...Which works fine as long as you are in HTML... but what about citations? There has to be some sort of portable way to reference specific portions of the document no matter where it is printed or accessed.
An anchor link isn't typically visible (though you could make it so - with a section number for instance;-) and as such is not portable to other media.
Let's not forget DRM (i.e.: copyright enforced by code / encryption). As the content industries move towards greater control over digital media they effectively sidestep the need for stringent copyright. In this absolute control scenario, access to information becomes a matter of market forces, whereby only those works that have some market value and/or are dutifully maintained by their owners will survive.
Is summed up here:
"Networks like Kazaa, Gnutella, iMesh, Grokster and Morpheus, among others, are encouraging and helping individuals to distribute perfect digital copies of music to millions of strangers simultaneously." (my emphasis added)
Ask any audiophile if a 128 kbps MP3 is a perfect copy and they will laugh at you.
The RIAA depends on this misinformation to make their caseif people are sharing "perfect" copies, they can call it distribution and seek punishment as such.
This is also the argument they made for levying fees against webcasters, but again, is a 40 kbps Real Audio stream anywhere close to "perfect"? Why do webcasters have to pay distribution fees while radio broadcasters don't?
As with various patent fiascos, attach the implication that digital is somehow different and you have a legal knowledge gap that the dominant industry will gleefully exploit.
The recording industry is a dinosaur that has met it's asteroid.
Re:Things PHP is missing
on
PHP Cookbook
·
· Score: 2, Informative
The PEAR packages, usually bundled with the distribution, would take care of the first two: http://pear.php.net/
Big Bang is just one possible explanation
on
One of Many
·
· Score: 2, Interesting
I just finished reading a book by Eric J. Lerner called "The Big Bang Never Happened" (yes, I was skeptical at first as well)
It actually turns out to make some very good points about the rise of Big Bang cosmology. In a nutshell:
- The earliest incarnation of the Big Bang theory was posited by a Belgian priest, Georges-Henri Lemaitre, in his "primeval atom" theory, based on Einstein's equations and supported only in observation by the Hubble redshift (expansion). This theory very conveniently supported the Christian dogma of creation "ex nihilo" (out of nothing).
- The revision(s) of this original theory had only tenuously been supported by observed phenomenon. Contemporary cosmology relies quite heavily on mathematical deduction; trying to make the universe fit the theory (faith) as opposed to the other way around (scientific method); a conflict which is apparent through the history of science and which Lerner pounds soundly into your head.
- The Big Bang is only one of many solutions to Einstein's equations and has been persued mostly out of a desire to seek the most beautiful and sleek solutions (and remember - beauty is in the eye of the beholder, or beer-holder, but I digress)
- The current paradigm supports the assertion that the universe must be closed with a cosmological constant (a self-confessed afterthought by Einstein) near or equal to one. This assertion demands that there must be much more matter in the universe than we have observed, ultimately sending particle physicists on the hunt for so-called "Dark Matter" (which has yet to be confirmed or observed). In the meantime, other theories exist that have no need to inflate the mass of the universe artificially and can explain formation of structures at the observed mass density (a density that adjusts the cosmological constant to about.02-.2)
- Alternate theories that are based on observation have been summarily dismissed by the 'status quo'. These theories have arisen from the assertion that the laws of physica in the universe behave the same way as they do here on earth (and where we can observe) and that self-similarity is a tool that can be used to model structures in the laboratory (or in-silico) to explain structures and processes on the universal to the sub-microscopic level.
- Big Bang theory posits a great many bizarre phenomena that can only be mathematically verfied and have not been observed or duplicated. Cosmology has moved far away from the realm of scientific method, instead relying on the exotic world of mathematics (nothing wrong with math, unless you are trying to explain the universe without confirming by observation)
And on and on... he does a far better job of explaining it all (full disclosure: I'm not a cosmologist) -- read the book (or don't).
It is my opinion that the RIAA is not even entitled to payments; here's my reasoning:
DMCA addresses distribution of "perfect" digital copies of data/music; CARP is the rate structure to compensate document owners for distribution via Webcasting.
If the distributed media cannot be retained by the end user, or is below "perfect" quality, these fees should not apply as the copy is non-existent or not perfect.
When assessing the means of distribution, quality must be taken into account. FM radio is not perfect quality; neither is a 40 kbps or less Real Audio stream. Similarly, a 128 kbps or less MP3 file distributed via a P2P system is not distribution of a perfect product. Distribution of a quality product is no longer occurring; therefore distribution compensation is not warranted. Authorship rules still apply, as do appropriate broadcast fees, such as those paid by radio broadcasters.
Slashdot Mirror
It's HTML. You use a named anchor (#) link.
...Which works fine as long as you are in HTML... but what about citations? There has to be some sort of portable way to reference specific portions of the document no matter where it is printed or accessed.
An anchor link isn't typically visible (though you could make it so - with a section number for instance ;-) and as such is not portable to other media.
If anyone wants to get up to speed on where all of this royalty mess came from (through 2003), here's a paper I wrote on the subject:
The Digital Performance Right and its Effects on Diversity in Webcasting
The rates have been successfully challenged and averted in the recent past, and I am confident that they can be again.
Let's not forget DRM (i.e.: copyright enforced by code / encryption). As the content industries move towards greater control over digital media they effectively sidestep the need for stringent copyright. In this absolute control scenario, access to information becomes a matter of market forces, whereby only those works that have some market value and/or are dutifully maintained by their owners will survive.
e ss_and_the_cultural_record
Here's a shameless plug for a paper I wrote on this very subject:
http://thomas.kiehnefamily.us/technologies_of_acc
Is summed up here:
"Networks like Kazaa, Gnutella, iMesh, Grokster and Morpheus, among others, are encouraging and helping individuals to distribute perfect digital copies of music to millions of strangers simultaneously." (my emphasis added)
Ask any audiophile if a 128 kbps MP3 is a perfect copy and they will laugh at you.
The RIAA depends on this misinformation to make their caseif people are sharing "perfect" copies, they can call it distribution and seek punishment as such.
This is also the argument they made for levying fees against webcasters, but again, is a 40 kbps Real Audio stream anywhere close to "perfect"? Why do webcasters have to pay distribution fees while radio broadcasters don't?
As with various patent fiascos, attach the implication that digital is somehow different and you have a legal knowledge gap that the dominant industry will gleefully exploit.
The recording industry is a dinosaur that has met it's asteroid.
The PEAR packages, usually bundled with the distribution, would take care of the first two:
http://pear.php.net/
I just finished reading a book by Eric J. Lerner called "The Big Bang Never Happened" (yes, I was skeptical at first as well)
.02-.2)
It actually turns out to make some very good points about the rise of Big Bang cosmology. In a nutshell:
- The earliest incarnation of the Big Bang theory was posited by a Belgian priest, Georges-Henri Lemaitre, in his "primeval atom" theory, based on Einstein's equations and supported only in observation by the Hubble redshift (expansion). This theory very conveniently supported the Christian dogma of creation "ex nihilo" (out of nothing).
- The revision(s) of this original theory had only tenuously been supported by observed phenomenon. Contemporary cosmology relies quite heavily on mathematical deduction; trying to make the universe fit the theory (faith) as opposed to the other way around (scientific method); a conflict which is apparent through the history of science and which Lerner pounds soundly into your head.
- The Big Bang is only one of many solutions to Einstein's equations and has been persued mostly out of a desire to seek the most beautiful and sleek solutions (and remember - beauty is in the eye of the beholder, or beer-holder, but I digress)
- The current paradigm supports the assertion that the universe must be closed with a cosmological constant (a self-confessed afterthought by Einstein) near or equal to one. This assertion demands that there must be much more matter in the universe than we have observed, ultimately sending particle physicists on the hunt for so-called "Dark Matter" (which has yet to be confirmed or observed). In the meantime, other theories exist that have no need to inflate the mass of the universe artificially and can explain formation of structures at the observed mass density (a density that adjusts the cosmological constant to about
- Alternate theories that are based on observation have been summarily dismissed by the 'status quo'. These theories have arisen from the assertion that the laws of physica in the universe behave the same way as they do here on earth (and where we can observe) and that self-similarity is a tool that can be used to model structures in the laboratory (or in-silico) to explain structures and processes on the universal to the sub-microscopic level.
- Big Bang theory posits a great many bizarre phenomena that can only be mathematically verfied and have not been observed or duplicated. Cosmology has moved far away from the realm of scientific method, instead relying on the exotic world of mathematics (nothing wrong with math, unless you are trying to explain the universe without confirming by observation)
And on and on... he does a far better job of explaining it all (full disclosure: I'm not a cosmologist) -- read the book (or don't).
-t_kiehne
It is my opinion that the RIAA is not even entitled to payments; here's my reasoning:
DMCA addresses distribution of "perfect" digital copies of data/music; CARP is the rate structure to compensate document owners for distribution via Webcasting.
If the distributed media cannot be retained by the end user, or is below "perfect" quality, these fees should not apply as the copy is non-existent or not perfect.
When assessing the means of distribution, quality must be taken into account. FM radio is not perfect quality; neither is a 40 kbps or less Real Audio stream. Similarly, a 128 kbps or less MP3 file distributed via a P2P system is not distribution of a perfect product. Distribution of a quality product is no longer occurring; therefore distribution compensation is not warranted. Authorship rules still apply, as do appropriate broadcast fees, such as those paid by radio broadcasters.
t_kiehne
...the choice is clear -- support your local, non-corporate, public/college radio stations.
What? You don't have any in your area, you say? Better get to work in taking back your airwaves!
t_kiehne
... for the fire: http://www.pbs.org/cringely/pulpit/pulpit20010802. html