Why is this so hard? Really, if you are the music company and you have the individual channels of the song, then you can do remarkable clean channel encoding and mix them together on the client side. I believe this is what mp4 does.. someone back me up here. So think about it. If music companies and individual artists (the only folk who can do this) produce music files that are better encoded and drastically smaller than "ripped" music files, wouldn't we pay for them? The RIAA is running around talking about Napster and laws and copy control but they really can't give us a good reason why we would want to pay money for the official stuff instead of grabbing the free stuff. Isn't this a reason? or am I out on a limb here?
Hmm.. for some reason I think that if the muzak corps started producing 900k music files that sound better than today's mp3's people will accept whatever player that have to download to play them and if that player can only be written by people with licenses from Fraunhofer then they will make a lot of cash. Especially if they have some stupid form of copy control embedded.
why would they be pissed? I'm sure it will contain some "copy protection" scheme in the format and they will go sue happy over anyone who ignores the "copy bit".
I don't believe you can actually say that we've reached the limit of audio compression. What kind of a researcher are you? Why bother doing a PHD about a "mature" technology that has no where to go? Sheesh.. The lower limit (for size) has already been defined. Have a look at MOD/S3M files. These are systems which store the actual placement of samples into different channels at different frequency/pitch. ie. they actually contain the composition of the song. Reading an S3M file is like reading sheet music with a list of instruments to play. You can get high quality songs, similar in quality to studio recordings for under 300k (although most are a meg these days). These are full length songs. A lot of the S3M's that are produced today contain too many samples which blow out the size. For example, an artist may include the same sample at two different pitches because he/she is not aware that they can use the format to change the pitch. We're nowhere even close to developing a system that can reduce an audio stream to the component instruments and a score format like S3M. Well as far as I know. You're the researcher, so tell us, is it even possible? Isn't this where the research should be focused -- on the hard problem?
I was at a reverse engineering conference and happened to sit down next to a guy from the Fraunhofer Institute. They do a lot of research in many different fields and when I asked him about patents he shut up for a minute and then said "yes, we are commercial oriented, that's how we get to do so much interesting research." He didn't seem too happy about it.
Well I'm shocked that they even use it for day to day use. Do they have an MCSE up there? At least none of the critical systems are hooked up. Damn.. Someone needs to fork IP addresses for the NT Server they gotz up there. I can see the headline now "l33t k1dd13 hax0rs IIS"
Captain's Log, Stardate 54324.5: Starfleet Command has directed the Enterprise to do a preliminary exploration of planet M22 in advance of a full research team. Scanners report the atmosphere to be breathable, but are recieving confusing readings with regard to life forms. I am beaming down with a landing party composed of all our chief officers except for poor Scotty.
Supplement: Redshirt Riley has received a head injury, apparently while exploring under a high rock shelf. He reports only hearing a loud sound and jumping before being struck. After examination by Dr. McCoy he has been judged capable of continuing duty.
Anyone happen to have links to the Microsoft system he discussed? I like to think I'm in touch with social norms but this dude really threw me some curve balls. So seriously, here's one more question for you.. What did 90% of your responses actually mean?
I didn't say it. George Orwell said it and he was talking about real capitalist societies and real collectivist societies that he witnessed himself. These are observations what what we as people make of our ideals.
I love the way you use health care as an argument against public goods. Everyone on this forum who lives in a country with health care is shaking his head at your inhumanity.
It's pretty likely that your ISP gets charged per (mega)byte and passes that cost onto you. He is just beting that you wont use more than some average data usage or that for every high data user there will be 10 low data users paying the same amount. One could say that the low data users are subsidising the high data users, one of the biggest complaints to these types of royalty collection schemes.
no.. that's not the way it works. You get charged per megabyte no matter what you are downloading for precisely this reason. Say the ISP adds one cent to every taffic per megabyte they are currently charging. Those cents add up and that's exactly how much they give to the collection agency. It's like a tax on packets. By stripping tags you are not reducing the amount you will pay, you are just screwing your favourite artist which means less of the music you like will be made.
I've worked at two different companies that used linux for billing and IP accounting etc. Not a single one has ever contributed back to the codebase. They download the source, hack it to suit their needs and when they find a bug they bitch and moan until someone else fixes it. If they manage to fix it themselves they don't bother to generate a patch and contribute it. Is this the experience other people have had?
Copy control hasn't worked in the last 20 years and it isn't going to start working now. The day the music industry actually starts suing individuals for their illicit use will be the day anti-copyright zealists declare victory.
Firstly, any restaurant that plays any music of any kind (including tapes and live bands) gets hit with a fee by collection agencies (unless the music is original in which case they just pay the band) and yes, I could assume that there would be ISP's that have a scanner that doesn't allow tagged content through.. but that would result in exactly the same thing, people would use the unmetered ISP's to download tagged content and the people on metered ISP's would be saying that they are subsidising the unmetered users.
As for the issue of ballot stuffing, I doubt that producer could increase his share of the pie any more than the amount that he was charged for by his ISP!
That's not a bad idea. Some how I dont think it will matter though. The ISP is going to be paying for the downloads anyway and you wont be able to do too much balot stuffing.. maybe you can increase your piece of the pie by 0.1%. BTW - I've posted about three times in this group and replied to a dozen or so posts.
wow.. I wish I lived where you live. Most places already have metered downloads. Even if you have an "unlimited" account your ISP is most likely still being metered for their data usage and you can be sure they are passing that cost onto you (probably by either guessing how much you will use or having an "appropriate use policy" that probits large downloads).
Because you are paying per megabyte regardless of what content you are downloading. If you remove the tags from the files you are merely giving the money you have to pay anyway to some other artist (as opposed to the ones you like). So go ahead and encrypt you're file sharing, but you are only doing yourself harm (and your favourite artist).
Slashdot Mirror
Why is this so hard? Really, if you are the music company and you have the individual channels of the song, then you can do remarkable clean channel encoding and mix them together on the client side. I believe this is what mp4 does.. someone back me up here. So think about it. If music companies and individual artists (the only folk who can do this) produce music files that are better encoded and drastically smaller than "ripped" music files, wouldn't we pay for them? The RIAA is running around talking about Napster and laws and copy control but they really can't give us a good reason why we would want to pay money for the official stuff instead of grabbing the free stuff. Isn't this a reason? or am I out on a limb here?
Hmm.. for some reason I think that if the muzak corps started producing 900k music files that sound better than today's mp3's people will accept whatever player that have to download to play them and if that player can only be written by people with licenses from Fraunhofer then they will make a lot of cash. Especially if they have some stupid form of copy control embedded.
why would they be pissed? I'm sure it will contain some "copy protection" scheme in the format and they will go sue happy over anyone who ignores the "copy bit".
I don't believe you can actually say that we've reached the limit of audio compression. What kind of a researcher are you? Why bother doing a PHD about a "mature" technology that has no where to go? Sheesh.. The lower limit (for size) has already been defined. Have a look at MOD/S3M files. These are systems which store the actual placement of samples into different channels at different frequency/pitch. ie. they actually contain the composition of the song. Reading an S3M file is like reading sheet music with a list of instruments to play. You can get high quality songs, similar in quality to studio recordings for under 300k (although most are a meg these days). These are full length songs. A lot of the S3M's that are produced today contain too many samples which blow out the size. For example, an artist may include the same sample at two different pitches because he/she is not aware that they can use the format to change the pitch. We're nowhere even close to developing a system that can reduce an audio stream to the component instruments and a score format like S3M. Well as far as I know. You're the researcher, so tell us, is it even possible? Isn't this where the research should be focused -- on the hard problem?
I was at a reverse engineering conference and happened to sit down next to a guy from the Fraunhofer Institute. They do a lot of research in many different fields and when I asked him about patents he shut up for a minute and then said "yes, we are commercial oriented, that's how we get to do so much interesting research." He didn't seem too happy about it.
Well I'm shocked that they even use it for day to day use. Do they have an MCSE up there? At least none of the critical systems are hooked up. Damn.. Someone needs to fork IP addresses for the NT Server they gotz up there. I can see the headline now "l33t k1dd13 hax0rs IIS"
Heh.. should have posted the URL.
Captain's Log, Stardate 54324.5: Starfleet Command has directed the Enterprise to do a preliminary exploration of planet M22 in advance of a full research team. Scanners report the atmosphere to be breathable, but are recieving confusing readings with regard to life forms. I am beaming down with a landing party composed of all our chief officers except for poor Scotty.
Supplement: Redshirt Riley has received a head injury, apparently while exploring under a high rock shelf. He reports only hearing a loud sound and jumping before being struck. After examination by Dr. McCoy he has been judged capable of continuing duty.
That's an out and out lie. Do you have any proof that there is Windows in Space? I'd like to sue someone if there is.
Anyone happen to have links to the Microsoft system he discussed? I like to think I'm in touch with social norms but this dude really threw me some curve balls. So seriously, here's one more question for you.. What did 90% of your responses actually mean?
I didn't say it. George Orwell said it and he was talking about real capitalist societies and real collectivist societies that he witnessed himself. These are observations what what we as people make of our ideals.
Well this is true.. there would be a lot of protest to such a system and untagging would be a good way to do it.
What system were you reading? He gets charged per byte that he downloads!
I love the way you use health care as an argument against public goods. Everyone on this forum who lives in a country with health care is shaking his head at your inhumanity.
"To be short" - it's a tax.
It's pretty likely that your ISP gets charged per (mega)byte and passes that cost onto you. He is just beting that you wont use more than some average data usage or that for every high data user there will be 10 low data users paying the same amount. One could say that the low data users are subsidising the high data users, one of the biggest complaints to these types of royalty collection schemes.
no.. that's not the way it works. You get charged per megabyte no matter what you are downloading for precisely this reason. Say the ISP adds one cent to every taffic per megabyte they are currently charging. Those cents add up and that's exactly how much they give to the collection agency. It's like a tax on packets. By stripping tags you are not reducing the amount you will pay, you are just screwing your favourite artist which means less of the music you like will be made.
I've worked at two different companies that used linux for billing and IP accounting etc. Not a single one has ever contributed back to the codebase. They download the source, hack it to suit their needs and when they find a bug they bitch and moan until someone else fixes it. If they manage to fix it themselves they don't bother to generate a patch and contribute it. Is this the experience other people have had?
heh.. you can read my response to your unoriginal thought here. (Yes, I'm posting links to myself here!)
Copy control hasn't worked in the last 20 years and it isn't going to start working now. The day the music industry actually starts suing individuals for their illicit use will be the day anti-copyright zealists declare victory.
Firstly, any restaurant that plays any music of any kind (including tapes and live bands) gets hit with a fee by collection agencies (unless the music is original in which case they just pay the band) and yes, I could assume that there would be ISP's that have a scanner that doesn't allow tagged content through.. but that would result in exactly the same thing, people would use the unmetered ISP's to download tagged content and the people on metered ISP's would be saying that they are subsidising the unmetered users.
As for the issue of ballot stuffing, I doubt that producer could increase his share of the pie any more than the amount that he was charged for by his ISP!
That's not a bad idea. Some how I dont think it will matter though. The ISP is going to be paying for the downloads anyway and you wont be able to do too much balot stuffing.. maybe you can increase your piece of the pie by 0.1%. BTW - I've posted about three times in this group and replied to a dozen or so posts.
wow.. I wish I lived where you live. Most places already have metered downloads. Even if you have an "unlimited" account your ISP is most likely still being metered for their data usage and you can be sure they are passing that cost onto you (probably by either guessing how much you will use or having an "appropriate use policy" that probits large downloads).
and I know the americans hate that. You're talking about the tragic of the commons and yes, you can do it.
Because you are paying per megabyte regardless of what content you are downloading. If you remove the tags from the files you are merely giving the money you have to pay anyway to some other artist (as opposed to the ones you like). So go ahead and encrypt you're file sharing, but you are only doing yourself harm (and your favourite artist).