"This may be the ultimate solution for artists and online stations to go about. Some artists should think about releasing an online version of their songs prior to committing to anyone like RIAA, ASCAP, etc., this way their songs become more popular, people enjoy their music before its been monopolized, and artists can then leverage more rights from RIAA, and the others, and if those agencies don't like it, the artist (now popular from releasing a net based song) can then press and distribute records on their own, which many successful artists have done."
Exactly. Musicians will regret ever signing up with the RIAA members. I can see the class action lawsuit coming now...
"The RIAA is stifiling our (the RIAA member artists) ability to get exposure in recently very important XYZ online music video stream/audio stream/forum. We are asking for 123 dollars in compensation."
That will make me smile.:p Heed this warning, independent artists. Don't Do It! Don't sign that RIAA member contract. You Will Be Screwed, and in the cold. It's your stuff, Don't sign away exclusive rights.
"Sure, SOAP and.NET are all new and shiny--but what do they provide ? Don't confuse the shovel with the ditch, as I read somewhere recently. Updating your shovel with no benefit to either the shoveler or the ditch is just technological masturbation."
Microsoft masterbating, there is a stunning image.
"A banner is nothing more than a highway billboard, a reminder message," said Richard V. Hopple, a former ad agency executive and now chief executive of Unicast, an advertising technology firm. "We know what outdoor is worth ? $2 per thousand."
Has anyone noticed the context of web ads suck? When I read an interesting/daring/important article/story I try to click on the banner add to make the author some money. Somtimes, even though the article is blatently for geeky type people the add is for somthing totally uninteresting to geeks. To examine the opposing situation, has anyone noticed the coolness of the ThinkGeek Ads here?
So what is the going rate for banner adds? And how much is context taken into account. It seems to me Ebay will get more clicks because people there are in the mood to shop. People at Yahoo are their to check their stock or the game or the weather, not to buy a couch.
It's gotta be more than 2 dollars per thousand, but how much more?
Look it may be simplistic, but it's necessary. It seems to be a noble goal and even if it's as hard as a desktop enviorment to implement it's the only way to insure we are allowed to anonymously file share in the future.
To simplify coding it he/she/it could have suggested...
...breaking the plugins down to client and server modules, but that makes it leagaly vulnerable
...breaking it down by type of service:ptp, central-database-based and single node shares, but that also makes it weak to attack legally.
So the question really is, what do ptp and central-index, and node by node file sharing have in common.
This should be really useful for downloading free software public domain type stuff too. If not it will be a short conversation when intent becomes a topic in the court.
slanted soapbox, preachy rant type thing
One could look at the litigation and destruction of napster as the dumbest thing corporate media ever did. All those users were going to one place, and may-not have-ever-known they could learn a new interface... but they will know now. When the RIAA goes after the next target making the next switch will be much easier for those millions of users. It might be as easier for techie types to adopt an ex-napster user who is wandering the streets like a lost dog, and show them 2 way nature of the internet. After all not ALL musicans are/want-to-be RIAA and for them this kinda sucks.
Ex-napster users have been unAOLified. awoken from their clicky-clicky bad dream. I haven't met anyone who is a born again AOLer, have you?
"Its getting trite to point out how anti-MS the Slashdot trolls^H^H^H^H^H^Heditors are, but..."
Very True. This guy shouldn't have been modded "Troll". If moderatore/slashdot/posters/etc... can't say anything nice, we are talking to ourselves. Let the FBI be the bad guys here. Use quotes from what the Story had to say for the negitive and concentrate on the positive.
"Speculation is welcome as to why NT sysadmins don't install service packs for known vulnerabilities..."
"I've worked with many companies, both Windows based and UNIX based, and in my experience there's plenty of clueless sysadmins to go around."
That is totally true, for some ass kissing is enough.
"In fact, while I have no numbers to back it up, my experience suggests NT sysadmins are MORE likely to be running patched systems than UNIX sysadmins... Not because they are more clueful, but because its easier to install one monolithic service pack than hundreds of seperate patches to deal with specific security problems as is the norm on the UNIX side of things."
For the preceding statment...
Solaris==true
FreeBSD==wrong question
Red Hat (based)Linux==true
Debain Linux==false
If you don't know Debian let me teach you...
apt-get update [return](sync up database)
apt-get upgrade [return] (update all updated packages)
Thats it, all updated up to the minute. Even if someone is waiting just for your box they may never get in!
"I'm not saying the NT 'way' is better -- you certainly generally have to wait longer for a fix to a known problem on that end, but to suggest that sysadmins who use NT are someone less clueful or responsible just because they are running NT is just, well, fucking stupid."
"less clueful"---->probably, I honestly think most people here are tring to help you discover what we have discovered about computers and the good side of the source.
"(less) responsible"---->If anybody tells you that they just a jerk. They are "fucking stupid" They don't speak for everyone though.:)
The following code is a PERL script capable of decoding an encrypted DVD (necessary to watch a DVD on a Linux machine) in real time. This is illegal to use according to the Digital Millennium Copyright Act, a set of laws passed by anonymous vote in congress in 1998. The MPAA feels that they must stop you from using this code to watch DVD movies because then...
...they can't force you to watch the commercials, ...they can't charge you more money according to your wealth or region code.
If you are interested in learning more about how to create your own DVD decoder you can take the authors class on the subject at MIT http://www.mit.edu/iap/dvd
END.SIG
I was kinda hoping to create somthing that could spell out the evils in a tolerable length/readability. Other than manditory commercial viewing and region codes what else does an open source version wreck for the MPAA?
I will be appending this with a brief description to my emails. Here is what I had in mind.
The following code is a PERL script capable of decoding an encrypted DVD
(necessary to watch a DVD on a Linux machine) in real time. This is illegal
to have according to the Digital Millennium Copyright Act, a set of laws passed
by anonymous vote in congress in 1998. The MPAA feels that they must stop you
from using this code to watch DVD movies because then...
...they can't force you to watch the commercials, ...they can't charge you more money according to your wealth or region code.
If you are interested in learning more about how to create your own DVD decoder you can take the authors class on the subject at MIT http://www.mit.edu/iap/dvd
From the article... "The company made its point in a friend-of-the-court brief"
Obviously AOL is not making a "friend" of the Pennsylvania Superior Court.;) BOF stick together, ya know. I wonder how this would end if tried in Pennsylvania.
Perhaps the AOL half of TW/AOL isn't pure evil, more like 96.2%. Good luck to them on this battle.
I've noticed the absence of discussion of the HDCC threat.
If such a thing went through, having a open source bios image to flash might be the only thing that saves us from Dumb/Prejudical/Just-Plain-Evil(TM) HD access restictions.
EX: The BIOS refuses see LILO in the boot sector...
Clinton was a wiz at garnering soft money contributions. The Law was passed in 91, he was elected in 92. What else can you say he was a natural.:)
Clinton is the symtom, (not that that obsolves him) soft money is cause. He was just shead of his time
Wave goodbye to the last non-bought politicians. A few more elections and there won't be any non-corrupt politicians left.
I can't wait for nanotech (point out Moores law to people.) in this level of corruption. Well maybe they will think I am smart and not low level format my brain (yea right)
Until Soft money is stopped NOTHING WILL CHANGE! EVERYTHING COMES BACK TO SOFT MONEY!!
If Jesse Ventura(sic?)reruns for Govenor of Minn in 2 years he won't take any monetery contributions. His logic is the prior 4 years are his resume. Do you think Bush or any of the incumbant republicrats can or will say that. Na nobodys that nieve.
Don't blame me I voted for Nader (in NY)
This was test and only a test, if it were a real rant people would listen, get really pisssed of and do somthing about it.
The contitution (except maybe later amendments) is written in plain english. It is an intelligent logical and agreeable piece of law. Do a search and read it. The politcians can subvert it's ideaolgy all they want but if we understand it then their damage will always be limited.
Use the first and speak out against the DMCA and drug war in your loudest voice. If you and others strum the right chord, change will come. If you make the MPAA/DOJ/Republicrats look bad enough and they are corrupt enough they may start shooting at you. This is why all is lost with out the second.
Educate people, keep trying, don't give up. We are not just protecting ourselves but everybody. Let them know, they might just help.
Lets play their game.
Things are run by bribery for now, so we hire lobbiests. Give to the EFF.
The Media badmouths the internet at EVERY opportunity so we will badmouth them (and we've got better ammo too.)
Last time bribery was legalized it took a labor movment to stop it! Lets oginize. Not just online, but in meatspace where are rights are well established and well known. Right to assemble baby.
Work on the baby boomers. They are powerfull swing them over and we win. Explain that their favorite rock star already has copyright for life and anything else is, well overkill. Without the money generated by their copyright extentions the MPAA/RIAA wont have all that money to throw great lawyers at long shots.
You have brought up the least discussed and most important aspect of "The right to bear arms". I don't belive our forefathers meant the second amendment as an excuse to go out and Gang Bang or even to protect hunters. Nor was it meant as a supplement for a poor police force(ie: shooting a thief.) It was meant so if the system ever becomes so corrupt or fails you so badly that excersising the first amendment get you shot at, you have the means to shoot back.
The US constitution even protects us against its own inevitable failure (new laws widdle away bit by bit.) It is almost like it forsees it.
There are a few implications to this...
This logic also implies the military will never start a revolution on the part of the people. It dosn't (and didn't) jive with the doctrine of arming the people. They may, and hopfully some would, join in on the right side if first amendment does get you shot at. I don't think the founders forsaw the acceleration of arms that are not availible to the people.
People can and should speak their minds knowing this is behind them. That said if they shoot first, they automaticly lose in the eyes of the country. Whoever shoots first is wrong and creat es a clear and present danger, creating the scenrio for the just war from the other side.
The contitution (and any republic) counts on people to be willing to fight the govenment not only for themselves but free ideals. First with words and with arns if arms are drawn.
Everybody loves that TJ paraphase "Those who give up freedom for security are bound for neither." because as logical people they recognise that we are headed for the scenrio where we need the second amendment to keep us prepared. Few speak up, fewer listen and only some even care. With the media as corrupt as it is and bribery legal there is little recourse but dumping the Tea in the river and we know where that leads. Most of us are inclined to speak our minds but other (non-geek interest) oppressed groups don't understand the internet as well as we do to take advantage of it's benifits.
Educating people on seting up their own internet services, is where we can stop this before it comes to blows and bloodshed. The two greatest accompilishments of the net so far are concurent open source software devlopment (Linux,BSD,etc) and the threaded discussion group (Slashcode,Usenet, and some mailing lists.) Notice Big media sites usually don't use threaded lists! Media blindly tell people the Internet will change the world without elaberating. We should elaberate! Teach the people of the world how to use Free Software and the Threaded Discussion Group and empower them with a voice louder than that damn TV. Lets stop a brutal war before it ever happens!
I'm the president of LILUG. I noticed this too on a discussion on our mailing list. I for one, have bought lots of Loki Games but many of our LUG Members don't. So what do I do? I buy games and give em away at the meetings. Once people see that shrink wrapped box and the quality inside, they are at Loki's site buying more.
Did this happen? Wouldn't "We at NASA need to play our DVD's on ISS on Linux, because it was to expensive to ship the extra weight of seperate DVD players up into space. DeCSS was the only logical way"
be an excelent argument in the 2600 appeal.
I mentioned this in a previous article so I hope I don't get marked redundant.
We live in a pop/tv culture. Most people who understand this DMCA case's potential impact are already out of touch with that culture. While this is honorable in some respects, it makes it difficult to communicate those risks to others.
Go See that movie! Buy that CD! Keep in touch with the RIAA/MPAA dominated buzzwords/phrases/ideas! After each purchase, make a note of every dollar you spend on these things. Every few months wipe the slate clean and send matching funds to the EFF.
There have been discussions here where the conclusion has been, `even if we boycott, what good will it do'.
Being ostacized because of being witless to the pop culture will only further us from the point of influence in peoples lives. A boycott of the media monsters would only mean an exclusion from the society we are trying to protect.
The church has somthing known as titheing, where poeple give a tenth of their income to the church. A scheduled donation to help battle sin, hmmmm....
In response to people's (including myself) hypocracy denouning the MPAA, but gawking over the latest movie, I will be giving money to the EFF dollar for dollar for every RIAA/MPAA movie or song, I purchase or pay them money for. If half of slashdot did that, think of the politicians EFF could buy(sorry but that is the way the game is played right now.) Look out AARP!
So next time you see someone drooling over Star Wars#, or the lastest remix of whatever, don't tell them to stop. Gently remind them to make two piles of money, and enjoy it.
Observation: With these close election politicians will be running scared for contributons to win the next round. Especially the next commander and chief.
Observation: People have knee jerk reactions and are offended at the idea that IP law is to slanted toward companies.
I wish I could make it to ALS to grab just 5 minutes of your time, but alas I took a teaching job teaching intro to Unix starting this week.
Deus Ex Machina said,
Again, as a Debian user, I feel that there is a hell of a lot WRONG with RedHat's distro - for ME. This
more of a personal taste though - and don't anyone dare tell me that Debian hasn't had it's share of
crippling bugs....
So I think we should back off and turn down our flamethrowers here - if
you want to criticize RedHat, fine, but at least find a good reason.
I too am a Debian and a Redhat user. I like the elegance and commitment to structure that is Debian, but don't be fooled that really doesn't matter to most people. They want it to just go.
Please build or accept somthing like apt-get that doesn't depend on unique ID numbers or "Priority Access." My gut tells me if you don't, one day Linux==Debian instead of Redhat in most peoples minds. What you lose in CD sales you will gain in acceptance of Linux in general.
Please don't lose your dominance. I appreciate your contribution, and I fear the morality of your replacements. Thanks for listening.
"Fact: Machines don't and can't think. Existence precedes essence. Computers pass voltages. Period. They don't remember
anything. They don't think about anything. Everything we discuss or sense about them is secondary and something we bring to
it. Saying that computers think is like discussing the political persuasions of rock formations.
Once we see the Turing Test for what it really is, the real CT/Turing Test project is now revealed:
Can we make machines operate in such a way that we can - deceive - ourselves into thinking there's actually a sentient human
in it? And can we deceive/bludgeon others into agreeing with us?
The Turing Testers know that machines aren't sentient, as they wait for the next rev of some machine to trick them. And once
"tricked" - what makes them think they or anyone else wouldn't know it's a trick - everytime?
"Gee - last week, the HAL 9000 passed the Turing test. Well wuddya know - that last algorithm really did the trick. Let's check
it out now. UhOh. Today it's not passing the Turing test...so I guess it isn't sentient anymore..."
That we so deceive ourselves does not mean the condition of sentience is or ever was actually present - it simply means that
the required conditions to our test have been met at a particular historical juncture - on a given day, the machine has "fooled"
us into thinking it can think. It's been programmed in such a way that we are led to believe it has a mind. This doesn't mean it
actually has one. With the Turing Test, the machine must simply be able to do what we expect of a human within a certain range
of activity. But is it Sentient? Hell No. It doesn't take Albert Einstein to see how nekkid that Emperor is."
I think the turing test is really neat milestone but not really a test of anything but ability in a typical clerk job. I recently saw an AOL commercial touting AIM in which the perky actress said,
"AOL instant messaging is better than talking on the phone!"
How thoughtless do you have to be to believe that?
People forget that when they talk on the phone or in person to someone that they are collecting FAR more information than just the words, the spelling, grammar, and the speed with which they are typed. Or maybe a person who would believe that is just very unobservant.
Unlike AOL's fictional character most people I know collect enormous amounts of information during a analog (perhaps digitally carried) converstion. For important decisions I may dwell on the information obtained from just one conversation for days. Every facial muscule, every breath, arm gestures, tone and waver of voice and so on.
I have a friend who will remain nameless who keeps going on dates with girls he meets online. Meeting people online is no problem, but baseing a friendship on typed converstions with little or no analog interation is flawed. Needless to say he keeps getting hurt, even more so than he did in purely meatspace endevors.
I propose a new test. Create a human voice and/or form and if I or someone else who isn't asleep can remain friends with said robot for a year and not know, give their creators the prize.
There is a reason that trust in a good friendship is earned over time. Friendships are far more complex than beauty parlor chatter held through a teletype. We don't need computers to talk about the weather or how bad politics suck. If AI is to be usefull is must be trusted... like a friend.
Slashdot Mirror
Exactly. Musicians will regret ever signing up with the RIAA members. I can see the class action lawsuit coming now... "The RIAA is stifiling our (the RIAA member artists) ability to get exposure in recently very important XYZ online music video stream/audio stream/forum. We are asking for 123 dollars in compensation."
That will make me smile. :p Heed this warning, independent artists. Don't Do It! Don't sign that RIAA member contract. You Will Be Screwed, and in the cold. It's your stuff, Don't sign away exclusive rights.
Microsoft masterbating, there is a stunning image.
A project to implement a royalty free, polished mp3 ripper.
A maintained copy of the newest Linux Kernels with the real time patches applied.
Anything Else? I know I'm forgeting some.
Allow me to quote...
"A banner is nothing more than a highway billboard, a reminder message," said Richard V. Hopple, a former ad agency executive and now chief executive of Unicast, an advertising technology firm. "We know what outdoor is worth ? $2 per thousand."
Has anyone noticed the context of web ads suck? When I read an interesting/daring/important article/story I try to click on the banner add to make the author some money. Somtimes, even though the article is blatently for geeky type people the add is for somthing totally uninteresting to geeks. To examine the opposing situation, has anyone noticed the coolness of the ThinkGeek Ads here?
So what is the going rate for banner adds? And how much is context taken into account. It seems to me Ebay will get more clicks because people there are in the mood to shop. People at Yahoo are their to check their stock or the game or the weather, not to buy a couch.
It's gotta be more than 2 dollars per thousand, but how much more?
To simplify coding it he/she/it could have suggested...
So the question really is, what do ptp and central-index, and node by node file sharing have in common.
This should be really useful for downloading free software public domain type stuff too. If not it will be a short conversation when intent becomes a topic in the court.
slanted soapbox, preachy rant type thing
One could look at the litigation and destruction of napster as the dumbest thing corporate media ever did. All those users were going to one place, and may-not have-ever-known they could learn a new interface... but they will know now. When the RIAA goes after the next target making the next switch will be much easier for those millions of users. It might be as easier for techie types to adopt an ex-napster user who is wandering the streets like a lost dog, and show them 2 way nature of the internet. After all not ALL musicans are/want-to-be RIAA and for them this kinda sucks.
Ex-napster users have been unAOLified. awoken from their clicky-clicky bad dream. I haven't met anyone who is a born again AOLer, have you?
End rant type thing
Very True. This guy shouldn't have been modded "Troll". If moderatore/slashdot/posters/etc... can't say anything nice, we are talking to ourselves. Let the FBI be the bad guys here. Use quotes from what the Story had to say for the negitive and concentrate on the positive.
"Speculation is welcome as to why NT sysadmins don't install service packs for known vulnerabilities..."
"I've worked with many companies, both Windows based and UNIX based, and in my experience there's plenty of clueless sysadmins to go around."
That is totally true, for some ass kissing is enough.
"In fact, while I have no numbers to back it up, my experience suggests NT sysadmins are MORE likely to be running patched systems than UNIX sysadmins... Not because they are more clueful, but because its easier to install one monolithic service pack than hundreds of seperate patches to deal with specific security problems as is the norm on the UNIX side of things."
For the preceding statment...
Solaris==true
FreeBSD==wrong question
Red Hat (based)Linux==true
Debain Linux==false
If you don't know Debian let me teach you...
apt-get update [return](sync up database)
apt-get upgrade [return] (update all updated packages)
Thats it, all updated up to the minute. Even if someone is waiting just for your box they may never get in!
"I'm not saying the NT 'way' is better -- you certainly generally have to wait longer for a fix to a known problem on that end, but to suggest that sysadmins who use NT are someone less clueful or responsible just because they are running NT is just, well, fucking stupid."
"less clueful"---->probably, I honestly think most people here are tring to help you discover what we have discovered about computers and the good side of the source.
"(less) responsible"---->If anybody tells you that they just a jerk. They are "fucking stupid" They don't speak for everyone though. :)
The following code is a PERL script capable of decoding an encrypted DVD (necessary to watch a DVD on a Linux machine) in real time. This is illegal to use according to the Digital Millennium Copyright Act, a set of laws passed by anonymous vote in congress in 1998. The MPAA feels that they must stop you from using this code to watch DVD movies because then...
$_='while(read+STDIN,$_,2048){$a=29;$b=73;$c=142;$ t=255;@t=map{$_%16or$t^=$c^=($m=(11,10,116,100,11, 122,20,100)[$_/16%8])$t^=(72,@z=(64,72,$a^=12 *($_%16-2?0:$m&17)),$b^=$_%64?12:0,@z)[$_%8]}(16.. 271);if((@a=unx"C*",$_)[20]&48){$h=5;$_=unxb24,joi n"",@b=map{xB8,unxb8,chr($_^$a[--$h+84])}@ARGV;s/. ..$/1$&/;$d=unxV,xb25,$_;$e=256|(ord$b[4])>8^($f=$ t &($d>>12^$d>>4^$d^$d/8))>8^($t&($g=($q=$e>>14&7^$e )^$q*8^ $q>=8)+=$f+(~$g&$t))for@a[128..$#a]}print+x"C*",@a } ';s/x/pack+/g;eval
If you are interested in learning more about how to create your own DVD decoder you can take the authors class on the subject at MIT http://www.mit.edu/iap/dvd
END .SIG
I was kinda hoping to create somthing that could spell out the evils in a tolerable length/readability. Other than manditory commercial viewing and region codes what else does an open source version wreck for the MPAA?
I will be appending this with a brief description to my emails. Here is what I had in mind.
The following code is a PERL script capable of decoding an encrypted DVD (necessary to watch a DVD on a Linux machine) in real time. This is illegal to have according to the Digital Millennium Copyright Act, a set of laws passed by anonymous vote in congress in 1998. The MPAA feels that they must stop you from using this code to watch DVD movies because then...
$_='while(read+STDIN,$_,2048){$a=29;$b=73;$c=142;$ t=255;@t=map{$_%16or$t^=$c^=($m=(11,10,116,100,11, 122,20,100)[$_/16%8])$t^=(72,@z=(64,72,$a^=12 *($_%16-2?0:$m&17)),$b^=$_%64?12:0,@z)[$_%8]}(16.. 271);if((@a=unx"C*",$_)[20]&48){$h=5;$_=unxb24,joi n"",@b=map{xB8,unxb8,chr($_^$a[--$h+84])}@ARGV;s/. ..$/1$&/;$d=unxV,xb25,$_;$e=256|(ord$b[4])>8^($f=$ t &($d>>12^$d>>4^$d^$d/8))>8^($t&($g=($q=$e>>14&7^$e )^$q*8^ $q>=8)+=$f+(~$g&$t))for@a[128..$#a]}print+x"C*",@a } ';s/x/pack+/g;eval
If you are interested in learning more about how to create your own DVD decoder you can take the authors class on the subject at MIT http://www.mit.edu/iap/dvd
Obviously AOL is not making a "friend" of the Pennsylvania Superior Court. ;) BOF stick together, ya know. I wonder how this would end if tried in Pennsylvania.
Perhaps the AOL half of TW/AOL isn't pure evil, more like 96.2%. Good luck to them on this battle.
If such a thing went through, having a open source bios image to flash might be the only thing that saves us from Dumb/Prejudical/Just-Plain-Evil(TM) HD access restictions.
EX: The BIOS refuses see LILO in the boot sector...
Trivial now, Vital Later.
Clinton was a wiz at garnering soft money contributions. The Law was passed in 91, he was elected in 92. What else can you say he was a natural. :)
Clinton is the symtom, (not that that obsolves him) soft money is cause. He was just shead of his time
Wave goodbye to the last non-bought politicians. A few more elections and there won't be any non-corrupt politicians left.
I can't wait for nanotech (point out Moores law to people.) in this level of corruption. Well maybe they will think I am smart and not low level format my brain (yea right)
Until Soft money is stopped NOTHING WILL CHANGE! EVERYTHING COMES BACK TO SOFT MONEY!!
If Jesse Ventura(sic?)reruns for Govenor of Minn in 2 years he won't take any monetery contributions. His logic is the prior 4 years are his resume. Do you think Bush or any of the incumbant republicrats can or will say that. Na nobodys that nieve.
Don't blame me I voted for Nader (in NY)
This was test and only a test, if it were a real rant people would listen, get really pisssed of and do somthing about it.
Use the first and speak out against the DMCA and drug war in your loudest voice. If you and others strum the right chord, change will come. If you make the MPAA/DOJ/Republicrats look bad enough and they are corrupt enough they may start shooting at you. This is why all is lost with out the second.
Educate people, keep trying, don't give up. We are not just protecting ourselves but everybody. Let them know, they might just help.
Lets play their game.
Things are run by bribery for now, so we hire lobbiests. Give to the EFF.
The Media badmouths the internet at EVERY opportunity so we will badmouth them (and we've got better ammo too.)
Last time bribery was legalized it took a labor movment to stop it! Lets oginize. Not just online, but in meatspace where are rights are well established and well known. Right to assemble baby.
Work on the baby boomers. They are powerfull swing them over and we win. Explain that their favorite rock star already has copyright for life and anything else is, well overkill. Without the money generated by their copyright extentions the MPAA/RIAA wont have all that money to throw great lawyers at long shots.
Just some thoughts.
The US constitution even protects us against its own inevitable failure (new laws widdle away bit by bit.) It is almost like it forsees it.
There are a few implications to this...
This logic also implies the military will never start a revolution on the part of the people. It dosn't (and didn't) jive with the doctrine of arming the people. They may, and hopfully some would, join in on the right side if first amendment does get you shot at. I don't think the founders forsaw the acceleration of arms that are not availible to the people.
People can and should speak their minds knowing this is behind them. That said if they shoot first, they automaticly lose in the eyes of the country. Whoever shoots first is wrong and creat es a clear and present danger, creating the scenrio for the just war from the other side.
The contitution (and any republic) counts on people to be willing to fight the govenment not only for themselves but free ideals. First with words and with arns if arms are drawn.
Everybody loves that TJ paraphase "Those who give up freedom for security are bound for neither." because as logical people they recognise that we are headed for the scenrio where we need the second amendment to keep us prepared. Few speak up, fewer listen and only some even care. With the media as corrupt as it is and bribery legal there is little recourse but dumping the Tea in the river and we know where that leads. Most of us are inclined to speak our minds but other (non-geek interest) oppressed groups don't understand the internet as well as we do to take advantage of it's benifits.
Educating people on seting up their own internet services, is where we can stop this before it comes to blows and bloodshed. The two greatest accompilishments of the net so far are concurent open source software devlopment (Linux,BSD,etc) and the threaded discussion group (Slashcode ,Usenet, and some mailing lists.) Notice Big media sites usually don't use threaded lists! Media blindly tell people the Internet will change the world without elaberating. We should elaberate! Teach the people of the world how to use Free Software and the Threaded Discussion Group and empower them with a voice louder than that damn TV. Lets stop a brutal war before it ever happens!
I'm the president of LILUG. I noticed this too on a discussion on our mailing list. I for one, have bought lots of Loki Games but many of our LUG Members don't. So what do I do? I buy games and give em away at the meetings. Once people see that shrink wrapped box and the quality inside, they are at Loki's site buying more.
Give it a whirl in your LUG.
Fighting an evil empire is rather fun and the EFF hats look cool.
I donate dollar for dollar what I spend on RIAA/MPAA (movie viewings, movie rentals, cd's) to the EFF
Did this happen? Wouldn't "We at NASA need to play our DVD's on ISS on Linux, because it was to expensive to ship the extra weight of seperate DVD players up into space. DeCSS was the only logical way" be an excelent argument in the 2600 appeal.
Kernel vs Kernel
Gnu tools vs Gnu tools
this goes here, this goes there
All of these can become moot details to an experianced admin.
The real question for me is...
Any plans on porting to dpkg and apt?
I mentioned this in a previous article so I hope I don't get marked redundant.
We live in a pop/tv culture. Most people who understand this DMCA case's potential impact are already out of touch with that culture. While this is honorable in some respects, it makes it difficult to communicate those risks to others.
Go See that movie! Buy that CD! Keep in touch with the RIAA/MPAA dominated buzzwords/phrases/ideas! After each purchase, make a note of every dollar you spend on these things. Every few months wipe the slate clean and send matching funds to the EFF.
My paper on why the DMCA isn't the problem, but a symptom
check out the smeg and sattool at onegeek.org They are pretty cool.
Being ostacized because of being witless to the pop culture will only further us from the point of influence in peoples lives. A boycott of the media monsters would only mean an exclusion from the society we are trying to protect.
The church has somthing known as titheing, where poeple give a tenth of their income to the church. A scheduled donation to help battle sin, hmmmm....
In response to people's (including myself) hypocracy denouning the MPAA, but gawking over the latest movie, I will be giving money to the EFF dollar for dollar for every RIAA/MPAA movie or song, I purchase or pay them money for. If half of slashdot did that, think of the politicians EFF could buy(sorry but that is the way the game is played right now.) Look out AARP!
So next time you see someone drooling over Star Wars#, or the lastest remix of whatever, don't tell them to stop. Gently remind them to make two piles of money, and enjoy it.
Ground war in Asia? Civil unrest in USA? Vietnam2 (or china1)?
FACT: Microsoft is now the fourth biggest soft money contributor in the USA.
yahoo article
Observation: With these close election politicians will be running scared for contributons to win the next round. Especially the next commander and chief.
Observation: People have knee jerk reactions and are offended at the idea that IP law is to slanted toward companies.
It's not hard to see where this could go.
I believe copyrite term should be shortened and contract law reformed. And I have written an editorial on the subject.
I wish I could make it to ALS to grab just 5 minutes of your time, but alas I took a teaching job teaching intro to Unix starting this week.
Deus Ex Machina said,
Again, as a Debian user, I feel that there is a hell of a lot WRONG with RedHat's distro - for ME. This more of a personal taste though - and don't anyone dare tell me that Debian hasn't had it's share of crippling bugs....
So I think we should back off and turn down our flamethrowers here - if you want to criticize RedHat, fine, but at least find a good reason.
I too am a Debian and a Redhat user. I like the elegance and commitment to structure that is Debian, but don't be fooled that really doesn't matter to most people. They want it to just go.
Please build or accept somthing like apt-get that doesn't depend on unique ID numbers or "Priority Access." My gut tells me if you don't, one day Linux==Debian instead of Redhat in most peoples minds. What you lose in CD sales you will gain in acceptance of Linux in general.
Please don't lose your dominance. I appreciate your contribution, and I fear the morality of your replacements. Thanks for listening.
Matthew Newhall President of LILUG
Right to Censor
Yes they really are a tag team.
"Fact: Machines don't and can't think. Existence precedes essence. Computers pass voltages. Period. They don't remember anything. They don't think about anything. Everything we discuss or sense about them is secondary and something we bring to it. Saying that computers think is like discussing the political persuasions of rock formations.
Once we see the Turing Test for what it really is, the real CT/Turing Test project is now revealed:
Can we make machines operate in such a way that we can - deceive - ourselves into thinking there's actually a sentient human in it? And can we deceive/bludgeon others into agreeing with us?
The Turing Testers know that machines aren't sentient, as they wait for the next rev of some machine to trick them. And once "tricked" - what makes them think they or anyone else wouldn't know it's a trick - everytime?
"Gee - last week, the HAL 9000 passed the Turing test. Well wuddya know - that last algorithm really did the trick. Let's check it out now. UhOh. Today it's not passing the Turing test...so I guess it isn't sentient anymore..."
That we so deceive ourselves does not mean the condition of sentience is or ever was actually present - it simply means that the required conditions to our test have been met at a particular historical juncture - on a given day, the machine has "fooled" us into thinking it can think. It's been programmed in such a way that we are led to believe it has a mind. This doesn't mean it actually has one. With the Turing Test, the machine must simply be able to do what we expect of a human within a certain range of activity. But is it Sentient? Hell No. It doesn't take Albert Einstein to see how nekkid that Emperor is."
I think the turing test is really neat milestone but not really a test of anything but ability in a typical clerk job. I recently saw an AOL commercial touting AIM in which the perky actress said, "AOL instant messaging is better than talking on the phone!"
How thoughtless do you have to be to believe that?
People forget that when they talk on the phone or in person to someone that they are collecting FAR more information than just the words, the spelling, grammar, and the speed with which they are typed. Or maybe a person who would believe that is just very unobservant.
Unlike AOL's fictional character most people I know collect enormous amounts of information during a analog (perhaps digitally carried) converstion. For important decisions I may dwell on the information obtained from just one conversation for days. Every facial muscule, every breath, arm gestures, tone and waver of voice and so on.
I have a friend who will remain nameless who keeps going on dates with girls he meets online. Meeting people online is no problem, but baseing a friendship on typed converstions with little or no analog interation is flawed. Needless to say he keeps getting hurt, even more so than he did in purely meatspace endevors.
I propose a new test. Create a human voice and/or form and if I or someone else who isn't asleep can remain friends with said robot for a year and not know, give their creators the prize.
There is a reason that trust in a good friendship is earned over time. Friendships are far more complex than beauty parlor chatter held through a teletype. We don't need computers to talk about the weather or how bad politics suck. If AI is to be usefull is must be trusted... like a friend.