A: Until after the LZW compression was established in the CompuServe GIF format--this was in 1994, the year before Internet Explorer 1.0's release.
Re:You're actually mistaken - let me explain
on
Mattel Spyware
·
· Score: 1
The application does not contact the server ever. Fair enough--not by the application and not on launch. Still more than should be done without informed consent.
Re:I wrote that code - I'll tell you what it does
on
Mattel Spyware
·
· Score: 1
You mean like a newspaper or cable TV?
Exactly. Except that the newspapers and cable TV didn't trick the public into accepting that model--it's well known (if not particularly fair, esp. in the case of cable TV).
Seriously, how exactly is showing a 320x200 JPEG (for 15 seconds) that advertises a product you just might want to buy an invasion of your privacy?
The invasion of privacy is the identifiable (by IP) information passed with the fact that the program was launched. That's no more acceptable than a TV (or toaster, or microwave, or vibrator (!)) that reports when the owner turns it on without his or her consent. (If a user gives informed consent after being presented with the option in plain language, e.g.:
The program will connect to Broderbund's web site each time it is started. This allows us to serve you better by retrieving information on products that might interest you. Check the box below if this is OK.
(It's no good if it's buried in the EULA and/or agreeing to the practice is a condition for installing the software the user paid for), then, and only then, is it OK to do that.
Right here, actually.
I'm darned glad to hear that--seriously. I know that privacy concerns often fall on deaf ears, but we are responsible to at least raise them.
An unrelated Broderbund anecdote--I haven't purchased or used a Broderbund product since buying "The Playroom," which used a manual based copy protection scheme (which was trivially defated) on a program meant to be used by kids not yet old enough to read.
Proof for that assertion, please? Have you been keeping logs and running statistics against them, or are your extrapolating your personal experience, hmmm:>?
I agree that people with technical expertise will find a way around whatever. However, that isn't what the intellectual "property" goons are worried about--they fear the day when non-technical users can avoid paying.
Re:I wrote that code - I'll tell you what it does
on
Mattel Spyware
·
· Score: 1
Where does Broderbund get off using a product someone paid for to pitch more products? If they want a platform from which to pitch products, it should be free (as in beer)--the ads Broderbund wanted the users to look at should have been the price of the program. Forcing uninformed consumers to accept ads and an invasion of privacy (which reporting the launch of a program with an IP address without informing the user is) is disingenuous and, perhaps not illegal, but certainly highly unethical.
And where was the programmer with the developed sense of ethics to bring this to the attention of his employer?
I'm not seeing this--I use WebWasher under Win32 and Junkbuster under Linux and just loaded Yahoo. Do you know of any other pages that actually refuse to load with images turned off or ads blocked? I heard of one (in Wired, I think) site that had lame short stories that it wouldn't show the user if s/he blocked the ads, but that's it.
Re:Cnet headline is misleading
on
Napster Wars
·
· Score: 1
Filename grepping--great: now we'll see stuff like
That's probably in there to preserve the parameters that allowed it to have FCC certification. You'll see the same notice on wireless transmitters, etc.
And, by jove, if the music industry markets only "music that will only play on one Walkman," the money grubbing bastards are destined to see just how many people can live without their entertainment offerings!
Sounds like some of them need some more stringent regulation. With their obvious abuse of one-sided service agreements that say "We can do whatever the hell we want and you agree to pay us and cede the rights to your firstborn", it's indicated.
IMO, programmers who use their talent to write programs like this, or censorware, or programs that force ads to be viewed before content, or tools to spy on people surfing the web, or whatever should be the first against the wall after the revolution. They're traitors against the spirit that made it possible for them to even touch a computer or network, much less control one. (Disclaimer: I am not adovcating actual murder of these programmers. I do hope to make them think a little.)
It would be cool to use cameras to hold law enforcement accountable in this way. However, after a few more police officers (or politicians responsible for police officers' conduct) goes down based on such evidence, I predict it won't be long before it becomes illegal to make an audio or video recording of an officer conducting a stop or other arrest without his or her permission. Off topic, but what sucks is that we even have to think about recording traffic stops in case our one of our most trusted citizens decides to beat the crap out of one of us.
Sky King, Sky King. Stand by for FLASH traffic. ALFA, ZULU, BRAVO, DELTA . . . When our boys are miles away from home with not a woman in sight, the radio operator's husky, yet feminine, voice is a simultaneous siren and messenger to them while they diligently wield the nuclear arsenal of the United States.
And he causeth all, both small and great, rich and poor, free and bond, to receive a mark in their right hand, or in their foreheads: And that no man might buy or sell, save he that had the mark, or the name of the beast, or the number of his name.
Back on topic, something I'd like to see is friends swapping their GPS ad enabled cellphones, giving bogus demographics, and otherwise contaminating the advertisers' databases. If free phones were given out in exchange for ad impressions, this would be as easy as swapping grocery discount cards. (Disclaimer: I have never engaged in this despicable practice that denies grocers their legitimate right to collect detailed personally identifiable data on me in return for the privilege of purchasing items at regular price rather than the inflated price available to non-compliant shoppers.)
A few people doing sort of thing is like peeing in the ocean, but lots of people doing is is peeing in the privacy thieves' Wheaties (TM).
Goodness knows we could keep this going until the thread's archived--it's been a pleasure conversing with someone who can be civil and not reduce the discussion to a lower level. Thanks!
Relatively good freedom compared to what? With encryption and libel laws that would make any old-time tyrant proud? With no written constitution that allows rights to be legislated away at the whim of whatever party's in Parliament this week? Where a usenet provider can be smacked down in the courts because some scumbag (come sue me, bring it on) get over his head in a flame war?
It's pretty easy to say that free speech should not be anonymous so as not to avoid responsibility when one's life and property aren't at stake. For that and other good reasons, the U.S. Supreme Court has acknowledged humans' right to anonymous speech, particularly in the form of anonymous pamphleteering: McIntyre v. Ohio Elections Commission.
Unfortunately, no. On the IDSA's (with whose actions and legal opinions I certainly do not agree) anti-piracy page they state it thus (in their FAQ):
"Haven't the copyrights for old games (like Atari & Commodore) expired?
U.S. copyright laws state that copyrights owned by corporations are valid for 75 years [emphasis mine] from the date of first publication. Because video & computer games have been around for less than three decades, the copyrights of all video and computer programs will not expire for many decades to come."
Geez. I've been had. But, unfortunately, the RIAA thing is sufficiently realistic that I actually bought it. Nicely done--I was wondering why they hadn't gone after the major distros for including uuencode/decode.
Slashdot Mirror
Bzzt. Thanks for playing.
A: Until after the LZW compression was established in the CompuServe GIF format--this was in 1994, the year before Internet Explorer 1.0's release.
The application does not contact the server ever.
Fair enough--not by the application and not on launch. Still more than should be done without informed consent.
Exactly. Except that the newspapers and cable TV didn't trick the public into accepting that model--it's well known (if not particularly fair, esp. in the case of cable TV).
Seriously, how exactly is showing a 320x200 JPEG (for 15 seconds) that advertises a product you just might want to buy an invasion of your privacy?
The invasion of privacy is the identifiable (by IP) information passed with the fact that the program was launched. That's no more acceptable than a TV (or toaster, or microwave, or vibrator (!)) that reports when the owner turns it on without his or her consent. (If a user gives informed consent after being presented with the option in plain language, e.g.:
(It's no good if it's buried in the EULA and/or agreeing to the practice is a condition for installing the software the user paid for), then, and only then, is it OK to do that.
Right here, actually.
I'm darned glad to hear that--seriously. I know that privacy concerns often fall on deaf ears, but we are responsible to at least raise them.
An unrelated Broderbund anecdote--I haven't purchased or used a Broderbund product since buying "The Playroom," which used a manual based copy protection scheme (which was trivially defated) on a program meant to be used by kids not yet old enough to read.
Proof for that assertion, please? Have you been keeping logs and running statistics against them, or are your extrapolating your personal experience, hmmm :>?
I agree that people with technical expertise will find a way around whatever. However, that isn't what the intellectual "property" goons are worried about--they fear the day when non-technical users can avoid paying.
Where does Broderbund get off using a product someone paid for to pitch more products? If they want a platform from which to pitch products, it should be free (as in beer)--the ads Broderbund wanted the users to look at should have been the price of the program. Forcing uninformed consumers to accept ads and an invasion of privacy (which reporting the launch of a program with an IP address without informing the user is) is disingenuous and, perhaps not illegal, but certainly highly unethical.
And where was the programmer with the developed sense of ethics to bring this to the attention of his employer?
I'm not seeing this--I use WebWasher under Win32 and Junkbuster under Linux and just loaded Yahoo. Do you know of any other pages that actually refuse to load with images turned off or ads blocked? I heard of one (in Wired, I think) site that had lame short stories that it wouldn't show the user if s/he blocked the ads, but that's it.
Filename grepping--great: now we'll see stuff like
(|\/|3ta||1ca) |\|0th1ng 31s3 |\/|att3r5.mp3
That's probably in there to preserve the parameters that allowed it to have FCC certification. You'll see the same notice on wireless transmitters, etc.
Cool! And since it runs Windows, I can walk around wearing the Blue Screen of Death(TM), at least until UCITA passes in my state.
And, by jove, if the music industry markets only "music that will only play on one Walkman," the money grubbing bastards are destined to see just how many people can live without their entertainment offerings!
VMware PANIC:
NOT_IMPLEMENTED F(562):1654
on VMware under Linux. Time to make a partition!
I can't wait to see if it's going to run under VMWare!
I played with the bootable image they made available free awhile back, but balked at paying hundreds for the manuals. Now the source--life is good!
Sounds like some of them need some more stringent regulation. With their obvious abuse of one-sided service agreements that say "We can do whatever the hell we want and you agree to pay us and cede the rights to your firstborn", it's indicated.
I'll bet even AOL wouldn't shut someone down for being a victim of a DOS attack. Where does that put your employer?
IMO, programmers who use their talent to write programs like this, or censorware, or programs that force ads to be viewed before content, or tools to spy on people surfing the web, or whatever should be the first against the wall after the revolution. They're traitors against the spirit that made it possible for them to even touch a computer or network, much less control one. (Disclaimer: I am not adovcating actual murder of these programmers. I do hope to make them think a little.)
Three words. First. Sale. Doctrine.
It would be cool to use cameras to hold law enforcement accountable in this way. However, after a few more police officers (or politicians responsible for police officers' conduct) goes down based on such evidence, I predict it won't be long before it becomes illegal to make an audio or video recording of an officer conducting a stop or other arrest without his or her permission. Off topic, but what sucks is that we even have to think about recording traffic stops in case our one of our most trusted citizens decides to beat the crap out of one of us.
Sky King, Sky King. Stand by for FLASH traffic. ALFA, ZULU, BRAVO, DELTA . . . When our boys are miles away from home with not a woman in sight, the radio operator's husky, yet feminine, voice is a simultaneous siren and messenger to them while they diligently wield the nuclear arsenal of the United States.
Back on topic, something I'd like to see is friends swapping their GPS ad enabled cellphones, giving bogus demographics, and otherwise contaminating the advertisers' databases. If free phones were given out in exchange for ad impressions, this would be as easy as swapping grocery discount cards. (Disclaimer: I have never engaged in this despicable practice that denies grocers their legitimate right to collect detailed personally identifiable data on me in return for the privilege of purchasing items at regular price rather than the inflated price available to non-compliant shoppers.)
A few people doing sort of thing is like peeing in the ocean, but lots of people doing is is peeing in the privacy thieves' Wheaties (TM).
Goodness knows we could keep this going until the thread's archived--it's been a pleasure conversing with someone who can be civil and not reduce the discussion to a lower level. Thanks!
Relatively good freedom compared to what? With encryption and libel laws that would make any old-time tyrant proud? With no written constitution that allows rights to be legislated away at the whim of whatever party's in Parliament this week? Where a usenet provider can be smacked down in the courts because some scumbag (come sue me, bring it on) get over his head in a flame war?
Someone please moderate this up. I laughed so hard I cried. BTW, how long before we see server-based filesharing to swap porn--Whackster?
It's pretty easy to say that free speech should not be anonymous so as not to avoid responsibility when one's life and property aren't at stake. For that and other good reasons, the U.S. Supreme Court has acknowledged humans' right to anonymous speech, particularly in the form of anonymous pamphleteering: McIntyre v. Ohio Elections Commission .
Unfortunately, no. On the IDSA's (with whose actions and legal opinions I certainly do not agree) anti-piracy page they state it thus (in their FAQ):
"Haven't the copyrights for old games (like Atari & Commodore) expired?
U.S. copyright laws state that copyrights owned by corporations are valid for 75 years [emphasis mine] from the date of first publication. Because video & computer games have been around for less than three decades, the copyrights of all video and computer programs will not expire for many decades to come."
Geez. I've been had. But, unfortunately, the RIAA thing is sufficiently realistic that I actually bought it. Nicely done--I was wondering why they hadn't gone after the major distros for including uuencode/decode.