DRM is the totalitarianism of the digital age. To allow our communications devices the right to control how we communicate is to give up our most essential means of self determination. Read Stallman's short story "The Right to Read" and try to understand that these are first steps down exactly that road. To my mind, peddling DRM is just as bad as segregation/prejUdIce.
Tnx for catching the tpyo. Always make it.:) Anyway, you are right. Total DRM would be totalitarianism of the digital age. But the digital age, in terms of the net and music, really isn't that old. Switching from the old casette and analog era of doing things is something that has to happen gently. Otherwise, everyone will pull out or chaos will happen. iTMS is a form of that. It was worse when we couldn't even copy cd's at all, but now we can at least have it in digital form a litlte easier than before. But after 5 or so years, I'd challenge the RIAA again to open up more, showing what something like ITMS, can do, coexisting with free music. ITMS would be more of a service of convenience vs a solitary outlet.
Indeed, but when they make that money in unethical ways, we should be making the world aware of that, not congratulating them on a job well done.
So make them aware of it more. You can't get from somewhere to somewhere else without change. Keep on rallying people like RMS. But realize, RMS's ideals aren't something that happen instantaneously. It took years for the Berlin wall to tumble. It took ages for people to accept homosexuality. Do you think there's a switch somewhere that someone will push, you or RMS, and life would change? Change takes time. Fight, but don't expect results in unreasonable time.
You are right that every journey starts with a single step. The journey to world where every bit of communication is controlled by computers not acting on behalf of their users but against them was initiated by Apple.
If everything were iTMS, our music, our movies, our books, yes.. it would be bad. I'm not congratulating DRMism. I dont' think anyone is. I think the change from total lack of sharing is the first step. The next step would be, more sharing and more trust. Do you not see the possibility of that happening because of something like iTMS or the new napster?
2. Apple is here to make money. First and fore most. They are not the red cross. Before, you'd have to by a full CD to get most songs, since cd producers didn't make singles of every song. They also cheapened the cost.
3. If you don't like it... talk with your money or open up your own business. Apple doesn't have the ideal model for me.
What I find disgusting is that such practices get commended and congratulated around here. It frightens me to no end that this community could be so easily subverted and 180ed completely into sycophantic lackeys of the RIAA and those who wish the Internet and PC were no more!
4. Every journey starts with a single step. Apple made it feasible to do something not so inovative, something a lot of people wanted, a cheaper cd. Buying singles. In digital form. I don't commend Apple in making money. Anyone can make money. I commend apple for successfully causing change. Is that wrong?
Who's the label? Zero7 must go through a label to get on iTMS. I'm sure a fraction goes back to the label and whatever contract (100% through 0%) of that goes back to him. If zero7 can post it freely, I'm sure zero7 is just making some side cash.
Yes. A quick lesson in rhetoric is in order. This isn't an opinion site. It's a news site. If there was a sound story of how Apple is screwing and its not getting posted, post it. Otherwise, don't waste the bandwidth.
Most of all, I would like to congratulate Apple on their fantastic use of the DMCA to crush free software developer writing applications (PlayFair) that can handle the formats in which they sell music.
The world isn't so black and white. Have you thought about the RIAA, who has a large say in what apple can and can't do with what RIAA says, is their property?
It is very important that companies like Apple help show the world that is completely possible to shove DRM down consumers throwts
Throats.:) Did you think if they didn't use DRM, the RIAA would even work with Apple?
Thank you Apple, thank you Jobs, and thank you iTMS for a job well done teaching us to be a soulless, consume-on-command suckers.
How does the old saying go? "First they ignore you; then they mock you; then they punish you; then you win." Are you on 2 or 3? Jobs did something that people wanted, granted the ability to buy a single song, by itself, with not uber-strict drm. Did you expect Apple to buy 100 million songs and give them away for free?
p.s. Apple is the first largely successful online retailer of music. Napster came up shortly after iTMS. Many have folded. Some are just crap. Is it wrong to acknowledge what others have yet to achieve? They give a way a great player. Not the best 100% of the time, but a damned great one. Can you easily do the same?
Apparently you agree in some part if you just relayed them. I mean, if they were rubish, you wouldn't post 'em, right?
If you don't care about liner notes, you can burn the CD from a friend for 25 cents and send the musician a buck.
For a musician to be successful to the RIAA, they need to sell albums as well as touring. Brand new ones. If everybody did this, yes, the artist could dump the label, somehow breaking the contract, and live on to make great music. But we don't live in an ideal world. If enough people don't agree to do this, the label dumps them for being unsuccessful and has pocket change.
Apple says iTunes is "better than free" because it's "fair to the artists and record labels." That's simply not true. First of all, Apple gets 3 times as much money as musicians from each sale. Apple takes a 35% cut from every song and every album sold, a huge amount considering how little they have to do. Record labels receive the other 65% of each sale. Of this, major label artists will end up with only 8 to 14 cents per song, depending on their contract. Many of them will never Artists Get Ripped Off. even see this paltry share because they have to pay for producers and recording costs, both of which can be enormous. Until the musician "recoups" these costs, when you buy an iTunes song, the label gives them nothing.
The RIAA gets most of the money. Apple, according to a few people, make almost no money on this. Not even making a profit. They supposedly make less than a dime, which is a lot less than %35 if a song costs a buck.
So why does iTunes give artists such a raw deal? Because it's the exact same deal that artists
Wrong, they worked with the labels. Mostly. The indie groups are different. Some proxy through a label like cdbaby. You know how difficult it'd be to contract every single artist they had on there... individually?
iTunes is just a shiny new facade for the ugly, exploitative system that has managed music for the past 50 years. Thanks to peer to peer filesharing, we finally have a chance to break the major record label system-- but every iTunes user who pays 90 cents on the dollar to middlemen props up the old regime and delays the day when corporations finally lose their stranglehold on music. Now that's something to feel guilty about.
Have you/him thought about it the other way around? Apple just made music more popular during a decline of cd sales. Yes, the RIAA is getting helped, but the arists are getting helped too. Being an artist is tough work. If artists could sell themselves due to easier money rolling in, I'm sure they wouldn't need the RIAA, but because they get trapped in their deals, they need a good way out. Not a bunch of people making life harder when the artists haven't even asked for a rebelion of this kind.
When the artists come forth, ala They Might Be Giants, and sell directly, sure. I'd rip a used copy and send them most of the cost. It'll prolly save them more money not dealing with me in the first place.
And mr poster, yes. Sometimes slashdot doesn't post all of the facts, and sometimes it posts crappy stories. But what you just posted is just plain wrong.
Oh please. That is completely different. It's not like you are staring at your monitor with a fisheye lens on. Ambient noise is always around. And unless you have none, it is harder to hear the differences between AAC and mp3. Take your bad analogies elsewhere.
1. You have a source copy of the software to decode mp3s. You OWN it. You don't have to get it "fixed". It works, it's there. That's like worrying about kfc going out of biz 'cause they make fried chicken. The recipie isn't a secret.
2. Over 15 years, you've never learned to build a backup system? Now THAT is sad.
3. No, it's not sad. You are being a zealot. Get over yourself. I was giving you credit where credit is due before, but forget it. Just another flaming idiot on this "information superhighway"
1. Lower sound quality. Everyone I have compared them for has asked "What's wrong with it?" after listening to the CD and then the AAC verison.
This is true mostly if you have very good headphones or are in a very quiet room. If you are in a room with other random noises, cars passing, people chattering, yourself typing, it probably matters less. Even so, you start to suffer the waterfall effect. You stop listening for the waterfall, but for the sound you want to hear.
2. Codecs are changing very rapidly. You are investing a a fleeting software phenomenon that depends on the current and rapidily changing technology and the marketing whims of the computer and music industries. Soon there could be much better quality or with increased bandwidth CD quality. SOme sights now sell 24 bit flacs which you can burn using you regualr old DVDs and burner into DVD-A for BETTER THAN CD QUALITY.
And by using records or tapes, you invited using a technology that would and did go away.. well.. not totally.. but you get the gist. you hav eto jump in sometime.
3. Commercial CDs are inherently more stable than CD-Rs.
You do make backups of your data, right?
4. It is extremely difficult and time concuming to archive digital files for very long periods of time.
CDs are bulky. Hard drives are not so much. Copying from one hd to another every now and then is NOT that hard. 2 hd's takes up less space than 6 cd's in their jewels. They take up less space than maybe 20 cds out of them.
5. In most cases you get no liner notes or cover art.
Which you read once. I'm not buying the cover art, i'm buying the music.
6. You invite DRM.
Tell me. Can you, in isolation, take a cd, dvd, 8 track, and decode the information by hand? No? If you don't like AAC, use MP3, it's a solved problem that has opensource versions out there.
7. For all the above, at a lot of stores, particularly iTMS, you PAY MORE for all these problems than a fine sounding CD, or a much better sounding DVD-A or SACD.
The worth of something is dependent on the individual. No one is forcing YOU to like mp3 or aac. Thus, you probably see mp3's and the likes as low worth, while myself, have really high worth for them. I can mix and match months of music via a few keyboard commands. I don't need a bulky juke box to try and do as good as a job as itunes or other software, with 200 cd's.
Your opinions are sound. You don't seem ignorant to the facts. The only thing that's wrong is pushing them on everyone else.
-primitive types and associated classes:
When I want to store a variable of one the primitve types like int (the ones you use in every class) you have to wrap them into a class (Integer) which has no way to change the Value later. So everytime I want to e.g. increment a counter stored this way, I have to convert it back to int, increment it und create a new Integer-Object to store the incremented value back into my container-class.
You probably should be using privatives all over the place. Use the object wrappers when you want storage. The wrapper objects are immutable for a reason. It sounsd like you are using them wrong.
-If I want to compare two Classes I have to use the equals-Method instead of a simple operator-overloading which would enable me to use ==
Operator overloading was left out for a reason.
-When I retrieve an Object from a Container it is a java.lang.Object instead of the type I stored which totally negates the advantages of static typing
Wrong. It's a superclass of object. Just cast it back. The reason you dont' get back the class you ask for is because the containers allow mixed storage at the current moment.
-Attributes of a Class are not totally protected against access from the outside (I have to work with old code that makes heavy use of this)
Define protected. You should be making them private. Yes, you can use reflection to unprotect them, but it's 1. dumb to do so, since it negates design. 2. it takes a lot of work.
When I started the programming project for the University I mentioned above I had to install Borland Together (for UML which we had to use). I tried to install it but the InstallAnywhere insisted on using its 1.3.1 dynamically compiled JRE which did not run on my glibc 2.3 system. I had to manually unpack the installation package, use another JRE 1.3.1 to install (the installer insisted on the old version, i had installed 1.4.2 at the time). When I tried to use the JRE 1.4.2 with it later (by editing the start-shell-script) the exporting to images of the diagrams stopped working.
So you are blaming Sun/Java for Borldand's issue? Let's blame intel and amd for windows issues. Mind you, other languags have the same problem. Perl, pthon, php. If the langauage interperter has a bug or issue for your platform, then you won't get anywhere. And mucking around with the internals which you clearly didn't fully understand, you break stuff. It's true of any system. Linux, Apache, Perl..
And for the record, java typically is very portable. You can typically unzip it to a dir, in the case of unixes, and go. It's only when you go into things like JNI where incompatability arises.
This site is supposed to be about technology I thought. The only really interesting technical tidbit of this film was that it was, IIRC, entirely created on a mac using Final Cut pro
Isolationist. The world is beyond your 4 walls. Education is always valuable.
The ONLY cool thing about 3d, is the fact that it resembles real life. We see in 3d, right? The problem is, the only information we can gather from it, due to culture, is spacial. How far objects are from things, what is behind another object...
The mind is far better at doing things in 2d. The only reason you can close one eye and do anything, is due to experience. We know how large the average book is, or a couch, or a car. So it only would make sense to a person if it's only so far away or close up.
The counter example is, take a video game in 3d, like Mario Sunshine. In the game, you have some large and small blocks, but the only way you can tell the size in relation to mario, is when you are close up until you have experience. The blocks have no marks what-so-ever, such as easily visible grains, that can help you see that it is only so distant.
Having said ALL of that, it is far better to work in 2d, work meaning being productive, for dealing with numbers and words. As for plain 'ol navigation of semi-real life stuff, such as touring the inside of a building, there is an advantage of using 3d. You can go into a room and filter out a lot of crap that a bunch of 2d representations, such as floor plans, may confuse. i.e. how do you represent a box in a drawer of a table in a 2d representation using no 3d hints?
1. Standing out among others of its kind; prominent. See Synonyms at noticeable.
2. Superior to others of its kind; distinguished.
3. Projecting upward or outward; standing out.
4. Still in existence; not settled or resolved: outstanding debts; a long outstanding problem.
5. Publicly issued and sold: outstanding stocks and bonds.
So is it 1, 2 or 4?:) Better use more accurate words there.
I downloaded it twice on two different days for the Mac. It mounts the dmg file fine, but won't launch. In the console for OSX, you see complaints about the executable being corrupt or truncated, then just dies out. Happens on two seperate machines too. Nightly builds don't do it either:\
So you'll still have a firewall for all other ports, leaving your sshd daemon visible, which may be flawed. And you'll ignore a new technology which will block off ALL ports and only open one to sshd, which may be flawed or not, if you know the right port sequence?
I mean, come on, people, are we expecting The Big One to cause the entire state of California to break away at its borders, and we start floating around the Pacific Ocean..
Slashdot Mirror
'cause Pepsi gambled that most people would not redeem the caps.
Tnx for catching the tpyo. Always make it.
So make them aware of it more. You can't get from somewhere to somewhere else without change. Keep on rallying people like RMS. But realize, RMS's ideals aren't something that happen instantaneously. It took years for the Berlin wall to tumble. It took ages for people to accept homosexuality. Do you think there's a switch somewhere that someone will push, you or RMS, and life would change? Change takes time. Fight, but don't expect results in unreasonable time.
If everything were iTMS, our music, our movies, our books, yes.. it would be bad. I'm not congratulating DRMism. I dont' think anyone is. I think the change from total lack of sharing is the first step. The next step would be, more sharing and more trust. Do you not see the possibility of that happening because of something like iTMS or the new napster?
2. Apple is here to make money. First and fore most. They are not the red cross. Before, you'd have to by a full CD to get most songs, since cd producers didn't make singles of every song. They also cheapened the cost.
3. If you don't like it... talk with your money or open up your own business. Apple doesn't have the ideal model for me.
4. Every journey starts with a single step. Apple made it feasible to do something not so inovative, something a lot of people wanted, a cheaper cd. Buying singles. In digital form. I don't commend Apple in making money. Anyone can make money. I commend apple for successfully causing change. Is that wrong?
Who's the label? Zero7 must go through a label to get on iTMS. I'm sure a fraction goes back to the label and whatever contract (100% through 0%) of that goes back to him. If zero7 can post it freely, I'm sure zero7 is just making some side cash.
Your argument is missing.. something.
Yes. A quick lesson in rhetoric is in order. This isn't an opinion site. It's a news site. If there was a sound story of how Apple is screwing and its not getting posted, post it. Otherwise, don't waste the bandwidth.
The world isn't so black and white. Have you thought about the RIAA, who has a large say in what apple can and can't do with what RIAA says, is their property?
Throats.
How does the old saying go? "First they ignore you; then they mock you; then they punish you; then you win." Are you on 2 or 3? Jobs did something that people wanted, granted the ability to buy a single song, by itself, with not uber-strict drm. Did you expect Apple to buy 100 million songs and give them away for free?
p.s. Apple is the first largely successful online retailer of music. Napster came up shortly after iTMS. Many have folded. Some are just crap. Is it wrong to acknowledge what others have yet to achieve? They give a way a great player. Not the best 100% of the time, but a damned great one. Can you easily do the same?
For a musician to be successful to the RIAA, they need to sell albums as well as touring. Brand new ones. If everybody did this, yes, the artist could dump the label, somehow breaking the contract, and live on to make great music. But we don't live in an ideal world. If enough people don't agree to do this, the label dumps them for being unsuccessful and has pocket change.
The RIAA gets most of the money. Apple, according to a few people, make almost no money on this. Not even making a profit. They supposedly make less than a dime, which is a lot less than %35 if a song costs a buck.
Wrong, they worked with the labels. Mostly. The indie groups are different. Some proxy through a label like cdbaby. You know how difficult it'd be to contract every single artist they had on there... individually?
Have you/him thought about it the other way around? Apple just made music more popular during a decline of cd sales. Yes, the RIAA is getting helped, but the arists are getting helped too. Being an artist is tough work. If artists could sell themselves due to easier money rolling in, I'm sure they wouldn't need the RIAA, but because they get trapped in their deals, they need a good way out. Not a bunch of people making life harder when the artists haven't even asked for a rebelion of this kind.
When the artists come forth, ala They Might Be Giants, and sell directly, sure. I'd rip a used copy and send them most of the cost. It'll prolly save them more money not dealing with me in the first place.
And mr poster, yes. Sometimes slashdot doesn't post all of the facts, and sometimes it posts crappy stories. But what you just posted is just plain wrong.
I usually use the email of an ex-boss that I hate.
And that's bad, how? Sounds like they were trying to eliminate a problem. ;)
How I was so impressed with link then. for he was left AND right handed in that one.
If i remember correctly, Juniper is supposed to have a substancial share of the market. Something in the realm of a quarter.
Oh please. That is completely different. It's not like you are staring at your monitor with a fisheye lens on. Ambient noise is always around. And unless you have none, it is harder to hear the differences between AAC and mp3. Take your bad analogies elsewhere.
2. Over 15 years, you've never learned to build a backup system? Now THAT is sad.
3. No, it's not sad. You are being a zealot. Get over yourself. I was giving you credit where credit is due before, but forget it. Just another flaming idiot on this "information superhighway"
This is true mostly if you have very good headphones or are in a very quiet room. If you are in a room with other random noises, cars passing, people chattering, yourself typing, it probably matters less. Even so, you start to suffer the waterfall effect. You stop listening for the waterfall, but for the sound you want to hear.
And by using records or tapes, you invited using a technology that would and did go away.. well.. not totally.. but you get the gist. you hav eto jump in sometime.
You do make backups of your data, right?
CDs are bulky. Hard drives are not so much. Copying from one hd to another every now and then is NOT that hard. 2 hd's takes up less space than 6 cd's in their jewels. They take up less space than maybe 20 cds out of them.
Which you read once. I'm not buying the cover art, i'm buying the music.
Tell me. Can you, in isolation, take a cd, dvd, 8 track, and decode the information by hand? No? If you don't like AAC, use MP3, it's a solved problem that has opensource versions out there.
The worth of something is dependent on the individual. No one is forcing YOU to like mp3 or aac. Thus, you probably see mp3's and the likes as low worth, while myself, have really high worth for them. I can mix and match months of music via a few keyboard commands. I don't need a bulky juke box to try and do as good as a job as itunes or other software, with 200 cd's.
Your opinions are sound. You don't seem ignorant to the facts. The only thing that's wrong is pushing them on everyone else.
You probably should be using privatives all over the place. Use the object wrappers when you want storage. The wrapper objects are immutable for a reason. It sounsd like you are using them wrong.
Operator overloading was left out for a reason.
Wrong. It's a superclass of object. Just cast it back. The reason you dont' get back the class you ask for is because the containers allow mixed storage at the current moment.
Define protected. You should be making them private. Yes, you can use reflection to unprotect them, but it's 1. dumb to do so, since it negates design. 2. it takes a lot of work.
So you are blaming Sun/Java for Borldand's issue? Let's blame intel and amd for windows issues. Mind you, other languags have the same problem. Perl, pthon, php. If the langauage interperter has a bug or issue for your platform, then you won't get anywhere. And mucking around with the internals which you clearly didn't fully understand, you break stuff. It's true of any system. Linux, Apache, Perl..
And for the record, java typically is very portable. You can typically unzip it to a dir, in the case of unixes, and go. It's only when you go into things like JNI where incompatability arises.
Instead of installing monitoring the line, having people paid to doing this beaurocracy plus the machine power to filter on rules.
they rather...
Globally block the port on the firewall. After all, they have one in place somewhere, just have to add a rule.
I don't disagree with you. I'm just pointing out the reasoning :)
Isolationist. The world is beyond your 4 walls. Education is always valuable.
The mind is far better at doing things in 2d. The only reason you can close one eye and do anything, is due to experience. We know how large the average book is, or a couch, or a car. So it only would make sense to a person if it's only so far away or close up.
The counter example is, take a video game in 3d, like Mario Sunshine. In the game, you have some large and small blocks, but the only way you can tell the size in relation to mario, is when you are close up until you have experience. The blocks have no marks what-so-ever, such as easily visible grains, that can help you see that it is only so distant.
Having said ALL of that, it is far better to work in 2d, work meaning being productive, for dealing with numbers and words. As for plain 'ol navigation of semi-real life stuff, such as touring the inside of a building, there is an advantage of using 3d. You can go into a room and filter out a lot of crap that a bunch of 2d representations, such as floor plans, may confuse. i.e. how do you represent a box in a drawer of a table in a 2d representation using no 3d hints?
Well, that'll be a chunk out of the deficit :)
Definition of outstanding...
So is it 1, 2 or 4?
I downloaded it twice on two different days for the Mac. It mounts the dmg file fine, but won't launch. In the console for OSX, you see complaints about the executable being corrupt or truncated, then just dies out. Happens on two seperate machines too. Nightly builds don't do it either :\
um...
We can only hope