I would never have said that before reading the article but this tells a lot:
"Vonage, which has around 2.2 million customers, says that it loses about 2.5% of its customers a month, or about 650,000 a year. That's why it is imperative to add new customers constantly, the company has argued."
No matter how many slashdotter are happy with their vonage service, if they are loosing 2.5% of existing customers a month, this can only mean that the service is just not good enough. Or at least it seems to me... To be fair I would be curious to see how other phone companies numbers...
So if they are keeping themselve on life support with constant influx of new users, thanks to their clever ads, I dont think this could last forever, even if Verizon was not pushing them over the grave....
As much as I think some cops are abusing their powers in those situation, I think ultimately their employer should be responsible.
They are the one paying them for doing that. They are the one who should handle the problem.
You cant tell to a cop: you need to run red lights and go fast to catch the bad guy, but dont get into an accident or you are fired.
The police departments knows there is a risk, its a calculated risk. I dont think one particular officer should be responsible for following the rules and doing his job. Its not fair for him, if he is just doing what all other cops are doing, but he is the unlucky one. It should not be a loterry.
I personally think police car pursuits should be forbidden, and thats it. There are many more safer ways to stop drivers. Pursuit is just too dangerous.
If the reading "4" means a value between 3 and 5, then what does the reading (or writing) "5000" means ? Some could argue it means a value between 4000 and 6000. But I would argue it means a value between 4999 and 5001. A value between 4000 and 6000 should be noted "5K" or "5*10^3", or even to be more correct "0.5*10^4"
Lets go further: "4"*1200 (exact 1200) is a value between "3"*1200 and "5"*1200, that is between 3600 and 6000.
This is neither "5000" or "5K".
If you read or write 4, or 4.0 or 4.00000 this doesnt say anything about precision, unless you already have described your notations, or referenced a spec that does.
Actually... bottle water is an example of successful MARKETING... and not much else. Bottle water is 1000x more expensive than tap. FDA regulations on bottle water are much less strict than EPA's on tap water. Studies shows that tap water quality is actually better than many bottled water. A lot of bottled water actually come from taps and not from srings
It might depends where you live or what brand you buy, but really, the advantage of bottled water are mostly overblown compared to the price...
Hum... are you saying I can download or buy the Fairplay spec somewhere ?
Are you saying somebody can implement a FairPlay compatible music server ? Are you saying somebody can implement a FairPlay compatible music player on my linux PC ?
All this without requiring reverse engineering?
I believe somebody can do all this with Marlin, as long as you they pay the required licensing fees of course.... That is very different from FairPlay I believe...
Open DRM does exist. Its called Marlin. Okay nobody uses it, but it proves its doable. If Apple was coming out tomorrow saying: "we will now use Marlin for our DRM needs", this would take off.
The article has a good overview of how iTunes works. But nothing in how-it-works proscribe a licensable or open DRM. And you know, they all work the same. The Zune DRM, the PlayForSure DRM, FairPlay and this Marlin, they could all be explained with the same slides. You have a master key for the content, and you encrypt the master key with a user's key.
FairPlay and Zune: Non Licensable and Proprietary PlayForSure: Licensable and Proprietary Marlin: Open
The reason why FairPlay is winning has nothing to do with the fact that it is proprietary and completely closed. Its winning because they were there first, and executed very well.
Apple need to control the DRM? Why?
So it is more secure ? Not really: they are not protecting their own IP, their are just doing it for the studios. So what's so crucial to protect the content that bad. The studios dont even care that much. Look, FairPlay is broken as is PlayForSure, did the studio sue them? No. Did Apple actually fixed iTunes? No, the current iTunes is still vulnerable. I heard Apple is already ready with the next iTunes generation but are holding off the upgrade until they take heat from the studios or they have another reason to upgrade.
For the liability ? Actually, I think if the Studio approved an open-drm and Apple respected the Robustness rules, then why would Apple be bothered? Right now Apple is shouldering alone the legal responsability for the design and their implementation. If they were using an open-drm they would only be liable for their own implementation.
To keep it simple? Trust me, I saw an implementation of Marlin, running on a PSP, and actually tested it. It was very very very user friendly. I know the demo I used was polished, but it means it is possible, and I would not believe that Apple could not do the same. Please somebody send a journalist to Intertrust (the people who demoed this to me) to witness what they can do.
To keep cost down ? I believe it is cheaper to implement a spec than to write your own spec, and implement it. Apple is still hiring more people in the fairplay team. It is still costing them developers. If Apple was using an open interoperable DRM on their iPod, they could connect to any store. And since Apple does not make any money from the store (right?), they would save even more money.
Yeah, and hopefully whatever information is embeded (content id, user id), is also digitally signed, so you know it has not been embedded by some hacker.
So if you buy several copies and mix them, the result is that you get several marks. Even easier for the content owner to track you.
A good watermarking solution is resistant to many kinds of processing, including re-encoding.
Thats the whole challenge.
Off course the watermark might not be resistant to extremely destructive transformation such as downscaling from HD to QCIF, but then who cares about pirated QCIF video ? But certainly a very accurate transcoding would not affect the watermark.
Current watermarking technologies are very much dependant on proprietary algorithm.
Actually, you also probably underestimate the number of contributors and copyright holders in all those FSF projects.
I know that in theory contributions to FSF projects are required to have a Copyright assignement to the FSF, so that FSF probably is the only copyright holder, but the fact is the FSF leadership cannot just decide to switch all their project to GPLv3 if this is going to piss off active mainteners.
So I assume that switching will happen on a project by project basis and will be driven by mainteners rather than the FSF leadership.
For big projects switching may prove controversial and could lead to forks...
Steal from The rich who stole from the poor and give back to the poor.
Thats basically what it is (assuming those companies are really bad)
Bad Corp make money by making Worker miserable. Then Gates Foundation get a bit of this money (investement returns) Then they give that money to the miserable Worker.
The question is how much money did stay in the Rich guys hand ?
What make you think its even remotely possible to build such a machine (in any shape or form) with a budget of $1.2M?
Also which location get one transaction every 2 minutes ? Even a busy supermarket cashier doesnt get a transaction every 2 minutes. Assuming you were trying to plant your device into a busy place like a supermarket, your device would need to look similar in size to the other readers. This add to the difficulty. You will also need to have a sytem to collect your chips, and track which chip was for which pin, without any of the customers or any of your coworkers or supervisor notcing.
You might try to get everybody (or at least the important people) in your store to be part of the scam, but this is going to reduce your profits, and increase your risks.
Also, you need to create the fake cards and use them quickly before they get deactivated by the owner noticing all calling is bank. I would say you have less than 12 hours. Since you still need somebody at the register processing cards, you need another team to create the fake cards and use them.
Even if you were able to do all that, think about the trail you are leaving behind, and how hard it is going to avoid the FBI when they come after you.
It should be easy for them to see that, for all the de-chipped cards, the last transaction was made at your location. Also it will be difficult to hide your tracks if you do 1200 transactions a day with your "fake" cards. The best way not to leave a trail is probably to get cash at ATMs, but pretty much all ATM have cameras so you or your team better be cleaver about it...
In brief: there is no way you could setup a profitable operation and get away with it. (And i didnt even scratch the surface of the logistic involved).
There are much more efficient ways to make money (legally and illegaly).
Slashdot Mirror
Come on, nobody should ever need anything but a 80 columns ascii terminal.
Kerning is a scam to destroy ascii artists !!
I would never have said that before reading the article but this tells a lot:
"Vonage, which has around 2.2 million customers, says that it loses about 2.5% of its customers a month, or about 650,000 a year. That's why it is imperative to add new customers constantly, the company has argued."
No matter how many slashdotter are happy with their vonage service, if they are loosing 2.5% of existing customers a month, this can only mean that the service is just not good enough. Or at least it seems to me... To be fair I would be curious to see how other phone companies numbers...
So if they are keeping themselve on life support with constant influx of new users, thanks to their clever ads, I dont think this could last forever, even if Verizon was not pushing them over the grave....
Its all about service.
I do not agree...
As much as I think some cops are abusing their powers in those situation, I think ultimately their employer should be responsible.
They are the one paying them for doing that. They are the one who should handle the problem.
You cant tell to a cop: you need to run red lights and go fast to catch the bad guy, but dont get into an accident or you are fired.
The police departments knows there is a risk, its a calculated risk. I dont think one particular officer should be responsible for following the rules and doing his job. Its not fair for him, if he is just doing what all other cops are doing, but he is the unlucky one. It should not be a loterry.
I personally think police car pursuits should be forbidden, and thats it. There are many more safer ways to stop drivers. Pursuit is just too dangerous.
Its interesting to note that Matsushita and Toshiba compete in many areas (eg: BluRay vs HD-DVD), but can still collaborate on some other products...
Yet so much easier to bomb, train or subways...
Paris, London, Madrid,...
I call BS:
If the reading "4" means a value between 3 and 5, then what does the reading (or writing) "5000" means ?
Some could argue it means a value between 4000 and 6000. But I would argue it means a value between 4999 and 5001.
A value between 4000 and 6000 should be noted "5K" or "5*10^3", or even to be more correct "0.5*10^4"
Lets go further: "4"*1200 (exact 1200) is a value between "3"*1200 and "5"*1200, that is between 3600 and 6000.
This is neither "5000" or "5K".
If you read or write 4, or 4.0 or 4.00000 this doesnt say anything about precision, unless you already have described your notations, or referenced a spec that does.
Be more explicit please...
If i understand what they are asking is that they could add a clause such as:
(1) "If you ever made this kind of patent deal in relation to any GPL software, you are prohibited from using this GPLv3 software"
Or if they should stick to:
(2) "You cannot make this kind of patent deal on this GPLv3 software without loosing your license to said GPLv3 software"
Off course, "this kind of patent deal" would be defined in details somewhere...
Correct me if I'm wrong.
You are free to walk. (for the time being).
Actually... bottle water is an example of successful MARKETING... and not much else.
Bottle water is 1000x more expensive than tap.
FDA regulations on bottle water are much less strict than EPA's on tap water.
Studies shows that tap water quality is actually better than many bottled water.
A lot of bottled water actually come from taps and not from srings
It might depends where you live or what brand you buy, but really, the advantage of bottled water are mostly overblown compared to the price...
> Oh yes, I am well aware that the USA is actually a republic and not a direct democracy.
Hum ? This should probably read:
> Oh yes, I am well aware that the USA is actually a republic BUT not a direct democracy.
Otherwise you seem to imply that a Republic cannot be a direct democracy, which is not true.
Hum... are you saying I can download or buy the Fairplay spec somewhere ?
.... That is very different from FairPlay I believe...
Are you saying somebody can implement a FairPlay compatible music server ?
Are you saying somebody can implement a FairPlay compatible music player on my linux PC ?
All this without requiring reverse engineering?
I believe somebody can do all this with Marlin, as long as you they pay the required licensing fees of course
I dont know where to start...
Open DRM does exist. Its called Marlin. Okay nobody uses it, but it proves its doable. If Apple was coming out tomorrow saying: "we will now use Marlin for our DRM needs", this would take off.
The article has a good overview of how iTunes works. But nothing in how-it-works proscribe a licensable or open
DRM.
And you know, they all work the same. The Zune DRM, the PlayForSure DRM, FairPlay and this Marlin, they could all be explained with the same slides. You have a master key for the content, and you encrypt the master key with a user's key.
FairPlay and Zune: Non Licensable and Proprietary
PlayForSure: Licensable and Proprietary
Marlin: Open
The reason why FairPlay is winning has nothing to do with the fact that it is proprietary and completely closed. Its winning because they were there first, and executed very well.
Apple need to control the DRM? Why?
So it is more secure ? Not really: they are not protecting their own IP, their are just doing it for the studios. So what's so crucial to protect the content that bad. The studios dont even care that much. Look, FairPlay is broken as is PlayForSure, did the studio sue them? No. Did Apple actually fixed iTunes? No, the current iTunes is still vulnerable. I heard Apple is already ready with the next iTunes generation but are holding off the upgrade until they take heat from the studios or they have another reason to upgrade.
For the liability ? Actually, I think if the Studio approved an open-drm and Apple respected the Robustness rules, then why would Apple be bothered? Right now Apple is shouldering alone the legal responsability for the design and their implementation. If they were using an open-drm they would only be liable for their own implementation.
To keep it simple? Trust me, I saw an implementation of Marlin, running on a PSP, and actually tested it. It was very very very user friendly. I know the demo I used was polished, but it means it is possible, and I would not believe that Apple could not do the same. Please somebody send a journalist to Intertrust (the people who demoed this to me) to witness what they can do.
To keep cost down ? I believe it is cheaper to implement a spec than to write your own spec, and implement it. Apple is still hiring more people in the fairplay team. It is still costing them developers. If Apple was using an open interoperable DRM on their iPod, they could connect to any store. And since Apple does not make any money from the store (right?), they would save even more money.
More information about the Marlin DRM: http://www.marlin-community.com/
Intertrust is the company behind it: http://www.intertrust.com/
Ah... I love watching pixels... I used to watch movies, but nowadays they are all crap, so I ended up watching pixels... So much easier on my brain...
It applies to Sales of Goods for sure, but how do you return a Service that has already been rendered ?
And also is digital bits really a "Good" ?
Digital download is "Information". Can you return Information ? You can return the Media if there is one. But in this case there is no Media.
... and stop dicking around.
If iTunes is only 3% of iPods songs, why does Apple care ?
Close the store, let the labels and Microsoft figure out a way to sell songs online...
Meanwhile, we'll just Rip It....
But frankly, I think jobs is mainly posturing to shield himself from the lawsuits.
Funny he didnt mention other medium... DRM free video anyone ?.. What about DRM free iPhone ?
Yeah... and Bill Gates just commited perjury...cool... Send Bill to the Gulag !!!
I'm european, I live in the US, but it doesnt matter....
I think the european are being stupid on this one. You cant legislate technology.
Microsoft tried to have an open DRM (Windows Media DRM) and they are failing miserably.
Just stay away from iTunes if you dont like their DRM.
Yeah, and hopefully whatever information is embeded (content id, user id), is also digitally signed, so you know it has not been embedded by some hacker.
So if you buy several copies and mix them, the result is that you get several marks. Even easier for the content owner to track you.
A good watermarking solution is resistant to many kinds of processing, including re-encoding.
Thats the whole challenge.
Off course the watermark might not be resistant to extremely destructive transformation such as downscaling from HD to QCIF, but then who cares about pirated QCIF video ? But certainly a very accurate transcoding would not affect the watermark.
Current watermarking technologies are very much dependant on proprietary algorithm.
Actually, you also probably underestimate the number of contributors and copyright holders in all those FSF projects.
I know that in theory contributions to FSF projects are required to have a Copyright assignement to the FSF, so that FSF probably is the only copyright holder, but the fact is the FSF leadership cannot just decide to switch all their project to GPLv3 if this is going to piss off active mainteners.
So I assume that switching will happen on a project by project basis and will be driven by mainteners rather than the FSF leadership.
For big projects switching may prove controversial and could lead to forks...
Since we are talking about law, how about you look for some legal terms such as:
m )
Accessory : http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Accessory_(legal_ter
Intent : http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intent
Knowingly profiting from a stolen good, even without ever handling that good, is illegal.
I'm not saying it applie here, IANAL, but I hope that now you can see how, from a legal stand point, they can be held accountable.
Steal from The rich who stole from the poor and give back to the poor.
Thats basically what it is (assuming those companies are really bad)
Bad Corp make money by making Worker miserable.
Then Gates Foundation get a bit of this money (investement returns)
Then they give that money to the miserable Worker.
The question is how much money did stay in the Rich guys hand ?
Because thats all that matters now.... I want an iPhone now, for cheap!
What make you think its even remotely possible to build such a machine (in any shape or form) with a budget of $1.2M?
Also which location get one transaction every 2 minutes ? Even a busy supermarket cashier doesnt get a transaction every 2 minutes. Assuming you were trying to plant your device into a busy place like a supermarket, your device would need to look similar in size to the other readers. This add to the difficulty. You will also need to have a sytem to collect your chips, and track which chip was for which pin, without any of the customers or any of your coworkers or supervisor notcing.
You might try to get everybody (or at least the important people) in your store to be part of the scam, but this is going to reduce your profits, and increase your risks.
Also, you need to create the fake cards and use them quickly before they get deactivated by the owner noticing all calling is bank. I would say you have less than 12 hours. Since you still need somebody at the register processing cards, you need another team to create the fake cards and use them.
Even if you were able to do all that, think about the trail you are leaving behind, and how hard it is going to avoid the FBI when they come after you.
It should be easy for them to see that, for all the de-chipped cards, the last transaction was made at your location. Also it will be difficult to hide your tracks if you do 1200 transactions a day with your "fake" cards.
The best way not to leave a trail is probably to get cash at ATMs, but pretty much all ATM have cameras so you or your team better be cleaver about it...
In brief: there is no way you could setup a profitable operation and get away with it. (And i didnt even scratch the surface of the logistic involved).
There are much more efficient ways to make money (legally and illegaly).
So what does exactly the crooked retailer can do with my PIN but without my Card ?