quoting a dictionary is one of the most ignorant forms of educated argument you can make. Dictionaries are collections of what the dictionary writers think they know. Just because the American public misuses a term doesn't mean it is correct. Would you say that the words "your" and "you're" are interchangeable, since most people use them interchangeably? Dictionaries are to information what encyclopedias are to research books, or cliff's notes to literature. It is meant to be a starting point. Just because it is in a dictionary doesn't make it so.
Welcome to our society. That is kind of crappy, but honestly, what do you expect? Should I mourn for every death that I hear about? Do you know how many deaths I hear about on a daily basis? Should I feel sorry for this person, when there are thousands of other people dying every single day, for no fault of their own?
This story made the news because it was sensational. Then it is posted to a bunch of online dorks. What the hell do you expect? Black banners on the front page? I don't think games have desensitized me, I think this world has desensitized me - and I don't necessarily think it is a bad thing. If I reacted honestly and openly to every single bad piece of news that I hear, I would be an emotional wreck and wouldn't be able to function on a daily basis.
So this story was not posted, or even created, for sympathy. It was put here because it is sensational, and so people could say "wow". That is all. I don't feel sorry for the guy, he was someone halfway across the world from me, a nearly nameless person who died in an unusual way. So what? If you think that death itself is something that we should mourn, then you are going to be one very sad person your entire life.
I don't think anyone expects them to embrace the GNU/Linux community on the Xbox issue. What is WRONG is that they are using lawyers as their minions. If it were a technically sound product, they wouldn't CARE about modders because they would know that it wouldn't affect their sales at all.
Let's look at this - a lot of people say "Why would I want to run GNU/Linux on an Xbox?" There is no secret reason, it is just because you can. That is what hacking is all about. Nobody can honestly tell me that the market for mod chips is big enough to make a dent in future sales. It is a niche community, and a small one. Microsoft shouldn't give a rat's ass about it. But they do, because it is something they don't control. This isn't about playing pirated games, or running another OS on the Xbox, it is about control. Microsoft wants to Own It All . Period. And they are using "the law" to assist them. Something is weird here, because as a lot of people have pointed out, they probably woulnd't buy an Xbox just to run GNU/Linux - so why does Microsoft care if they do it?
Yes, you can play pirated games on a modded Xbox. but there are perfectly legal reasons for wanting a modded box. This has been proven that it is possible, and that there is interest in it. I can't imagine that even pirated games would make a dent in legitimate sales. Modding an Xbox is not wrong, and if it is illegal it shouldn't be. What the hell has happened to common sense? This is just another example of Microsoft "not getting it". They are not a software, or a technology company. They have firmly moved into the ranks of a control business. The RIAA and the MPAA have welcomed them in with open arms.
So I'll add to my list of questions: Is that your real name or the one you are supposed to give me if I ask? :-)
(notwithstanding the extremely highly unlikliness that you have found such an algorithm)
If someone ever infringed on your patent, how would you prove it?
Why, I would just...
...
ahh... emmm...
D'oh!
delight: The text of the article gets the term right, saying that their smart cards were "cracked".
dismay: The text then misuses the term again, saying Echostar was hacked.
Come on folks, if a site that supposedly is "news for nerds" can't get the term right, how is anyone else expected to?
(and don't give me the BS that hacking and cracking are the same thing)
So I keep a pad of paper by the phone. When they call, I ask the person their full name, and I have them spell it. I ask them the name of their company. Then I politely say "I want you to take me off of your list, and never call here again". They are used to dealing with aholes, but they aren't so used to dealing with someone who takes down all their info and speaks nicely but firmly with them. They get a little freaked when you ask for their name, but they usually give it to you. Now THEY are tied to the call, so they have a vested interest in not pissing you off. As we all know, people are a lot more bold when they are Anonymous Cowards.
Check out Knoppix . Put in at least 128MB of memory (it runs on a ramdisk, ditch the hard drives, and boot them up on CDs. It comes with amazing auto-hardware-detection, and has Mozilla, OpenOffice, and many other programs. I use this currently on a discless machine to play MP3s through my stereo. It really is a nice distro. I think you can even mod the distro, but I haven't tried it yet.
I agree, I wouldn't buy one either. But think about this: before Linux (I'll assume GNU/Linux, since it is now a distro) was ported to the Xbox, there was no reason to have a mod chip other than to play pirated games. Now people are hacking it (in the truest sense of the word) and are finding other fun uses for THE HARDWARE THAT THEY BOUGHT. I emphasize that because Microsoft just shut down a company that sold mod chips. They have no right to do this. Once you buy hardware, you own it. Now they might be able to convince a judge that the only reason to have a mod chip is to play pirated games, therefore robbing Microsoft of their money. But with the porting of Linux, it proves that there are non-illegal reasons to want to buy a mod chip.
Not that I think that it will stop Microsoft from bullying people, but it is a start. If you couldn't run the Linux kernel on the Xbox, there would be no other reason to buy a mod chip.
Besides, I think it is cool that people have the skills to do this kind of thing. It is interesting, and proves the power of the "little guy".
So linuxdevices will change an archived story? I can only guess that the company who makes it contacted them. WTF is going on?!
My Very Energetic Mother Just Served Us Nine Pizzas Quickly
All the articles say essentially the exact same thing, which sounds like a press release that the company created themselves.
gimme a V
gimme an A
gimme a PORWARE