When you say that I as an individual have the ability to broadcast MY message, by purchasing commercial air-time YOU ARE WRONG. You are naive. Go to adbusters.org. They have tried to purchase air-time for commercials for YEARS without success. Television stations will not sell air-time to anyone who questions their pro-corporate message. They don't have to, and they won't. If you believe this is a level playing field, if you believe you have equal access to the airwave you are living a dream world. Try it.
No, the original poster is correct, it is NOT STEALING. In fact, recording a live show is not PER SE an intellectual property infringement, and it certainly isn't theft from the the music industry. The Greatful Dead didn't keep people from recording their shows, therefore ALL Greatful Dead bootlegs are legal. The particular concert that was made available on EZTree may have been illegally obtained, and may NOT have been illegally obtained, but it is not EZtree that is infringing, and it is the individual performer, not the INDUSTRY, who would have an interest in any infringement, or would be infringed against - the COPYRIGHT issues were dealt with when the band paid for the right to perform, the performance belongs to the band.
"Yeah, I think I will stick with OS X for my daily productivity which makes me wonder just what Microsoft is planning on doing for those individuals who switch to OS X."
Completely true. Open Source actually protects you against exactly the support/project dead-end that closed source, proprietary code presents. Besides, in the database world ANY SQL compliant database ( closed or open) can be migrated ( albeit painfully) to some other SQL compliant database as long as you hava ODBC or Java drivers.
I have applied a small home-made rule to any of the proposed rules, and where possible written to Congresspersons to oppose certain ideas. That rule is - How many Chinese dissidents will it kill? This proposal would eventually and routinely kill a lot of Chinese dissidents. It should be vigorously opposed. Spam is a trojan horse here. The Chinese government does concern itself with Spam, they don't care. They care about dissent and they want a supra-legal support structure to enforce their censorship on a global basis. And turn over IP addresses when asked, thank you very much. I have been on-line since 1995, and have had the same corporate e-mail address for eight years now and I average two spam messages a day. I know this is low for someone in this circumstances, but there are non-governmental ways of limiting Spam. Technical ways, and procedural ways.
Exactly. The P2P piracy "crisis" has never really been about intellectual property rights, or compensation for the artists, it's really about preventing the artists from finding easy and reliable ways to get directly to their listeners. In short, it is about control, but not control of the music, control of the artists themselves. Some artists did get it early, some got a snow job from their labels and bought it.
Actually the DSL vs Cable speed and price, which is a function of "competition" is only part of what the case is about. More important is the fact that as an information service Cable is able to refuse to carry certain CONTENT. This allows discrimination in terms of what you, as a user, can offer yourself, hence the restrictive terms about running your own server, etc. Setting up Server farms and creating on-line movie rental stores is impossible - the cable company has locked you out. There are other ramifications - the thing is, when you eliminate open and equal access you can never really say what would have evolved. The internet only evolved because the telcos were not ALLOWED to say what the content of the traffic was.
It's officially under US "jurisdiction", it's not on US Territory. But since in most cases you are bound by US law as a US citizen regardless of where you are (for example, you can be prosecuted in US courts for pedophilia that occured in Thailand, and you can be captured and tried in US courts for violations of US law even in you are the Head of State of a country, like, say, Panama, and you have never even been in the United States) - all this quibbling is a distinction without a difference. If the Supremes ( without Diana Ross?) want to be inconsistent in their theories of law that is their prerogative, but a violation of law by a US citizen or the US government is an ABUSE regardless.
Rumors, and they are really only rumors, are that the new Novell strategy is to migrate the old Netware services, which are a fairly complete and easily managed set of directory, print and Groupware services, to Linux. This is to stave off the inroads that Microsoft has been making in large companies who need these services. Some of these new services will be open source, like this announcement - some may remain proprietary. Basically Novell needs to move its existing clients onto Linux, while keeping them Novell clients. Its a risky strategy, if the rumors are correct, but a wise one. Microsoft has spent 20 years announcing that they have x or y in the pipe that will eliminate the need for a Novell solution, and eventually (like Active Directory) they implement something, this is Novell moving ahead again.
Linux would succeed against OS/2 just as it will against Windows because in the long term it is a better model for computer operating systems. It was making its presence felt before IBM put its weight behind it, and would probably have developed almost as quickly without IBM. The open source development model is at a short range disadvantage, but a long range advantage in that early adopters get less stability, but over time users get more stability and a better understood product.
You have forgotten "promote the general welfare" , which, I do beleive, is an essential and Constitutionally recognised feature of government. If access to information is made a private right ( by strenuous IP protections, access fees, and bandwidth frustrations) the general welfare is not being served. Government has a positive obligation to provide equal access, according to the long tradition of American History. It is only in the last 50-75 years that this has even been contentious.
This is obviously an attempt to use the unfortunate girl to get the I.N.D.I.A. PATRIOT act passed. If the description is at all correct then the law would have devatating consequenses to the Indian Internet - all ISPs would need a full-time monitor of all posts! This is either a poorly crafted law or they really want to shut that sucker (the internet) down.
I used to kill time at the office while I was scanning on one mac by graphing functions on a second mac. I loved this program, and missed it when OS X came out. Now I know who to thank, and my boss knows who to send the bill to. Thanks.
As just about everyone has said - you need new equipment. You could also outsource the scanning. This would be incredibly expensive to do on a drum scanner, but you might look for someone to do Kodak ProPhotoCD scanning. What you need to know is how big a scan is required. If you only need 11x14 output a ProPhotoCD scan runs 4-5 bucks in NYC. If you need big sizes you need a Drum scan or equivalent. If you are doing this for clients you can out source, and save for a better scanner. Under Linux I don't know what to recommend. Under Mac I would say look at Creo flatbeds ( their newest model is $8500.00) of course, you should always, always ask the vendor if they have plans to support Linux, or better yet open source their drivers. I always ask. They always say no.
I remember in the old days when the Unix philosophy was "that which is not expressly prohibited is permitted". And I remember when Americans used to think " Innocent until proven guilty". Of course, I realize that these days are gone, never to return, but I do wonder whether Mr. Tenet misunderstands the Internet, or whether the comments reported to the reporter ( who wasn't allowed to the event, after all) misinterpreted Mr. Tenet.
I don't see an easy way to deny access to the Internet to untrusted users, for the folowing reasons. First, as long as people can connect a modem to the POTS and find, or run, a DNS server there is no way to totally prevent access from a clever user, even in the US. Second, even if there was a way to shut down US POTS access, the Internet is not an American property, it is global and governed by standards that are outside anyone jurisdiction. The design of the Internet is, in fact, to prevent the kind of control he envisions. Governments and Industry COULD design a new network with protocols that denied access without trust keys, but I don't see how they could kill off the one that they have. Perhaps someone could enlighten me?
That said, you could evolve a dual internet scenario, a commercial and closed net and a free and open net that would be increasingly (A) marginalized or (B)Used in the original, non-commercial way as a medium of communication, rather than advertising. But as long as you can run IP v.4 and get a phone call out you can't eliminate the old internet.
You could make it costly and painful for the rule followers to use, but I don't think that was the idea.
Why would anyone steal computers from the campaign for the information on them? These are Windows machines, you send an email with the subject line RE: your photos, add a little email attachment, and boom, your in - total control of the machine.
The libertarian political philosophy presupposes an equivalence of power among citizens in order to funtion properly ( that is without becoming a tyranny or degenerating into a Darwinian bloodbath). Since the starting point is so obviously unequal, how can society recalibrate to equalize these relationships? And no cheating here, you can't simply wish away the problem, unless, of course you wish to defend the uneven power relationships themselves, and all that flows from that.
Some of the comments here seem blithe about the prospect of a "geek only" OS, but the beauty of the linux design and the OSS philosophy is that the entire system can be made completely user-friendly and never be 'dumbed down', no one has to lose. The problem comes in creating a mechanism for bringing naive users ( or non-technical users, or whatever you want to call these targeted users) into the interface design process. In short, how do we get open-source users as well as open source programmers? And how do they talk to each other. I am certain that there are ways of achieving this, but they will probably require business/programmer partnerships, rather than inspired risk-taking grandmothers, which is a shame since the latter probably have better ideas.
I can understand the fear and trembling among the broadcasters, the MPAA, and the RIAA - everyone who derives primary income from the control of distribution through time, but not withstanding the truly compelling Classic ESPN where we can watch the 1974 Eagles vs Browns matchup that decided fourth place in the AFC Central division ( don't quote me on that, I made it up) just what economic interest does the NFL think will be harmed. It can't be pirated before it hits the theater, it happens in real-time, and anyone who has ever watched a time delay telecast of a sporting event knows how deadly dull it is when you know the outcome, so what's their thinking? Any ideas?
I have used too many operating systems to feel content with Windows. It is inelegant, toylike and aimed at. apparently an 11 year old boy in interface design (not that there's anything wrong with being an 11 year old boy!). In short, I find it condescending. Mac OS X is very elegant, and doesn't feel limiting, even when it is. Linux, and for that matter SGI Irix are still rough around the edges, but so much more flexible than Windows. I will admit I haven't had more than a dabble at XP, but I have spent considerable time on 3.11, 95, NT and 2K - they just don't work for me.
Slashdot Mirror
When you say that I as an individual have the ability to broadcast MY message, by purchasing commercial air-time YOU ARE WRONG. You are naive. Go to adbusters.org. They have tried to purchase air-time for commercials for YEARS without success. Television stations will not sell air-time to anyone who questions their pro-corporate message. They don't have to, and they won't. If you believe this is a level playing field, if you believe you have equal access to the airwave you are living a dream world. Try it.
Yeah, but:
Get with child a mandriva root?
Come on, it'll never fly
No, the original poster is correct, it is NOT STEALING. In fact, recording a live show is not PER SE an intellectual property infringement, and it certainly isn't theft from the the music industry. The Greatful Dead didn't keep people from recording their shows, therefore ALL Greatful Dead bootlegs are legal. The particular concert that was made available on EZTree may have been illegally obtained, and may NOT have been illegally obtained, but it is not EZtree that is infringing, and it is the individual performer, not the INDUSTRY, who would have an interest in any infringement, or would be infringed against - the COPYRIGHT issues were dealt with when the band paid for the right to perform, the performance belongs to the band.
"Yeah, I think I will stick with OS X for my daily productivity which makes me wonder just what Microsoft is planning on doing for those individuals who switch to OS X."
I hear they're gonna offer SP2 for Mac OSX
We could bundle it with the Hubble telescope and sell it to the ESA, who still seems to believe in science.
Completely true. Open Source actually protects you against exactly the support/project dead-end that closed source, proprietary code presents. Besides, in the database world ANY SQL compliant database ( closed or open) can be migrated ( albeit painfully) to some other SQL compliant database as long as you hava ODBC or Java drivers.
I saw Episode One, and this can't be worse than that.
I have applied a small home-made rule to any of the proposed rules, and where possible written to Congresspersons to oppose certain ideas. That rule is - How many Chinese dissidents will it kill? This proposal would eventually and routinely kill a lot of Chinese dissidents. It should be vigorously opposed. Spam is a trojan horse here. The Chinese government does concern itself with Spam, they don't care. They care about dissent and they want a supra-legal support structure to enforce their censorship on a global basis. And turn over IP addresses when asked, thank you very much. I have been on-line since 1995, and have had the same corporate e-mail address for eight years now and I average two spam messages a day. I know this is low for someone in this circumstances, but there are non-governmental ways of limiting Spam. Technical ways, and procedural ways.
Exactly. The P2P piracy "crisis" has never really been about intellectual property rights, or compensation for the artists, it's really about preventing the artists from finding easy and reliable ways to get directly to their listeners. In short, it is about control, but not control of the music, control of the artists themselves. Some artists did get it early, some got a snow job from their labels and bought it.
Actually the DSL vs Cable speed and price, which is a function of "competition" is only part of what the case is about. More important is the fact that as an information service Cable is able to refuse to carry certain CONTENT. This allows discrimination in terms of what you, as a user, can offer yourself, hence the restrictive terms about running your own server, etc. Setting up Server farms and creating on-line movie rental stores is impossible - the cable company has locked you out. There are other ramifications - the thing is, when you eliminate open and equal access you can never really say what would have evolved. The internet only evolved because the telcos were not ALLOWED to say what the content of the traffic was.
What makes you think they're innocent?:-)
It's officially under US "jurisdiction", it's not on US Territory. But since in most cases you are bound by US law as a US citizen regardless of where you are (for example, you can be prosecuted in US courts for pedophilia that occured in Thailand, and you can be captured and tried in US courts for violations of US law even in you are the Head of State of a country, like, say, Panama, and you have never even been in the United States) - all this quibbling is a distinction without a difference. If the Supremes ( without Diana Ross?) want to be inconsistent in their theories of law that is their prerogative, but a violation of law by a US citizen or the US government is an ABUSE regardless.
Primitive peoples often think that you're stealing their soul when you photograph them.
Watching the behavior of often photographed celebrities would seem to confirm this
Rumors, and they are really only rumors, are that the new Novell strategy is to migrate the old Netware services, which are a fairly complete and easily managed set of directory, print and Groupware services, to Linux. This is to stave off the inroads that Microsoft has been making in large companies who need these services. Some of these new services will be open source, like this announcement - some may remain proprietary. Basically Novell needs to move its existing clients onto Linux, while keeping them Novell clients. Its a risky strategy, if the rumors are correct, but a wise one. Microsoft has spent 20 years announcing that they have x or y in the pipe that will eliminate the need for a Novell solution, and eventually (like Active Directory) they implement something, this is Novell moving ahead again.
Linux would succeed against OS/2 just as it will against Windows because in the long term it is a better model for computer operating systems. It was making its presence felt before IBM put its weight behind it, and would probably have developed almost as quickly without IBM. The open source development model is at a short range disadvantage, but a long range advantage in that early adopters get less stability, but over time users get more stability and a better understood product.
You have forgotten "promote the general welfare" , which, I do beleive, is an essential and Constitutionally recognised feature of government. If access to information is made a private right ( by strenuous IP protections, access fees, and bandwidth frustrations) the general welfare is not being served. Government has a positive obligation to provide equal access, according to the long tradition of American History. It is only in the last 50-75 years that this has even been contentious.
This is obviously an attempt to use the unfortunate girl to get the I.N.D.I.A. PATRIOT act passed. If the description is at all correct then the law would have devatating consequenses to the Indian Internet - all ISPs would need a full-time monitor of all posts! This is either a poorly crafted law or they really want to shut that sucker (the internet) down.
I used to kill time at the office while I was scanning on one mac by graphing functions on a second mac. I loved this program, and missed it when OS X came out. Now I know who to thank, and my boss knows who to send the bill to.
Thanks.
As just about everyone has said - you need new equipment. You could also outsource the scanning. This would be incredibly expensive to do on a drum scanner, but you might look for someone to do Kodak ProPhotoCD scanning. What you need to know is how big a scan is required. If you only need 11x14 output a ProPhotoCD scan runs 4-5 bucks in NYC. If you need big sizes you need a Drum scan or equivalent. If you are doing this for clients you can out source, and save for a better scanner. Under Linux I don't know what to recommend. Under Mac I would say look at Creo flatbeds ( their newest model is $8500.00) of course, you should always, always ask the vendor if they have plans to support Linux, or better yet open source their drivers. I always ask. They always say no.
I remember in the old days when the Unix philosophy was "that which is not expressly prohibited is permitted". And I remember when Americans used to think " Innocent until proven guilty". Of course, I realize that these days are gone, never to return, but I do wonder whether Mr. Tenet misunderstands the Internet, or whether the comments reported to the reporter ( who wasn't allowed to the event, after all) misinterpreted Mr. Tenet.
I don't see an easy way to deny access to the Internet to untrusted users, for the folowing reasons. First, as long as people can connect a modem to the POTS and find, or run, a DNS server
there is no way to totally prevent access from a clever user, even in the US. Second, even if there was a way to shut down US POTS access, the Internet is not an American property, it is global and governed by standards that are outside anyone jurisdiction. The design of the Internet is, in fact, to prevent the kind of control he envisions. Governments and Industry COULD design a new network with protocols that denied access without trust keys, but I don't see how they could kill off the one that they have. Perhaps someone could enlighten me?
That said, you could evolve a dual internet scenario, a commercial and closed net and a free and open net that would be increasingly (A) marginalized or (B)Used in the original, non-commercial way as a medium of communication, rather than advertising. But as long as you can run IP v.4 and get a phone call out you can't eliminate the old internet.
You could make it costly and painful for the rule followers to use, but I don't think that was the idea.
Why would anyone steal computers from the campaign for the information on them? These are Windows machines, you send an email with the subject line RE: your photos, add a little email attachment, and boom, your in - total control of the machine.
The libertarian political philosophy presupposes an equivalence of power among citizens in order to funtion properly ( that is without becoming a tyranny or degenerating into a Darwinian bloodbath). Since the starting point is so obviously unequal, how can society recalibrate to equalize these relationships? And no cheating here, you can't simply wish away the problem, unless, of course you wish to defend the uneven power relationships themselves, and all that flows from that.
Some of the comments here seem blithe about the prospect of a "geek only" OS, but the beauty of the linux design and the OSS philosophy is that the entire system can be made completely user-friendly and never be 'dumbed down', no one has to lose. The problem comes in creating a mechanism for bringing naive users ( or non-technical users, or whatever you want to call these targeted users) into the interface design process. In short, how do we get open-source users as well as open source programmers? And how do they talk to each other. I am certain that there are ways of achieving this, but they will probably require business/programmer partnerships, rather than inspired risk-taking grandmothers, which is a shame since the latter probably have better ideas.
I can understand the fear and trembling among the broadcasters, the MPAA, and the RIAA - everyone who derives primary income from the control of distribution through time, but not withstanding the truly compelling Classic ESPN where we can watch the 1974 Eagles vs Browns matchup that decided fourth place in the AFC Central division ( don't quote me on that, I made it up) just what economic interest does the NFL think will be harmed. It can't be pirated before it hits the theater, it happens in real-time, and anyone who has ever watched a time delay telecast of a sporting event knows how deadly dull it is when you know the outcome, so what's their thinking? Any ideas?
I have used too many operating systems to feel content with Windows. It is inelegant, toylike and aimed at. apparently an 11 year old boy in interface design (not that there's anything wrong with being an 11 year old boy!). In short, I find it condescending. Mac OS X is very elegant, and doesn't feel limiting, even when it is. Linux, and for that matter SGI Irix are still rough around the edges, but so much more flexible than Windows. I will admit I haven't had more than a dabble at XP, but I have spent considerable time on 3.11, 95, NT and 2K - they just don't work for me.