Tivo, 80 hour version, hooked up to the 5.1 reciever.
Wireless 802.11b access via a linksys USB nic - hooked up to the tivo.
D-Link wireless router, hooked up to the server as well as the internet connection.
CentOSrunning on the server. JavaHMO loaded on the server as well
With this setup, the music is automatically browsable so long as the server is on and functional. All one has to do is select 'music and pictures' within the tivo menu, and volia - all of the cd's, ripped, sorted by directory.
As an added bonus, there's the DVR functionality there as well. Parents, even older ones, can appreciate that (they may not with an xbox).
I've had a nextel for a long while now, and I can tell you 2 things about what you're seeing: 1) This is not the only way that direct connect works - you can turn off the speaker and just use direct connect as if you were using a regular phone 2) The people who do keep the speaker on all the time ( in resturants, movies, etc ) are doing it for 1 reason - status. They think they're ultra-hip and cool cause they have it on.
Me, I keep my i90 on vibrate. If someone DC's me and I'm in public, it just vibrates to let me know someone is trying to dc me. Then, flip it open and talk - odds are you wouldn't be able to tell the difference between that and a regular call unless you looked closely.
Seeping through your personal files and/or communications... that would be too much of a privacy invasion; asessing if you pose an IMMEDIATE threat to those around you wouldn't.
If you were an employer, and had spent thousands of dollars on computer equipment, don't you think that you would at least have some right as to what happens on said equipment?
How "personal" can things be when you do them with someone else's property?
I work telephone technical support. While I'm there, there's downtime - when there's no calls. I certainly read slashdot, ssh into my home computer, send email to my wife, and more. The important distinction is that when I'm using my employers computer, I do nothing that I would be afraid my boss would see.
Don't forget that they're paying you for composing those personal communications...
The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.
I can't believe you even quoted that. This applies to law enforcement searching your private residence/property off of government grounds. If he is employed there, he has consented to such searches. After all, he always has the option to leave and find other employment.
This kind of stuff reminds me of when spammers quote the first amendment when they get their ISP accounts shut down...
i don't condone it. it's evil. but the media companies are trying to survive the paradigm shift in content distribution that the internet has started. corporations are considered people under the law; like people, they're just trying to survive as best they can, and they'll do whatever it takes. thus, if they can get legislation passed that lets them live, they'll do anything they can to ensure it gets passed.
But you see, that's the problem. They haven't done everything under their power to remain profitable. They have seen online distrobution methods flourish, but haven't created a competitive alternative method. They would do well to offer their content online, at a price that is fair. I sure wouldn't pay $1-$2 per song, in a lossy format. Make the payments less, and add some value to the sites that sell the music (maybe someday we'll see Metallica selling music alongside their
online content). Why would anyone bother with P2P apps when they can get more from the artists websites themselves?
so, the big question is: if YOU were a major media corporation's CEO, and YOUR family's livelihood depended on keeping your corporation afloat in the face of underground distribution channels, what would YOU do?
i'll bet your answers, if you're truthful, aren't that far from what's happening now.
One of the main things that I would do if I were a CEO of a major media corporation would be to try not to alienate the customer base. If these types of laws end up passing, that is bound to happen sooner or later. Once the general public finds out about large issues they do tend to react. If that happens, I wouldn't be CEO much longer.
Of course it will be the media companies that make the decision in regards to copy-protection. Were any consumers asked when they implemented CSS protection for DVD's?
Or how about the CD replacements DataPlay Think any "focus groups" met for this wonderful product?
The more copy protection capabilities they can put into a device or the more laws that they can push that will provide for copy protection, the better. And if they can get it through without consumers knowing, at least at first, all the better.
Who read the article and saw " protection proposal being backed by Walt Disney and Sen. Ernest Hollings, D-S. C.
" and parsed it as "Disney-South Carolina"?
Slashdot Mirror
Here's my setup:
Tivo, 80 hour version, hooked up to the 5.1 reciever.
Wireless 802.11b access via a linksys USB nic - hooked up to the tivo.
D-Link wireless router, hooked up to the server as well as the internet connection.
CentOSrunning on the server. JavaHMO loaded on the server as well
With this setup, the music is automatically browsable so long as the server is on and functional. All one has to do is select 'music and pictures' within the tivo menu, and volia - all of the cd's, ripped, sorted by directory.
As an added bonus, there's the DVR functionality there as well. Parents, even older ones, can appreciate that (they may not with an xbox).
FWIW...
I've had a nextel for a long while now, and I can tell you 2 things about what you're seeing:
1) This is not the only way that direct connect works - you can turn off the speaker and just use direct connect as if you were using a regular phone
2) The people who do keep the speaker on all the time ( in resturants, movies, etc ) are doing it for 1 reason - status. They think they're ultra-hip and cool cause they have it on.
Me, I keep my i90 on vibrate. If someone DC's me and I'm in public, it just vibrates to let me know someone is trying to dc me. Then, flip it open and talk - odds are you wouldn't be able to tell the difference between that and a regular call unless you looked closely.
Seeping through your personal files and/or communications... that would be too much of a privacy invasion; asessing if you pose an IMMEDIATE threat to those around you wouldn't.
If you were an employer, and had spent thousands of dollars on computer equipment, don't you think that you would at least have some right as to what happens on said equipment?
How "personal" can things be when you do them with someone else's property?
I work telephone technical support. While I'm there, there's downtime - when there's no calls. I certainly read slashdot, ssh into my home computer, send email to my wife, and more. The important distinction is that when I'm using my employers computer, I do nothing that I would be afraid my boss would see.
Don't forget that they're paying you for composing those personal communications...
Amendment IV:
...
The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.
I can't believe you even quoted that. This applies to law enforcement searching your private residence/property off of government grounds. If he is employed there, he has consented to such searches. After all, he always has the option to leave and find other employment.
This kind of stuff reminds me of when spammers quote the first amendment when they get their ISP accounts shut down
i don't condone it. it's evil. but the media companies are trying to survive the paradigm shift in content distribution that the internet has started. corporations are considered people under the law; like people, they're just trying to survive as best they can, and they'll do whatever it takes. thus, if they can get legislation passed that lets them live, they'll do anything they can to ensure it gets passed.
But you see, that's the problem. They haven't done everything under their power to remain profitable. They have seen online distrobution methods flourish, but haven't created a competitive alternative method. They would do well to offer their content online, at a price that is fair. I sure wouldn't pay $1-$2 per song, in a lossy format. Make the payments less, and add some value to the sites that sell the music (maybe someday we'll see Metallica selling music alongside their
online content). Why would anyone bother with P2P apps when they can get more from the artists websites themselves?
so, the big question is: if YOU were a major media corporation's CEO, and YOUR family's livelihood depended on keeping your corporation afloat in the face of underground distribution channels, what would YOU do?
i'll bet your answers, if you're truthful, aren't that far from what's happening now.
One of the main things that I would do if I were a CEO of a major media corporation would be to try not to alienate the customer base. If these types of laws end up passing, that is bound to happen sooner or later. Once the general public finds out about large issues they do tend to react. If that happens, I wouldn't be CEO much longer.
Of course it will be the media companies that make the decision in regards to copy-protection. Were any consumers asked when they implemented CSS protection for DVD's?
Or how about the CD replacements DataPlay Think any "focus groups" met for this wonderful product?
The more copy protection capabilities they can put into a device or the more laws that they can push that will provide for copy protection, the better. And if they can get it through without consumers knowing, at least at first, all the better.
Who read the article and saw " protection proposal being backed by Walt Disney and Sen. Ernest Hollings, D-S. C.
" and parsed it as "Disney-South Carolina"?