My company (a large-ish, surviving Internet Retailer) has internally announce a Six Sigma Initiative. I'm wondering if we'll need to maintain 5 9s uptime...
It's been said to me by people who should know that some number way smaller than 10% of these releases actually make money. This is the missing information that people like Courtney leave out of their diatribes against those bloodsuckers in "the industry".
While Courtney's example (here) freely admits that it is for a hypothetically successful band. She doesn't hide that fact. Maybe she doesn't acknowledge that this band covers the nine in front of it that "failed", but the record company owns the copyright (essentially) to all 10 bands' music. Her point was not only that the band would have been better off fiscally working at 7-11, but that they don't even "own" their songs, anymore!
What frightens me is the following: of the 30,000 responses, they claim 10% were substansive (e.g. 3000). They also claim to have 7500 in favor of the settlement - is anyone else worried that none of the 15,000 opposed are considered "substansive".
The real issue (which I first saw raised in Jessica Litman's _Digital Copyright_) is the way copyright legislation is "passed". It is basically a poster child for Special Interest Groups negotiating amongst themselves, while leaving out the General Public.
As analogy, would the original US Constitution allowed slavery if black men had been allowed to participate in the Constitutional Convention?
The fact is, in a fair negotiation, all parties that will be affected should be represented - wasn't that the basis of some party in Boston? - and copyright law is the most egregious example of what results when this does not happen. Consumers and artists (the RIAA represents content holders, *not* content creators) are not represented and wind up holding the shaft.
The Halting Problem is well neigh impossible to solve. So if you can't even be sure that a program will halt, how can you be sure that it produces the correct results?
I don't know what rock Robotron2084 ("the best animated tv show") crawled out from under, but perhaps it should watch an episode or two of _The Simpsons_
Bug free software exists: http://www.fastcompany.com/online/06/writestuff.ht ml
Unfortunately, most companies are unwilling to allow the development staff the time required to develop in this manner. The Halting Problem is NP-Complete (it's been a while since I took CS), which sets the bar pretty high for any reasonably complex software. Not to say it can't be done, just saying that it is prohibitively expensive in most cases.
As for why buggy software exists, see _The Rise of Worse is Better_:
Point 1: Sklyarov wrote a program to defeat Adobe encryption while he was in Russia. This is undisputed. This is also perfectly legal both in Russia (where, apparently, Adobe violated the law by not providing this functionality) and in the States (as he is neither a US national nor on US soil when writing the program). In fact, writing the program is arguably legal according to the DMCA, but the distribution is not.
Point 2: His employer sold this software (for commercial gain) through a third party that apparently hosted the files on servers in Chicago. This is the *entire* basis of the Government's case. The culpability of Dmitry for the actions of his employer and a third party is certainly a matter of some debate, though I tend to think he should be held harmless. From my understanding, his employer and the third party removed the offending files and remedied the situation.
Point 3: The fact that he gave a speech about his work at a conference has nothing to do with the case, witness the actual indictment against him (I'm sure www.cryptome.org has a copy). The only bearing that it has on the case, is that he was in the country, which allowed the US's Federal BI to arrest him within its jurisdiction.
As for calls by Slashdotters for "Jury Nullification" - we (I presume to speak for many Slashdotters) would prefer to see the DMCA struck down completely or substantially rather than see it on the books. Dmitry, apparently, will pay the price for a chance for us to strike down the law. Please contribute to his defense fund and please support the EFF (www.eff.org).
Of course, there are other causes out there, too. War, genocide and disease in Africa are problems that readily come to mind.
I believe this "tax" already exists in the US on blank video and cassette tapes (whose sole use, we all know - thanks to the RIAA - is illegal copyright violations; who would put original content on this medium?). Blank CD-Rs is an inevitable extention. However, why stop there - paper products solely exist for the benefit of photocopiers and computer printers, and whose sole use is also illegal copyright violations. Thus, the RIAA should be entitled to a surcharge levied on paper. I'm more than happy to pay my tax in the form of used toilet paper, to verify that the tissue was not used to illegally reproduce the lyrics to 'NSync's latest hit.
Slashdot Mirror
Damn, that should read "Dark Knight"
Have you ever seen a Connery movie where he drops the accent? Didn't think so.
How about Clint Eastwood as the Dark Night - think "Unforgiven" - if it's to be anything like "The Fall".
Cheers,
Slak
If nobody visits a site that's down, is it really down? ;)
My company (a large-ish, surviving Internet Retailer) has internally announce a Six Sigma Initiative. I'm wondering if we'll need to maintain 5 9s uptime...
It's been said to me by people who should know that some number way smaller than 10% of these releases actually make money. This is the missing information that people like Courtney leave out of their diatribes against those bloodsuckers in "the industry".
While Courtney's example (here) freely admits that it is for a hypothetically successful band. She doesn't hide that fact. Maybe she doesn't acknowledge that this band covers the nine in front of it that "failed", but the record company owns the copyright (essentially) to all 10 bands' music. Her point was not only that the band would have been better off fiscally working at 7-11, but that they don't even "own" their songs, anymore!
Regards,
Slak
Reminds me of this article:
_ fo und.html
http://www.theonion.com/onion3819/factual_error
Using procurement in this fashion is an interesting tactic. How does OMB account for GPL "purchases"?
In the spirit of the Felt-Tip-Marker-Qua-DMCA-Illegal-Device, does this place electronic dictionaries under the same category?
Cheers,
Slak
I'm waiting for the RoboHolligans contest.
As Homer J. Simpson says, "Here's to alcohol, the cause of and solution to all the world's problems"!
Color me paranoid...
What frightens me is the following: of the 30,000 responses, they claim 10% were substansive (e.g. 3000). They also claim to have 7500 in favor of the settlement - is anyone else worried that none of the 15,000 opposed are considered "substansive".
Regards,
Slak
The real issue (which I first saw raised in Jessica Litman's _Digital Copyright_) is the way copyright legislation is "passed". It is basically a poster child for Special Interest Groups negotiating amongst themselves, while leaving out the General Public.
As analogy, would the original US Constitution allowed slavery if black men had been allowed to participate in the Constitutional Convention?
The fact is, in a fair negotiation, all parties that will be affected should be represented - wasn't that the basis of some party in Boston? - and copyright law is the most egregious example of what results when this does not happen. Consumers and artists (the RIAA represents content holders, *not* content creators) are not represented and wind up holding the shaft.
This crowd won't ease off Microsoft GPLs its software. All of it. And issues royalty-free use of any of its patents.
Interesting thought experiment, but don't hold your breath waiting for the reality to appear.
Two words: Halting Problem.
The Halting Problem is well neigh impossible to solve. So if you can't even be sure that a program will halt, how can you be sure that it produces the correct results?
Regards,
Slak
I don't know what rock Robotron2084 ("the best animated tv show") crawled out from under, but perhaps it should watch an episode or two of _The Simpsons_
Regards,
Slak
But Microsoft's mantra is: "If it's broken, then make them buy another".
Regards,
Slak
As Thomas Jefferson said, "The price of Copy Protection Schemes is eternal vigilence and endless lawsuits."
Regards,
Slak
And the NRA has asked people to stop procreating since "guns don't kill people, people kill people".
Bug free software exists: http://www.fastcompany.com/online/06/writestuff.ht ml
Unfortunately, most companies are unwilling to allow the development staff the time required to develop in this manner. The Halting Problem is NP-Complete (it's been a while since I took CS), which sets the bar pretty high for any reasonably complex software. Not to say it can't be done, just saying that it is prohibitively expensive in most cases.
As for why buggy software exists, see _The Rise of Worse is Better_:
http://www.jwz.org/doc/worse-is-better.html
Regards,
Slak
IANAL: If we are at war (in the legal sense) then some of our liberties may be suspended legitimately.
Regards,
Slak
You mean Britney Spears isn't going to make a guest appearance?
Does the video game come out? I'm thinking a game along the lines of that old (Commadore?) game where you "built" monsters and faught other monsters.
Point 2: His employer sold this software (for commercial gain) through a third party that apparently hosted the files on servers in Chicago. This is the *entire* basis of the Government's case. The culpability of Dmitry for the actions of his employer and a third party is certainly a matter of some debate, though I tend to think he should be held harmless. From my understanding, his employer and the third party removed the offending files and remedied the situation.
Point 3: The fact that he gave a speech about his work at a conference has nothing to do with the case, witness the actual indictment against him (I'm sure www.cryptome.org has a copy). The only bearing that it has on the case, is that he was in the country, which allowed the US's Federal BI to arrest him within its jurisdiction.
As for calls by Slashdotters for "Jury Nullification" - we (I presume to speak for many Slashdotters) would prefer to see the DMCA struck down completely or substantially rather than see it on the books. Dmitry, apparently, will pay the price for a chance for us to strike down the law. Please contribute to his defense fund and please support the EFF (www.eff.org).
Of course, there are other causes out there, too. War, genocide and disease in Africa are problems that readily come to mind.
Cheers,
Slak
I believe this "tax" already exists in the US on blank video and cassette tapes (whose sole use, we all know - thanks to the RIAA - is illegal copyright violations; who would put original content on this medium?). Blank CD-Rs is an inevitable extention. However, why stop there - paper products solely exist for the benefit of photocopiers and computer printers, and whose sole use is also illegal copyright violations. Thus, the RIAA should be entitled to a surcharge levied on paper. I'm more than happy to pay my tax in the form of used toilet paper, to verify that the tissue was not used to illegally reproduce the lyrics to 'NSync's latest hit.
Regards,
Slak