True. But the consumer does not set the price post-purchase. The consumer says "Next time I will not pay more than $x for this product." Not "I will pay $x for the product you have just provided."
I walk into McDonald's and order a hamburger and fries. They charge me $3. The hamburger is over done and the fries soggy. I think this meal is only worth $1.
The next day I walk into the same McDonald's order the same burger and fries. The service is excelent the burger and fries scrumcious. I think that the meal is worth $10.
The consumer NEVER sets the price for goods or services. It is the consumer's choice to intitiate the transaction at all.
As the Internet expands to the masses the percentage of people who abide by and apreciate the net's tradition of openness shrinks. Did we really expect people to respect privacy in the face of the almight dollar???
Finally a JonKatz editorial that reports facts and other peoples opinions, while allowing us to form our own.
snip validates the suspicion that corporatist employers are taking advantage of new technologies and of workers' anxieties to demand longer hours and increased productivity snip
I wonder if corporatist employers are actively taking advantage of this phenomenon or just rejoicing in the added productivity it gives them??
Why should some one re-write applications that already exist in usable form??? Granted it is nicer for an application to be Open Source but the meat and potatoes of Directory Services (DS) are standardized and extendable: the X500 standard and the schema is extendable.
Case in point MS implementation of DS in W2K. They extended the schema half way to hell and closely tied their OS to their implementation of DS. Never-the-less any X500 compliant client can access any of the info in MS Active Directory (escpecialy now since you can authenticate using Kerberos.)
If we are just looking for a port then check out openLDAP.
Sure if you don't need stored procs, transactions or tiggers, MySQL is a great choice very cost effective. If you have to make assurances to people that their data integrity then you want a little more functionality for CYA.
When I first looked at MySQL the claim was that by leaving out the features you gain speed. So if you have a DB with many queries but few updates, MySQL is the choice.
I have used MySQL in mission critical enviroments. The time frame was short but MySQL performed admirably. (even though I had to set up my own replication schemes.)
Every day as I walk down the street (Downtown NYC) I see countless street vendors selling bootleg copies of CDs. The other day I stopped to see if they had any of yours (they did.) When the police come they arrest the vendor not the manufacturer of the tape deck they used to make the copy. Why are you chasing Napster and not Napster users???
You are correct in stating that you have a right to control the and chose the distribution of you music. However, by your own admition you have relinquished control of selected distribution methods in the past. (Live concert recordings etc.) Why is reliquishing control of this method any different?? To quote: metallica_james_live: "Most I know who use Napster purchase far more music now than before they began to use the program. Moreover, the music purchased is that which they download and listen to the most."
Distributing source code is not the primary force driving Open Source Software. Rather it facilitates the growth of development communities around an application. ESR remarks that he does not believe developers will approach Windows source to improve it as an operating system, rather "mine" it for information useful in creating interoperatable apps.
If this is the primary goal of any remedy in the MS vs DOJ case, opening the code to Windows is not the only solution. If MS is split then it makes good business sense for each unit to encourage interoperability. Something companies have been doing one way or another for years without opening their source.
As for who should apply the remedy, the only party with the ability to guarantee enforcement is the US government.
I find the comparison to Xerox very interesting. I am sure that some time over the course of my collegiate career I photocopied something that I should not have legally done....besides isn't plagiarism the sincerest form of flattery??
The major difference in my mind is that a majority of authors are more interested in having their work read by a larger audience (the reason they are writing in the first place is of people to read.) However, most people in the music industry seem to be preoccupied with money. Otherwise the MPAA and RIAA would be proposing useful implementations of Napster.
So if money is the driving force then controlling the distribution market is key. If you need a reference for this fact check you encyclopedia under Gates, Bill or Vanderbilt
Geez can you say bandwagon. First Harpers then NYT . Why all the sudden the great stress on women on the net?? They are there just like any other "group."
While demographics are an interesting topic. The Internet is about results and substance. Regardless of race, creed, gender, or religion a person's worth is messured by their positive or negative contribution.
I am in the computing profession (majored in it in undergrad) and while you are correct: I do not know how paging works, however, I do know it exists and that I have to respect its existance.
However, many people have no desire to know or care. It is people like this that benifit from the Windows. Granted this dumbing down produces comments like "AOL is the internet."
Never-the-less providing seemless systems to end users so that they don't have to know about the internals is the name of the game. If you need any proof then look how big a deal the linux community is making of improving the install process. There is no reason that the user should know about scan and refresh rates. Or what an X server is. That there are multiple WMs yes but not Xservers.
Yes this is a great paradox. By bringing computing to the masses, Bill also acheived a great dumbing down.
Two reactions to this: a) Is it possible to do it any other way??? b) By definition not Everyone can know how it works, not Everyone knows the workings of the Linux kernel but it is considered to be a freedom bringing operating system.
Perhaps Jon is right and this ruling is nothing more that a morale victory albeit a large one. Nonetheless one cannot discount the value nor the power of morale.
You have to give MS their due. Windows did give the masses accessibility to computing, a factor which aided the growth of the Internet and the Internet did begat Linux.
Now if MS is prevented from exploiting their market share the prospect of consumer benefit from competition and innovation are extremely bright.
Check out my other post on this article. "Trafficing in User Rights". Personl copying/cracking seems to still be legal it is the aiding an abetting part that has become illegal.
Ok so what is your point?? No one will argue with you that those are you rights...I certainly have not. The argument against the MPAA is that if they try to make replication harder and protect their copyright by destroying MP3, MP3s have many legit uses that would be trampled.
No one can argue that copying cds to MP3 and distributing them is legal.
Are you saying that the copyright holder has no rights??? Stealing cable is theft. The cable company owns the rights to distribute the signal and charge for it. The MPAA (or equivalent agency) owns the rights to distribute many movies and/or songs. We can claim to have rights while denying them theirs.
We can, however, take up arms when these copyright holders try to defend their rights by stomping over ours.
What you say is true...outside the concepts introduced by the DCMA. If you help or facilitate the breaking of copyright protection, you have violated the DCMA. This is the new idea that everyone is so in an uproar over.
Lessig makes an interesting point. It seems if a single users decides to crack the protection on Cyber Patrol's black list it would be considered fair use: Nor would it limit (in my view) the right of a user to reverse-engineer a program to discover what sites that the program he has purchased is blocking.
So what we have here as a law that prevents the a person supporting anothers 1st Ammendment rights. So it is not so much CPHack that Mattel can attack rather the distribution of CPHack. Very scary for ISPs and for those against content filtering.
The only course of action is to get the law declared unconstitutional. I hope that some one out there has the drive to take it to the supreme court. Otherwise Trafficing in user rights will have a longer jail term then trafficing in drugs!
Re:Just flout the law. It worked for Prohibition.
on
Protesting DMCA
·
· Score: 1
Selective perception based on economics. Economicaly it was bad not to sell wiskey. Economicaly it is good to keep the big buisnesses happy.
Re:Just flout the law. It worked for Prohibition.
on
Protesting DMCA
·
· Score: 1
Good point, the law is only as good as you can inforce it. I think you will see some high profile court cases but since this is such a distributed culture with lots of small fry it will be impossible for the law to be inforced (similar to prohibition) and we will just have to sit tight and weather the storm.
Actually all memebers of the Legislative branch and the Chief Executive (Billy Boy) are required by law to be aware of the corispondence sent by their constituants. Usually they have a junior staff memeber (21 year old intern?) Opening mail and they see a sheet of paper each morning with percentages and issues.
I have been email the President, my Senators and Congresspeople about this for the past several weeks. You get a form letter back but you know you've been counted!
Slashdot Mirror
True. But the consumer does not set the price post-purchase. The consumer says "Next time I will not pay more than $x for this product." Not "I will pay $x for the product you have just provided."
I walk into McDonald's and order a hamburger and fries. They charge me $3. The hamburger is over done and the fries soggy. I think this meal is only worth $1.
The next day I walk into the same McDonald's order the same burger and fries. The service is excelent the burger and fries scrumcious. I think that the meal is worth $10.
The consumer NEVER sets the price for goods or services. It is the consumer's choice to intitiate the transaction at all.
As the Internet expands to the masses the percentage of people who abide by and apreciate the net's tradition of openness shrinks. Did we really expect people to respect privacy in the face of the almight dollar???
snip
validates the suspicion that corporatist employers are taking advantage of new technologies and of workers' anxieties to demand longer hours and increased productivity
snip
I wonder if corporatist employers are actively taking advantage of this phenomenon or just rejoicing in the added productivity it gives them??
Case in point MS implementation of DS in W2K. They extended the schema half way to hell and closely tied their OS to their implementation of DS. Never-the-less any X500 compliant client can access any of the info in MS Active Directory (escpecialy now since you can authenticate using Kerberos.)
If we are just looking for a port then check out openLDAP.
When I first looked at MySQL the claim was that by leaving out the features you gain speed. So if you have a DB with many queries but few updates, MySQL is the choice.
I have used MySQL in mission critical enviroments. The time frame was short but MySQL performed admirably. (even though I had to set up my own replication schemes.)
Every day as I walk down the street (Downtown NYC) I see countless street vendors selling bootleg copies of CDs. The other day I stopped to see if they had any of yours (they did.) When the police come they arrest the vendor not the manufacturer of the tape deck they used to make the copy. Why are you chasing Napster and not Napster users???
You are correct in stating that you have a right to control the and chose the distribution of you music. However, by your own admition you have relinquished control of selected distribution methods in the past. (Live concert recordings etc.) Why is reliquishing control of this method any different??
To quote: metallica_james_live: "Most I know who use Napster purchase far more music now than before they began to use the program. Moreover, the music purchased is that which they download and listen to the most."
Distributing source code is not the primary force driving Open Source Software. Rather it facilitates the growth of development communities around an application. ESR remarks that he does not believe developers will approach Windows source to improve it as an operating system, rather "mine" it for information useful in creating interoperatable apps.
If this is the primary goal of any remedy in the MS vs DOJ case, opening the code to Windows is not the only solution. If MS is split then it makes good business sense for each unit to encourage interoperability. Something companies have been doing one way or another for years without opening their source. As for who should apply the remedy, the only party with the ability to guarantee enforcement is the US government.
Geez,
I didn't mean that photocopying was plagiarism. Sorry it came out that way.
Take a joke man. Do you really think I believe plagiarism is flattering???
I find the comparison to Xerox very interesting. I am sure that some time over the course of my collegiate career I photocopied something that I should not have legally done....besides isn't plagiarism the sincerest form of flattery??
The major difference in my mind is that a majority of authors are more interested in having their work read by a larger audience (the reason they are writing in the first place is of people to read.) However, most people in the music industry seem to be preoccupied with money. Otherwise the MPAA and RIAA would be proposing useful implementations of Napster.
So if money is the driving force then controlling the distribution market is key. If you need a reference for this fact check you encyclopedia under Gates, Bill or Vanderbilt
Geez can you say bandwagon. First Harpers then NYT . Why all the sudden the great stress on women on the net?? They are there just like any other "group."
While demographics are an interesting topic. The Internet is about results and substance. Regardless of race, creed, gender, or religion a person's worth is messured by their positive or negative contribution.
The answer is in the source!
I have to disagree with you on these points.
I am in the computing profession (majored in it in undergrad) and while you are correct: I do not know how paging works, however, I do know it exists and that I have to respect its existance.
However, many people have no desire to know or care. It is people like this that benifit from the Windows. Granted this dumbing down produces comments like "AOL is the internet."
Never-the-less providing seemless systems to end users so that they don't have to know about the internals is the name of the game. If you need any proof then look how big a deal the linux community is making of improving the install process. There is no reason that the user should know about scan and refresh rates. Or what an X server is. That there are multiple WMs yes but not Xservers.
Yes this is a great paradox. By bringing computing to the masses, Bill also acheived a great dumbing down.
Two reactions to this:
a) Is it possible to do it any other way???
b) By definition not Everyone can know how it works, not Everyone knows the workings of the Linux kernel but it is considered to be a freedom bringing operating system.
Perhaps Jon is right and this ruling is nothing more that a morale victory albeit a large one. Nonetheless one cannot discount the value nor the power of morale.
You have to give MS their due. Windows did give the masses accessibility to computing, a factor which aided the growth of the Internet and the Internet did begat Linux.
Now if MS is prevented from exploiting their market share the prospect of consumer benefit from competition and innovation are extremely bright.
Incorrect (IMHO)
Check out my other post on this article. "Trafficing in User Rights". Personl copying/cracking seems to still be legal it is the aiding an abetting part that has become illegal.
Maybe but if you bealive people do that I have a bridge to sell you.
Ok so what is your point?? No one will argue with you that those are you rights...I certainly have not.
The argument against the MPAA is that if they try to make replication harder and protect their copyright by destroying MP3, MP3s have many legit uses that would be trampled.
No one can argue that copying cds to MP3 and distributing them is legal.
Are you saying that the copyright holder has no rights??? Stealing cable is theft. The cable company owns the rights to distribute the signal and charge for it. The MPAA (or equivalent agency) owns the rights to distribute many movies and/or songs. We can claim to have rights while denying them theirs.
We can, however, take up arms when these copyright holders try to defend their rights by stomping over ours.
What you say is true...outside the concepts introduced by the DCMA. If you help or facilitate the breaking of copyright protection, you have violated the DCMA. This is the new idea that everyone is so in an uproar over.
Lessig makes an interesting point. It seems if a single users decides to crack the protection on Cyber Patrol's black list it would be considered fair use: Nor would it limit (in my view) the right of a user to reverse-engineer a program to discover what sites that the program he has purchased is blocking.
So what we have here as a law that prevents the a person supporting anothers 1st Ammendment rights. So it is not so much CPHack that Mattel can attack rather the distribution of CPHack. Very scary for ISPs and for those against content filtering.
The only course of action is to get the law declared unconstitutional. I hope that some one out there has the drive to take it to the supreme court. Otherwise Trafficing in user rights will have a longer jail term then trafficing in drugs!
Selective perception based on economics. Economicaly it was bad not to sell wiskey. Economicaly it is good to keep the big buisnesses happy.
Good point, the law is only as good as you can inforce it. I think you will see some high profile court cases but since this is such a distributed culture with lots of small fry it will be impossible for the law to be inforced (similar to prohibition) and we will just have to sit tight and weather the storm.
You'd be surprised, besides all you have to do is change so characters and that would frustrate any diff checks they would be doing ;->
Actually all memebers of the Legislative branch and the Chief Executive (Billy Boy) are required by law to be aware of the corispondence sent by their constituants. Usually they have a junior staff memeber (21 year old intern?) Opening mail and they see a sheet of paper each morning with percentages and issues.
I have been email the President, my Senators and Congresspeople about this for the past several weeks. You get a form letter back but you know you've been counted!