Not going to get into this argument about which OS is better, since pretty much any os that has a decent install base has some feature set that is worthwhile.
But, there's a lot more students who can afford to send four bucks to cheap bytes or thirty-five bucks for a copy of RedHatCheapoEdition than can afford to pick up a $700 of NT Server or $100-$200 for NT Workstation.
But, if Linux is now outselling EVERY OTHER UNIX on the market, then (by definition), its standings must change, and relatively quickly, at that.
It's important to note a couple of facts: the price of admission to, say, AIX is >> than Linux. And because of this there are probably numerous would be Linux installs that failed to produce the desired result (ie. a company is willing to let a newish admin spend a teensy amount of money attempting to produce an alternative to their $75,000 Sun upgrade, even if the odds of it working out are low.)
We need to keep our hats on and not let these things fuck with our perceptions.
WTF? What you posted and what I posted are pretty much unconnected, except for your attack. I understand all four of your points as well as any non-litigious, non-lawyer can. Go back and reread the posts on this thread. You see numerous examples of people crying for crypto. Crying about free speech. Crying about using crypto and not providing the keys. And crying about how the system is violating their personal liberties.
Too late dude. It seems that the usual "Slashdot Fact Filter [1]" has been applied for most of these people and they could care less if the event under discussion is legal or not. It "sounds like" someone is getting ass-raped by Big-Corp Inc. so obviously there is going to be the usual first amendmant, crypto, disobediance and disrespect called for.
[1] You know. The one that removes any facts and relevant information from the story before anybody gets to comment on it here on slashdot.
Err. There is a difference between lynching somebody for something they did as opposed to something that they are. So stop drawing a correlation between those who suffered extreme physical abuse at the hands of ignorant assholes and some middle- to upper-class, immature prick who get's some kind of erotic high by criminally messing with someone's livelyhood. Evil isn't retaliation, it's diluting the blood that people truly bled. It's making little the cost paid by those who just wanted to live their lives.
People need to realize that they can't keep peeing in the water supply and expect everybody to ignore their behavior. Yahoo has real monetary losses that are the direct result of this. My personal opinion on the matter is: catch the person(s) responsible. Give them two choices 1) immediately cough up cash to cover the lost revenue, or 2) lock them up, put them to work, give all of their income to Yahoo until the damages are paid. At typical inmate wages, that'll probably only take the rest of their lives.
Many people look at things like this and only see a minor issue. But for the companies that are being hit it's a big expense. And for companies that make their revenue purely from their website it's unbelievable how much can be lost in a few hours.
Not to sound like a vigilante, one decent solution would be to have all the various technically inclined types pool their resources to track down the perpetrator of each and every indentified DDos. Send a group of thugs out to their house. Beat the living crap out of them. Destroy their computing equipment and other appliances. Generally trash their home. Maybe beat their family and neighbors. Tatoo the wanker's forehead with the message "I'm an Asswipe". Leave several hundred fliers around the neighborhood indicating why this happened, in detail. Make sure there is not way to provably connect it with any of the participants. Make sure it's publicized in the media.
After several of these, your average mindless, destructive, childish moron will think twice.
You stop distributed DoS attacks by making sure that packets coming in on a particular interface could only originate from that particular part of the net. Then you can statistically identify when a DoS is happening and then do something about it. Not to mention tracking down perps is a lot easier.
Unfortunately most ISPs thought their clue-pill was a suppository and have been to embarassed to go to the proper professionals for extraction. Thus their hardware is typically configured to the minimal state of "it works" rather than the proper state of "it works well."
Reading comprehension problem? Did you miss the phrase "they had a reason to think that you were not adhering to the personal/private terms of fair use"? Thus they would have something to demonstrate and you would therefore either have to defend yourself or bend over and take it like a man.
Read the whole subthread, maybe look into the whole DeCSS (the win32 program, yeah, the actual piece of code the jlj is in trouble for, not the piece of propaganda code that OpenDVD is trying to wave around like some geek flag.) Then look into what places on the net are using it for. You'll find that every site which mentions DeCSS.exe is explaining how to convert DVDs to VCDs/MPEGs. Then you'll note that the previous tools to do this conversion required that you baked your DVD and drive for 48-72 hours, which resulted in a number of DVD-ROM fatalities. Then come back and tell us that css only keeps you from playing them. It's a hurdle, not insurmountable, but was certainly enough to stop most people from swapping ripped DVDs on the net.
The day you are guilty until proven innocent is the day all polititions at fault should be shot.
Most people who are accused of a crime are treated as if they were guilty. Why do you think criminal-hacker-poster-boy Kevin Mitnick was jailed? Actions speak louder than words so pay attention to what's being done out there instead of what is said.
I make no assertion that there is a standard that you have to meet. The courts found that for personal, private use you could make copies. Once you start letting your friends use your CDs at the same time you are using copies of your CDs you are in violation of that finding and are breaking copyright law. If the RIAA approached you with a team of lawyers and they had a reason to think that you were not adhering to the personal/private terms of fair use, then they certainly could require you to demonstrate that you are, in fact, obeying copyright law.
Err. Sorry. Wrong. An actual "cracker" (as opposed to a remote intrustion script weenie) probably has more low-level coding skill and knowledge than your typical OSS hero or CS PhD.
Secondly DeCSS isn't really all that much code or algorithm. Just details.
And if DVD CCA spent millions of dollars developing this 40-bit encryption algorithm, then they were defrauded and should complain to their programmers. I could have come up with something just as good for far less money. Heck, I could have just repackaged 56-bit DES.
I hope you aren't going to BS the claim that "they should have made a better protection system if they didn't want people to crack/reverse engineer/lick it." The fact of the matter is is that once you allow software players to exist on PCs and their ilk, you have screwed yourself. No matter how technically competent your crypto engineers think they are, there is absolutely no way to prevent a skilled enough programmer from reverse engineering your algorithms. They did what was reasonable, the only mistake was in allowing the hype to convince them that software players were needed.
Probably the main purpose of the crypto was to provide a point of contention in the legal arena. The likelyhood that the DMCA was a surprise to the DVD-CCA is very low and they acted accordingly.
..due to the fact that it costs MORE to make one than to buy a new one!
This is a fallacious argument. There are a lot more ways to pirate a movie than to burn it do a DVD. Now it's possible to rip a DVD to your HD and do the translation to VCD/MPEG1 from there (rather than doing the decoding via the original DVD which has some heat issues.) Look at the number of people running around with little hard-ons because they managed to DL the crappy Star Wars mpeg. Or those who were l33t and got a copy of the Matrix. Woo.
Illegal? not a bit.. no more illegal than me transferring my cd's to tape so I can listen to them in the car.
Can you ensure that no one (family, friends, etc.) is listening to the original CDs while you are listening to the MP3s or tapes? If not then it would probably be possible for the RIAA to put a legal "stop" to your use of tapes or MP3s for mobility purposes, if they cared to do so. It's just that you are a very little fish.
What's wrong with the use of "hack" in that sentence? Maybe you're just seeing what you want to see in that phrase. It's also interesting that nobody has pointed out the dod speed ripper that seems to have been somewhat simultaneous with the release of MoRE DeCSS. I wonder which one came first. I'm pretty sure I saw dodsrip out there before Oct 99, but I may not be recalling correctly.
Somebody needs to point out that there are two items out there called DeCSS. One is a component of a poorly integrated Linux based DVD playback system. This one does not run under windows. The other (and the first to be distributed BTW) is a program for Win32 which takes tracks off of a DVD disk, decrypts them and stores the VOB file on your HD. This program does not run natively under Linux and never had anything to do with viewing movies under Linux.
It's difficult to understand the entire situation re. DeCSS because of these two different things. It's also difficult to perceive that the DeCSS program that was written and distributed by MoRE ever had anything whatsoever to do with viewing movies under different OSes. If you have a DVD-ROM and run Windows, run to your favorite ftp search and look for "decss121b.zip". Download it, and then run it and then tell us that it is relevant to watching movies under Linux.
I wonder what DeCSS files are being distributed by 2600 and friends. If it's the Win32 program, I can't see that this thread and this particular ruling have anything to do with each other (for the most part.) If it's the LiViD module, then the bozo attorneys for the defense need to get their arses in gear and address this issue properly, otherwise their clients might as well bend over and lube up.
Only someone who doesn't understand engineering would think that a gear in a machine is uninspired.
Come on. There may be some argument that style is a part of code, but the argument that every piece of code is a matter of free speech would be like saying that a particular design of a hammer is free speech. A hammer is a hammer. A particular type of hammer may be patented. But a hammer with a "special" flare in the handle is more a trademark than a matter of free speech.
Maybe I won't be using the licensed reader, but I did pay for a license.
Of course you know this and of course you don't give a fuck, but agent X can't provide you with a license for item Y if item Y isn't the property of agent X.
Information about you is yours and you should retain control of it.
Which brings up an interesting point: you make a little database about you, your family, etc. You copyright it. So now, you own the database and these data whores have to either get a license to use this information in their databases or run the risk of getting sued. Whee.
Slashdot Mirror
Statements like that also make the investors wonder why the hell they are paying ~$70/share for Linux companies...
Not going to get into this argument about which OS is better, since pretty much any os that has a decent install base has some feature set that is worthwhile.
But, there's a lot more students who can afford to send four bucks to cheap bytes or thirty-five bucks for a copy of RedHatCheapoEdition than can afford to pick up a $700 of NT Server or $100-$200 for NT Workstation.
It's important to note a couple of facts: the price of admission to, say, AIX is >> than Linux.
And because of this there are probably numerous would be Linux installs that failed to produce the desired result (ie. a company is willing to let a newish admin spend a teensy amount of money attempting to produce an alternative to their $75,000 Sun upgrade, even if the odds of it working out are low.)
We need to keep our hats on and not let these things fuck with our perceptions.
WTF? What you posted and what I posted are pretty much unconnected, except for your attack. I understand all four of your points as well as any non-litigious, non-lawyer can. Go back and reread the posts on this thread. You see numerous examples of people crying for crypto. Crying about free speech. Crying about using crypto and not providing the keys. And crying about how the system is violating their personal liberties.
Then tell me that I've got a "fact filter".
Too late dude. It seems that the usual "Slashdot Fact Filter [1]" has been applied for most of these people and they could care less if the event under discussion is legal or not. It "sounds like" someone is getting ass-raped by Big-Corp Inc. so obviously there is going to be the usual first amendmant, crypto, disobediance and disrespect called for.
[1] You know. The one that removes any facts and relevant information from the story before anybody gets to comment on it here on slashdot.
FreeBSD has a really nice VM system that got extensive tuning for "big iron" applications.
Correct you are. It was the Matrix that was rendered on FreeBSD boxes. Woop.
Err. There is a difference between lynching somebody for something they did as opposed to something that they are. So stop drawing a correlation between those who suffered extreme physical abuse at the hands of ignorant assholes and some middle- to upper-class, immature prick who get's some kind of erotic high by criminally messing with someone's livelyhood. Evil isn't retaliation, it's diluting the blood that people truly bled. It's making little the cost paid by those who just wanted to live their lives.
People need to realize that they can't keep peeing in the water supply and expect everybody to ignore their behavior. Yahoo has real monetary losses that are the direct result of this. My personal opinion on the matter is: catch the person(s) responsible. Give them two choices 1) immediately cough up cash to cover the lost revenue, or 2) lock them up, put them to work, give all of their income to Yahoo until the damages are paid. At typical inmate wages, that'll probably only take the rest of their lives.
Many people look at things like this and only see a minor issue. But for the companies that are being hit it's a big expense. And for companies that make their revenue purely from their website it's unbelievable how much can be lost in a few hours.
Not to sound like a vigilante, one decent solution would be to have all the various technically inclined types pool their resources to track down the perpetrator of each and every indentified DDos. Send a group of thugs out to their house. Beat the living crap out of them. Destroy their computing equipment and other appliances. Generally trash their home. Maybe beat their family and neighbors. Tatoo the wanker's forehead with the message "I'm an Asswipe". Leave several hundred fliers around the neighborhood indicating why this happened, in detail. Make sure there is not way to provably connect it with any of the participants. Make sure it's publicized in the media.
After several of these, your average mindless, destructive, childish moron will think twice.
But that's just an idea.
You stop distributed DoS attacks by making sure that packets coming in on a particular interface could only originate from that particular part of the net. Then you can statistically identify when a DoS is happening and then do something about it. Not to mention tracking down perps is a lot easier.
Unfortunately most ISPs thought their clue-pill was a suppository and have been to embarassed to go to the proper professionals for extraction. Thus their hardware is typically configured to the minimal state of "it works" rather than the proper state of "it works well."
Reading comprehension problem? Did you miss the phrase "they had a reason to think that you were not adhering to the personal/private terms of fair use"? Thus they would have something to demonstrate and you would therefore either have to defend yourself or bend over and take it like a man.
Read the whole subthread, maybe look into the whole DeCSS (the win32 program, yeah, the actual piece of code the jlj is in trouble for, not the piece of propaganda code that OpenDVD is trying to wave around like some geek flag.) Then look into what places on the net are using it for. You'll find that every site which mentions DeCSS.exe is explaining how to convert DVDs to VCDs/MPEGs. Then you'll note that the previous tools to do this conversion required that you baked your DVD and drive for 48-72 hours, which resulted in a number of DVD-ROM fatalities. Then come back and tell us that css only keeps you from playing them. It's a hurdle, not insurmountable, but was certainly enough to stop most people from swapping ripped DVDs on the net.
Most people who are accused of a crime are treated as if they were guilty. Why do you think criminal-hacker-poster-boy Kevin Mitnick was jailed? Actions speak louder than words so pay attention to what's being done out there instead of what is said.
I make no assertion that there is a standard that you have to meet. The courts found that for personal, private use you could make copies. Once you start letting your friends use your CDs at the same time you are using copies of your CDs you are in violation of that finding and are breaking copyright law. If the RIAA approached you with a team of lawyers and they had a reason to think that you were not adhering to the personal/private terms of fair use, then they certainly could require you to demonstrate that you are, in fact, obeying copyright law.
The US didn't go into Norway nor did they have anyone arrested. The MPAA filed a suit in Norway and the local police decided to investigate.
Even here in the US where the US government has jurisdiction, nobody has been arrested regarding this particular issue.
This post may not be the popular sentiment on slushdot, but it certainly isn't a troll and does actually include a valid point.
Err. Sorry. Wrong. An actual "cracker" (as opposed to a remote intrustion script weenie) probably has more low-level coding skill and knowledge than your typical OSS hero or CS PhD.
Secondly DeCSS isn't really all that much code or algorithm. Just details.
I hope you aren't going to BS the claim that "they should have made a better protection system if they didn't want people to crack/reverse engineer/lick it." The fact of the matter is is that once you allow software players to exist on PCs and their ilk, you have screwed yourself. No matter how technically competent your crypto engineers think they are, there is absolutely no way to prevent a skilled enough programmer from reverse engineering your algorithms. They did what was reasonable, the only mistake was in allowing the hype to convince them that software players were needed.
Probably the main purpose of the crypto was to provide a point of contention in the legal arena. The likelyhood that the DMCA was a surprise to the DVD-CCA is very low and they acted accordingly.
This is a fallacious argument. There are a lot more ways to pirate a movie than to burn it do a DVD. Now it's possible to rip a DVD to your HD and do the translation to VCD/MPEG1 from there (rather than doing the decoding via the original DVD which has some heat issues.) Look at the number of people running around with little hard-ons because they managed to DL the crappy Star Wars mpeg. Or those who were l33t and got a copy of the Matrix. Woo.
Can you ensure that no one (family, friends, etc.) is listening to the original CDs while you are listening to the MP3s or tapes? If not then it would probably be possible for the RIAA to put a legal "stop" to your use of tapes or MP3s for mobility purposes, if they cared to do so. It's just that you are a very little fish.
What's wrong with the use of "hack" in that sentence? Maybe you're just seeing what you want to see in that phrase. It's also interesting that nobody has pointed out the dod speed ripper that seems to have been somewhat simultaneous with the release of MoRE DeCSS. I wonder which one came first. I'm pretty sure I saw dodsrip out there before Oct 99, but I may not be recalling correctly.
Somebody needs to point out that there are two items out there called DeCSS. One is a component of a poorly integrated Linux based DVD playback system. This one does not run under windows. The other (and the first to be distributed BTW) is a program for Win32 which takes tracks off of a DVD disk, decrypts them and stores the VOB file on your HD. This program does not run natively under Linux and never had anything to do with viewing movies under Linux.
It's difficult to understand the entire situation re. DeCSS because of these two different things. It's also difficult to perceive that the DeCSS program that was written and distributed by MoRE ever had anything whatsoever to do with viewing movies under different OSes. If you have a DVD-ROM and run Windows, run to your favorite ftp search and look for "decss121b.zip". Download it, and then run it and then tell us that it is relevant to watching movies under Linux.
I wonder what DeCSS files are being distributed by 2600 and friends. If it's the Win32 program, I can't see that this thread and this particular ruling have anything to do with each other (for the most part.) If it's the LiViD module, then the bozo attorneys for the defense need to get their arses in gear and address this issue properly, otherwise their clients might as well bend over and lube up.
Only someone who doesn't understand engineering would think that a gear in a machine is uninspired.
Come on. There may be some argument that style is a part of code, but the argument that every piece of code is a matter of free speech would be like saying that a particular design of a hammer is free speech. A hammer is a hammer. A particular type of hammer may be patented. But a hammer with a "special" flare in the handle is more a trademark than a matter of free speech.
Of course you know this and of course you don't give a fuck, but agent X can't provide you with a license for item Y if item Y isn't the property of agent X.
Which brings up an interesting point: you make a little database about you, your family, etc. You copyright it. So now, you own the database and these data whores have to either get a license to use this information in their databases or run the risk of getting sued. Whee.
Store enough data and the language problem sorts itself out.