I don't believe the RIAA can prosecute people for merely being conduits. And since they can't distinguish between those uploading and those merely being conduits, the end users win.
true, but it would be very unlikely given the millions of users that both b and c would belong to the riaa. the system would obviously not let b and c be the same IP, and the chances of the system assigning b and c to two different ip's that the riaa owns are very unlikely. The chain can also be arbitarily long in the event that the RIAA hijacks the protocol.
I propose a new approach to p2p that might help prevent automatic detection. We'll call it p2p2p2p, or peer 2 peer 2 peer 2 peer. Basically, it's a traffic chain from A to D while going through B and C as proxies. This generates much more traffic, but as more users connect, it doesn't really matter. The pros: user A doesn't know who user D is. User B doesn't know who user D is. User C doesn't know that user D is the end user in the chain. Why not go p2p2p instead? The RIAA could be the middle man. But with p2p2p2p, the RIAA could be a middle man but not know who the end user or who the "instigator" is. This completely anonymizes everyone. There is no solid way to prove that user D is the one holding the information, and there is no solid way to prove that A is the instigator. Everyone is potentially a conduit and there is no way to prove that the user is acting as the source or the sink in the chain. (I retain copyright. I might publish a paper on this later on. 3-24-2004)
When these phones can get around the need for a central server if both parties are behind NAT, things will get real exciting. As it is right now, though, if both parties are using NAT, there's no direct way for them to connect unless through a central server, which is not a good idea for numerous reasons. Maybe with the new IP protocol...
What program do you use to watch movies on your iPaq? Also, what movie types do you watch, and how large are the movies in megabytes? What is the resolution?
There must be a point where software makers can no longer say "DISCLAIMER: IF WE BREAK YOUR MACHINE, IT'S NOT OUR FAULT." If you look at every piece of software's license, you'll see a clause like that. Imagine if every industry took that approach:
DISCLAIMER: IF YOUR CAR'S BRAKES FAIL, IT'S NOT OUR FAULT. TOUGH LUCK!
DISCALIMER: IF THIS MEDICINE KILLS YOU, OH WELL.. NOT OUR FAULT!
etc.
Some laws must be passed and software makers must be held accountable- they should no longer be able to hide under the big umbrella of the disclaimer.
After the knock has been verified, open the desired port for a brief time, but only accept incoming connections to that port from the verified IP address. There's still a slight race condition, but at least 99.99999% of the internet is now ineligible to get access.
One of the best way to eliminate most ads (of all types- popups, banners, etc) is to prevent your computer from finding the ads. Most major online advertisers use a very small number of major ad distributors; if you block the small number of distributors, you block out 75% of all advertising. Go here to find out more. This works for all OS's.
This is really the first step towards cyborgs, instant control for fighter pilots, enhanced soldier response, etc. When you stop to think about the potential, it's pretty fascinating and a bit scary.
No matter what happens with the patching, it is absolutely imperative that voters receive a hardcopy of their voting decision to *verify* that the machine voted correctly AND to provide a way for a manual recount. Right now, this is not mandatory, and until it is, this kind of voting is not 100% trust-worthy.
In the amount of time it takes for a successful transmission of just a few bytes over infrared, the pentium machine would have probably ran several thousand iterations. Infrared is horribly slow, regardless if you're just sending a few bytes at a time.
>Note: The information transmitted in this Notice is intended only for the >person or entity to which it is addressed and may contain confidential >and/or privileged material. Any review, reproduction, retransmission, >dissemination or other use of, or taking of any action in reliance upon, >this information by persons or entities other than the intended recipient >is prohibited. If you received this in error, please contact the sender >and delete the material from all computers.
Slashdot Mirror
I don't believe the RIAA can prosecute people for merely being conduits. And since they can't distinguish between those uploading and those merely being conduits, the end users win.
The reason is so that other people can't claim copyright/patent and then sue the hell out of anyone who implements this.
Not entirely; freenet is similar, yes, but this approach does not need either temporary storage on a harddrive or encryption.
true, but it would be very unlikely given the millions of users that both b and c would belong to the riaa. the system would obviously not let b and c be the same IP, and the chances of the system assigning b and c to two different ip's that the riaa owns are very unlikely. The chain can also be arbitarily long in the event that the RIAA hijacks the protocol.
I propose a new approach to p2p that might help prevent automatic detection. We'll call it p2p2p2p, or peer 2 peer 2 peer 2 peer. Basically, it's a traffic chain from A to D while going through B and C as proxies. This generates much more traffic, but as more users connect, it doesn't really matter. The pros: user A doesn't know who user D is. User B doesn't know who user D is. User C doesn't know that user D is the end user in the chain. Why not go p2p2p instead? The RIAA could be the middle man. But with p2p2p2p, the RIAA could be a middle man but not know who the end user or who the "instigator" is. This completely anonymizes everyone. There is no solid way to prove that user D is the one holding the information, and there is no solid way to prove that A is the instigator. Everyone is potentially a conduit and there is no way to prove that the user is acting as the source or the sink in the chain. (I retain copyright. I might publish a paper on this later on. 3-24-2004)
Musicians who are interested in this might also be interested in the creative commons license.
If you thought politicians were bad, now even NANOTUBES are spinning yarn.
When these phones can get around the need for a central server if both parties are behind NAT, things will get real exciting. As it is right now, though, if both parties are using NAT, there's no direct way for them to connect unless through a central server, which is not a good idea for numerous reasons. Maybe with the new IP protocol...
What program do you use to watch movies on your iPaq? Also, what movie types do you watch, and how large are the movies in megabytes? What is the resolution?
There must be a point where software makers can no longer say "DISCLAIMER: IF WE BREAK YOUR MACHINE, IT'S NOT OUR FAULT." If you look at every piece of software's license, you'll see a clause like that. Imagine if every industry took that approach:
DISCLAIMER: IF YOUR CAR'S BRAKES FAIL, IT'S NOT OUR FAULT. TOUGH LUCK!
DISCALIMER: IF THIS MEDICINE KILLS YOU, OH WELL.. NOT OUR FAULT!
etc.
Some laws must be passed and software makers must be held accountable- they should no longer be able to hide under the big umbrella of the disclaimer.
Windows Key + R brings up the Run window.
And on that note, some other interesting windows key combinations:
WK+D - shows the desktop. Pressing WK+D again will restore the windows if you haven't opened up any other window.
WK+M - minimizes all windows.
WK+L - locks the terminal or presents you with the logoff screen, depends on your OS.
WK+F1 - Brings up the windows help and support center.
WK+B - Sends the keyboard focus to the task bar.
WK+F - Brings up the Find window.
WK+E - Starts a new Explorer window.
WK+U - Brings up the Utility window.
Probably a few others, but I can't think of them right now.
-v
(living in newark, de.. resume is slightly outdated)
okay, i'll bite... pianoman a@t ksu.edu www.cis.ksu.edu/~bbp9857/resume.html
Now if only we can get these for vocalists...
After the knock has been verified, open the desired port for a brief time, but only accept incoming connections to that port from the verified IP address. There's still a slight race condition, but at least 99.99999% of the internet is now ineligible to get access.
Something tells me that "640K of memory should be enough for anybody" is not going to cut it...
One of the best way to eliminate most ads (of all types- popups, banners, etc) is to prevent your computer from finding the ads. Most major online advertisers use a very small number of major ad distributors; if you block the small number of distributors, you block out 75% of all advertising. Go here to find out more. This works for all OS's.
This is really the first step towards cyborgs, instant control for fighter pilots, enhanced soldier response, etc. When you stop to think about the potential, it's pretty fascinating and a bit scary.
All hell would break loose if the two competing sites started archiving each other!
No matter what happens with the patching, it is absolutely imperative that voters receive a hardcopy of their voting decision to *verify* that the machine voted correctly AND to provide a way for a manual recount. Right now, this is not mandatory, and until it is, this kind of voting is not 100% trust-worthy.
In the amount of time it takes for a successful transmission of just a few bytes over infrared, the pentium machine would have probably ran several thousand iterations. Infrared is horribly slow, regardless if you're just sending a few bytes at a time.
That's really strange.. this was supposed to be posted to a different story.
And at the end of this article...
>Note: The information transmitted in this Notice is intended only for the
>person or entity to which it is addressed and may contain confidential
>and/or privileged material. Any review, reproduction, retransmission,
>dissemination or other use of, or taking of any action in reliance upon,
>this information by persons or entities other than the intended recipient
>is prohibited. If you received this in error, please contact the sender
>and delete the material from all computers.
BWAHAHAHA!
Now I have an excuse when I show up to work drunk...
"But beer, boss does the body good," I exclaim as I show my boss an upside down picture of the revised food pyramid.
Everyone computer scientist knows about the No Free Lunch Theorem, so be leery!