Agreed, but for 98% of users this would be an acceptable way to circumvent the DRM, by removing the pain of doing it manually.
The other 2% where the added distortion would make a difference will have to find another solution.
The distortion you're talking about here over a normal MP3 is MINIMAL... and there's no reason you couldn't re-rip to something like OGG too to minimize the problem. Unless you're talking about a high-end system or $300 earphones I don't think it would make a difference to most people. Re-ripping 3-4-5 times would become an issue, but not once.
Everyone keeps mentioning that you can always record to CD (as a normal CD) and re-rip the file (but what a pain that would be).
A determined enough programmer could easily write a driver for a CD-R emulator that automatically ripped back to MP3... is iTunes flexible in letting you select the CD-R drive you want to record to?
>> Blogs and bloggers are just people, anyone really. This fact seems to escape the ALA President as if anyone publishing information is automatically held up to some high standard.
Keep in mind that if you held Picasso to the same artistic standards as his predecessors, he would be useless trash too...
Call it artistic license - blogs are people's expression... you cannot use antiquated standards on a new medium or art form.
>>There is no competition here since the movie you want to see is only sold by _one_ company.
How dense are you? So one studio happened to make one movie that is better than the rest... does that mean that they have a monopoly? Volkswagon makes better passenger cars than Ford... does that make THEM a monopoly? Sure, the car you want is only made by VW, but there are other (maybe less thrilling) ways to spend your time going from A to B.
Make a choice. If Studio A has a movie you want to see, but they have shitty DRM; choose wether the DRM headaches are worth it for seeing the movie. THAT is YOUR choice.
People pay money for products that suit their needs. If a product fails to meet the needs of the user, they can:
- bitch and complain - return the product - don't buy such products in the future.
If what the xxAA sells suits the needs of enough customers, they'll be successful with it. If they're overly restrictive then they'll fail. Obviously they think that most consumers won't mind the limitations, or even notice them.
Is that so difficult to understand? Just because YOU can't rip a DVD doesn't mean that the MPAA will care.
Seems like a novel application of a much older technology - barrier screen imaging. This is also similar to Lenticular imaging too - used for 3-D and "flip" image creation.
It's not a new technology, just a cool application of existing stuff.
It might have been more acceptable to intercept the request and give the user the option (explaining the error)... provide the CORRECT link, or continue to the one they really entered.
I do not like censorship... and there's nothing illegal about a gay porn star's website. However, helping people recognize a legitimate error would be ok.
Blind redirection is not an acceptable alternative in my eyes.
Product Manager: when will Project "A" be delivered?
Lead Developer: (hmmm... we could probably get it done by January, but the PM is going to ask for sooner...) There's a 50% chance we can deliver by March next year.
PM: Good, I'll tell the customers we can deliver by February.
LD: (Good... some room for padding...)
PM: We can deliver Feature B, right?
LD: We don't have enough people to finish developering it by March.
PM: You developers work overtime and spend too much time on Slashdot anyways, right? February it is.
LD: (grumble grumble... oh well, at least the schedule was padded a bit, maybe we can make it... but I don't have to be happy about it).:)
I've been on both sides of the fence, it's not black and white, dude.
>> My confidence level of their accuracy under these circumstances would be considerably -lower- than a software solution.
I'd be VERY surprised if they don't use automated filters as a first-line-of-defense (maybe with fairly lax rules just to weed out 90% of the spam). They can also build white-lists for your mailbox pretty easily.
So, if they have to manually filter 1% of the mail coming in (anything that makes it through the spam filters, minus whatever's on white lists), then 200 mailboxes isn't so tough to do.
Actually, you forget that patents expire (unlike what seems to be happening to copyright law lately).
So, in a worst case, long-lived inventions like the car would have been "freed" while the invention was still useful.
In today's day and age, things change so quickly (especially for software and processes), that the concept is likely to be useless by the time the patent runs out.
I'm not a supporter of software/process patents - but at the very least the duration of them should be much shorter than "normal" patents.
4-5 years would be enough for a company to recoup their investment, and the invention would still be beneficial elsewhere afterwards.
Isn't that the point of the system? Provide the inventor a period in which to profit from their invention, then turn it over to the public? 20-year software patents are like the MPAA giving Vanilla Ice CD's to public libraries to pay their fines. q:]
Absolutely - I went in to BB to get a 256MB XD card that was on sale for $89 CDN. They didn't get any in yet.
I ended up getting one though - only because I also bought two 17" LCD monitors, and I made it a condition of sale. The sales person went in on their day off to snag the ONE card that came in that week on the truck for me.
ONE lousy camera card shipped to them for their sale... great service.
We can't just keep adding programs indefinately... at some point you'll be taking 100% of my paycheck as tax, and there won't be anything left to give.
Our society is evolving, and so we need to address new issues and new needs. However, the flipside is that some of the old programs probably don't make much sense any more. Law enforcement shouldn't be cut, but you have to cut somewhere or make existing programs more efficient through modernization. Otherwise, the beaurocracy just keeps growing (and we know just how efficient governments are...).
Ok, I'm being dramatic. But it's a valid point: Add a program, kill a program... it MUST be done unless you want to eventually end up with communism (i.e. no personal property, everything is provided by the state).
Basically, it's another tax... instead of using the existing tax money to pay for these services, they're grabbing at a new revenue stream, and keeping the old tax revenue stream too.
Sure, it's more direct this way, but we're already paying for this.
Yes, yes... but it's not the only instrument on the HST.
Basically, the spectrometer is toast, but there's still other instruments that are just fine. Unfortunately the one that failed was one of the more useful ones.
I once installed Windows on my computer... and it still ran! However, I didn't have much confidence in it, so after proving it was at least POSSIBLE, I wiped the drive and reinstalled Linux.:)
Redundancy also has a cost - added cost, added weight, added complexity, added development time.
The X-prize competitors probably will have SIGNIFICANTLY less redundancy than any NASA craft would ever have (triple redundancy is normal in spaceflight), but they'll also be cheaper, lighter, and faster-to-completion. The associated risks are ones that government-run institutions just wouldn't take.
So, by putting the competition to the public instead of trying to achieve the same thing through NASA/etc. they're able to test riskier technologies quicker and cheaper - resulting in more significant technological advancement.
The risks are great... but they're being taken by individuals that have weighed them and accept them, not a government that's accountable to it's populace.
It's not so much a point of scrubbing the "nasties" OFF of a human... but OUT of a human. We're chalk full of bacteria inside and out, and wouldn't survive without them.
Also, debt reduces the cost of capital for a company (i.e. the return expected on money used).
If I were to invest $10 in a new research effort, if it were "borrowed" money the cost of capital would be only the interest on that $10 until I expected the research to pay back $10.
However, if that $10 came from my debt-free bank account, my shareholders would expect a certain rate of return on that investment which is typically much higher than interest rates are right now (which is why people invest in stocks in the first place, they're higher risk, but they expect higher returns).
Typically, cost of capital can be 15%, 20%, or more depending on the industry and stock performance. Borrowed money is cheap.
Email postage might make sense under one of two conditions:
1) the recipient gets the postage fee 2) the ISP that gets the postage fee provides email / internet access to the user for free
If the ISP gets the cash without providing any FURTHER service, it's nothing more than a cash grab. I would still be likely to maintain a "free" mail account so my friends wouldn't have to pay to email me... I'd just be more likely to filter that heavily for spam.
Slashdot Mirror
Agreed, but for 98% of users this would be an acceptable way to circumvent the DRM, by removing the pain of doing it manually.
The other 2% where the added distortion would make a difference will have to find another solution.
The distortion you're talking about here over a normal MP3 is MINIMAL... and there's no reason you couldn't re-rip to something like OGG too to minimize the problem. Unless you're talking about a high-end system or $300 earphones I don't think it would make a difference to most people. Re-ripping 3-4-5 times would become an issue, but not once.
MadCow.
Everyone keeps mentioning that you can always record to CD (as a normal CD) and re-rip the file (but what a pain that would be).
A determined enough programmer could easily write a driver for a CD-R emulator that automatically ripped back to MP3... is iTunes flexible in letting you select the CD-R drive you want to record to?
MadCow.
"Really honey, I was just logging in! It's this new semen-sample security thing that MS put in place, it'll make all my por...er, files more secure!"
>> Blogs and bloggers are just people, anyone really. This fact seems to escape the ALA President as if anyone publishing information is automatically held up to some high standard.
Keep in mind that if you held Picasso to the same artistic standards as his predecessors, he would be useless trash too...
Call it artistic license - blogs are people's expression... you cannot use antiquated standards on a new medium or art form.
MadCow.
The only real use of a certificate is to show that the software you download is actually from the company that it's claiming to be from.
The trust-worthiness of that company is still in debate... you just now know who it is you're dealing with.
MadCow.
>>There is no competition here since the movie you want to see is only sold by _one_ company.
How dense are you? So one studio happened to make one movie that is better than the rest... does that mean that they have a monopoly? Volkswagon makes better passenger cars than Ford... does that make THEM a monopoly? Sure, the car you want is only made by VW, but there are other (maybe less thrilling) ways to spend your time going from A to B.
Make a choice. If Studio A has a movie you want to see, but they have shitty DRM; choose wether the DRM headaches are worth it for seeing the movie. THAT is YOUR choice.
THAT is a free market.
MadCow.
People pay money for products that suit their needs. If a product fails to meet the needs of the user, they can:
- bitch and complain
- return the product
- don't buy such products in the future.
If what the xxAA sells suits the needs of enough customers, they'll be successful with it. If they're overly restrictive then they'll fail. Obviously they think that most consumers won't mind the limitations, or even notice them.
Is that so difficult to understand? Just because YOU can't rip a DVD doesn't mean that the MPAA will care.
MadCow.
Seems like a novel application of a much older technology - barrier screen imaging. This is also similar to Lenticular imaging too - used for 3-D and "flip" image creation.
It's not a new technology, just a cool application of existing stuff.
MadCow.
It might have been more acceptable to intercept the request and give the user the option (explaining the error)... provide the CORRECT link, or continue to the one they really entered.
I do not like censorship... and there's nothing illegal about a gay porn star's website. However, helping people recognize a legitimate error would be ok.
Blind redirection is not an acceptable alternative in my eyes.
MadCow.
You forgot the other side of the equation:
:)
Product Manager: when will Project "A" be delivered?
Lead Developer: (hmmm... we could probably get it done by January, but the PM is going to ask for sooner...) There's a 50% chance we can deliver by March next year.
PM: Good, I'll tell the customers we can deliver by February.
LD: (Good... some room for padding...)
PM: We can deliver Feature B, right?
LD: We don't have enough people to finish developering it by March.
PM: You developers work overtime and spend too much time on Slashdot anyways, right? February it is.
LD: (grumble grumble... oh well, at least the schedule was padded a bit, maybe we can make it... but I don't have to be happy about it).
I've been on both sides of the fence, it's not black and white, dude.
MadCow.
>> My confidence level of their accuracy under these circumstances would be considerably -lower- than a software solution.
I'd be VERY surprised if they don't use automated filters as a first-line-of-defense (maybe with fairly lax rules just to weed out 90% of the spam). They can also build white-lists for your mailbox pretty easily.
So, if they have to manually filter 1% of the mail coming in (anything that makes it through the spam filters, minus whatever's on white lists), then 200 mailboxes isn't so tough to do.
MadCow.
>> The signal is moving rapidly in frequency
:)
Isn't that the whole point of FM? (i.e. frequency modulation... varying the frequency to encode data?)
Couldn't it be a signal from a stationary source that's being modulated as a carrier wave? Think outside your tiny box once in a while...
Actually, you forget that patents expire (unlike what seems to be happening to copyright law lately).
So, in a worst case, long-lived inventions like the car would have been "freed" while the invention was still useful.
In today's day and age, things change so quickly (especially for software and processes), that the concept is likely to be useless by the time the patent runs out.
I'm not a supporter of software/process patents - but at the very least the duration of them should be much shorter than "normal" patents.
4-5 years would be enough for a company to recoup their investment, and the invention would still be beneficial elsewhere afterwards.
Isn't that the point of the system? Provide the inventor a period in which to profit from their invention, then turn it over to the public? 20-year software patents are like the MPAA giving Vanilla Ice CD's to public libraries to pay their fines. q:]
MadCow.
"Sorry, we didn't get any in yet"
Absolutely - I went in to BB to get a 256MB XD card that was on sale for $89 CDN. They didn't get any in yet.
I ended up getting one though - only because I also bought two 17" LCD monitors, and I made it a condition of sale. The sales person went in on their day off to snag the ONE card that came in that week on the truck for me.
ONE lousy camera card shipped to them for their sale... great service.
MadCow.
And to counter your argument:
We can't just keep adding programs indefinately... at some point you'll be taking 100% of my paycheck as tax, and there won't be anything left to give.
Our society is evolving, and so we need to address new issues and new needs. However, the flipside is that some of the old programs probably don't make much sense any more. Law enforcement shouldn't be cut, but you have to cut somewhere or make existing programs more efficient through modernization. Otherwise, the beaurocracy just keeps growing (and we know just how efficient governments are...).
Ok, I'm being dramatic. But it's a valid point: Add a program, kill a program... it MUST be done unless you want to eventually end up with communism (i.e. no personal property, everything is provided by the state).
MadCow.
Basically, it's another tax... instead of using the existing tax money to pay for these services, they're grabbing at a new revenue stream, and keeping the old tax revenue stream too.
Sure, it's more direct this way, but we're already paying for this.
MadCow.
Yes, yes... but it's not the only instrument on the HST.
Basically, the spectrometer is toast, but there's still other instruments that are just fine. Unfortunately the one that failed was one of the more useful ones.
MadCow.
Does that constitute a binding agreement, and if so doesn't that give Linux an essentially free license to use any IBM software patents?
Hmmm....
MadCow
I once installed Windows on my computer... and it still ran! However, I didn't have much confidence in it, so after proving it was at least POSSIBLE, I wiped the drive and reinstalled Linux. :)
I used to work at a camera store in Toronto... two doors up the street was our "competitor"... owned and operated by my boss' son.
We regularly went to the "back warehouse" to get stock we had ran out of... out the back door, and up to the other store.
It worked... WELL.
MadCow.
Redundancy also has a cost - added cost, added weight, added complexity, added development time.
The X-prize competitors probably will have SIGNIFICANTLY less redundancy than any NASA craft would ever have (triple redundancy is normal in spaceflight), but they'll also be cheaper, lighter, and faster-to-completion. The associated risks are ones that government-run institutions just wouldn't take.
So, by putting the competition to the public instead of trying to achieve the same thing through NASA/etc. they're able to test riskier technologies quicker and cheaper - resulting in more significant technological advancement.
The risks are great... but they're being taken by individuals that have weighed them and accept them, not a government that's accountable to it's populace.
My meaningless 0.02.
MadCow.
>> obviously above my head, thus I was too chicken to make any changes for fear of really screwing up something, or worse
You are hereby banished from Slashdot - any self-respecting geek wouldn't be caught dead admitting to anything like that!!!
q:]
It's not so much a point of scrubbing the "nasties" OFF of a human... but OUT of a human. We're chalk full of bacteria inside and out, and wouldn't survive without them.
MadCow.
Also, debt reduces the cost of capital for a company (i.e. the return expected on money used).
If I were to invest $10 in a new research effort, if it were "borrowed" money the cost of capital would be only the interest on that $10 until I expected the research to pay back $10.
However, if that $10 came from my debt-free bank account, my shareholders would expect a certain rate of return on that investment which is typically much higher than interest rates are right now (which is why people invest in stocks in the first place, they're higher risk, but they expect higher returns).
Typically, cost of capital can be 15%, 20%, or more depending on the industry and stock performance. Borrowed money is cheap.
MadCow.
Email postage might make sense under one of two conditions:
1) the recipient gets the postage fee
2) the ISP that gets the postage fee provides email / internet access to the user for free
If the ISP gets the cash without providing any FURTHER service, it's nothing more than a cash grab. I would still be likely to maintain a "free" mail account so my friends wouldn't have to pay to email me... I'd just be more likely to filter that heavily for spam.
MadCow.