Do they actually enforce the no-servers thing? I mean, do they prevent incoming connections completely at the TCP level? Or do they just say "no no, that would be bad" and check every once in a while to see if you've been bad?
I'm looking into Excite@Home, and I'd at least like to FTP home when I forgot to bring some files to work.
--
I've got 61, and I think I was moderated down a few times to no effect. (not that I care... just that people's moderation seems awfully arbitrary sometimes). Still at 61.
Do you care to speculate on the reason for the cap? Maybe there's a karma tax... Maybe user #1 wants to have the highest karma of all... --
So what happens if someone posts Nazi texts to freenet?
There are an endless number of ways to transmit data over the internet via covert channels. As long as you have a way to exchange any amount of information from the outside, you can figure out a way to get all of it.
Some of those ways can be made user-friendly, anonymous, ubiquitous, and decentralized. Then it's uncontrollable.
--
If you only count normal wear and tear, the first thing that stopped working on my palms was the silk screen writing area. It seems like putting pixels under there would make it even weaker. --
And just because everyone on the road speeds on the highways doesn't mean that speeding isn't illegal and dangerous...
Yeah, it's dangerous. It's also dangerous to drive on the road at all-- some drunk could hit you, no matter how fast you're going.
The point is that most things have costs and risks associated with them, and the public gets to decide which risks they're willing to live with (and which are illegal). Maybe I/they are willing to live with fewer CDs produced if it means that they could get to use more of them. --
Isn't the Napster server just a search engine? Granted, the clients have a protocol that allows them to request files and to serve requested files to other people, but the server is still just a search engine.
So what would happen if some internet search engine figured out a way to provide a very up to date list of all files available via FTP? Up to date enough that the only stale links were computers that had disconnected within the last 5 minutes. And what would happen if this search engine were used by so many "pirates" that the RIAA couldn't keep the number of sites down to a dull roar?
Certainly the RIAA would be up in arms. But would it be the search engine's fault for creating a better service? --
If one is able to make the argument "everything written should be protected by free speech and can be distributed freely", then... it seems like ANYTHING could be distributed. Any program (binary or source), circuit, radio wave, or hunk of matter (if nanotech gets good enough) could be translated into some string of letters and then later recovered, if the coding scheme is known.
I'm not saying that this argument is necssarily a bad one, I just think that it has far more reaching implications than it first appears.
Also, if the law decides that not every string of letters is protected under free speech... then it's not necessarily the string of letters that should be restricted. It's possible that, under coding scheme A, that the string would be decoded as sound waves of a Metallica CD... and under coding scheme B, the string would be decoded as mom's chocolate chip cookies.
To make this point clear, someone could write a program (call it an "unzipper") that takes in the results of the Human Genome Project and spits out the source code to DeCSS or a Metallica MP3. --
And if someone forced you to take the jumper off because it had an indecent image on it, could you claim that they were breaking your protection device and can be sued under DMCA? --
Well, as I stated, there's an assumption that an author should be able to control his/her published works. And RMS tried to back up his argument that they shouldn't necessarily have this right... his argument wasn't based on OSS specificaly, that was just my attempt at karma whoredom.:)
Go back and read RMS's paper... Stealing physical property is a zero-sum game. Unauthorized duplication of information isn't... the author's work becomes less valuable, but it might be the case that the new copy is valuable enough to more than make up the difference. This seems kind of like communism, but I think that the ultimate criteria to any scheme should be "overall good to society".
If your ultimate criteria is "the good of the individual", then one should be allowed to steal, rape, pilage, make obnoxious first posts, and be a karma whore.
It's generally assumed that authors don't have complete control over the usage of their works. For instance, most/.ers would complain loudly if Stephen King required people to stand on their heads and cluck like a chicken before they can read his e-book. So where do you draw the line between the author's rights and the users' rights? --
Mark the above post way up. I'll try to do a poor summary of the article...
The value (to the public) of all published works is [number of published works] x [average value of a published work].
The number of published works can be increased by giving the authors incentives-- potential for earnings because of copyrights. The value of each published work can be increased by allowing anyone to copy it-- If everyone gets to use it, then that particular work realizes its full value to society.
When copyright law was created, it was hard to copy things... the value of a published work was virtually fixed, so the total value to society was higher if more works were created. It was a decision that didn't really need to be made. A common misconception resulted... that authors have complete control over their published works.
However, now that copying takes much less effort, society can choose to increase the amount of copying allowed. The question is whether the increased number of people that could use each work would be worth the fewer number of works that would be published. If the public decided that it's more valuable to freely copy, then copyright law would have to be changed.
Some groups believe that if authors had no monetary incentive to create published works, then no one would publish anything. The OSS movement shows that people have additional reasons to produce and publish works.
On an individual basis, if copying is freely allowed, the net result could be that each individual gets to use MORE works, even if fewer works are being published. --
Yesterday NPR had an interesting commentary on Napster. (paraphrasing, can't find exact quote, they said it much better than I)
They said... Networks were designed to share data, that's what networks do, and it's a very useful thing. Napster is a system that aids in sharing data. So napster seems no different from any network. Napster might aid in finding things, but that's what google etc. do too. Implied in this was that unless the internet is shut down, such data sharing is going to continue because it's a fundamental operation. --
Or, perhaps, network spanners could be designed so that the clients don't have to change anything. For instance, one could make the data on Scour available to Gnutella users by setting up a sort of proxy computer... when a search comes in from Gnutella, search on scour. When someone requests the song from you, download it from scour and then hand it off to whoever requested it. Of course, this computer would use a ton of bandwidth, but if it were incorporated into some client, and maybe 10% of the clients had the proxy, then it might not too bad.
How would you do this on P2P systems that don't send out a "do you have this file?" request to every client? I guess with P2S2P systems like napster, the proxy could be incorporated into the server...
In addition to letting users use any client they like, proxies would allow P2P networks to span more areas. If some firewall manages to stop one particular P2P system, then another P2P system could be used to reconnect the island to the main network. --
They took the time to display the links, and had the person actually say each link
Hrm... couldn't this be construed as soon-to-be-illegal? Napster simply gives directions to data, helping people to infringe copyrights 80% of the time. So Fox-local gives directions to programs which give directions to data, helping people to infringe copyrights sometimes. --
As far as I can see, if the fans want an easy way to find new and interesting crap, and the authors want an easy way for new people to discover their crap, then big corporations shouldn't make it necessary for consumers to boycott the whole process just because of the middlemen (or women). --
Amen. Some have claimed that IrDA wasn't as significant as it could have been because there wasn't enough software that could talk to each over it.
Bluetooth is being touted as two things. The first is as a replacement for wires. This is certainly happening now. But just because you can string a wire between two devices doesn't mean they'll talk to each other.
The second thing Bluetooth is being touted as is a way to do dynamic networking, and it will make everything talk to everything. However, even TCP/IP isn't included in the spec, so some devices my choose to not support it. In the area of service discovery, there are there different standards that are being pushed... Sun's, Microsoft's, and an open group pushing Salutation. I like Jini the best because its drivers can be used on any platform and the devices can carry their drivers with them. But it doesn't specify a common transport.
Bluetooth seems to only make the Physical, DataLink, and Network layers standard. With more than half of the 7 layer burrito in limbo, I don't know how the protocol stack can hold up. --
U.S. networks do seem to dominate global Internet topology -- they provide transit for 71.4% of the total skitter paths that neither originate nor end in the U.S.
So Echelon-style spying need not be very sophisticated? Just a couple taps at major backbones... --
Because most people (IMHO) who buy CD's only want 1/3 of the songs on there.
For instance, Metallica has released roughly 12 CD's in the US, but if you searched for them on Napster, you'd be hard pressed to download even 48 distinct songs unless you spend many hours in diligent search. Well... even if you would have done it before the whole Metallica vs. their fans battle. I wasn't able to find 48 distinct songs back then. --
Is there a law against this? If WalMart wants to sell pencils for $20, shouldn't it be allowed to?
I guess the issue is whether or not this falls under "fair use"? Would the MySimons spend money on development and servers if they knew they wouldn't be able to get any revenue from it, even from banner ads? --
Slashdot Mirror
I'm looking into Excite@Home, and I'd at least like to FTP home when I forgot to bring some files to work.
--
C'mon... I thought information wanted to be free. One's heartbeat and GPS loc is simply information. Does this mantra have exceptions?
--
Do you care to speculate on the reason for the cap? Maybe there's a karma tax... Maybe user #1 wants to have the highest karma of all...
--
Meta-moderating can knock you down some, perhaps it was that?
--
Put large scrolling LED sign above each terminal that displays the current URL. Scan for words like "playboy" or "sex" and highlight them.
--
So what happens if someone posts Nazi texts to freenet?
There are an endless number of ways to transmit data over the internet via covert channels. As long as you have a way to exchange any amount of information from the outside, you can figure out a way to get all of it.
Some of those ways can be made user-friendly, anonymous, ubiquitous, and decentralized. Then it's uncontrollable.
--
If you only count normal wear and tear, the first thing that stopped working on my palms was the silk screen writing area. It seems like putting pixels under there would make it even weaker.
--
Carnivore was designed for ISPs that couldn't quickly have such a thing in place. I don't beleive that Carnivore is mandatory...
--
Yeah, it's dangerous. It's also dangerous to drive on the road at all-- some drunk could hit you, no matter how fast you're going.
The point is that most things have costs and risks associated with them, and the public gets to decide which risks they're willing to live with (and which are illegal). Maybe I/they are willing to live with fewer CDs produced if it means that they could get to use more of them.
--
So what would happen if some internet search engine figured out a way to provide a very up to date list of all files available via FTP? Up to date enough that the only stale links were computers that had disconnected within the last 5 minutes. And what would happen if this search engine were used by so many "pirates" that the RIAA couldn't keep the number of sites down to a dull roar?
Certainly the RIAA would be up in arms. But would it be the search engine's fault for creating a better service?
--
I'm not saying that this argument is necssarily a bad one, I just think that it has far more reaching implications than it first appears.
Also, if the law decides that not every string of letters is protected under free speech... then it's not necessarily the string of letters that should be restricted. It's possible that, under coding scheme A, that the string would be decoded as sound waves of a Metallica CD... and under coding scheme B, the string would be decoded as mom's chocolate chip cookies.
To make this point clear, someone could write a program (call it an "unzipper") that takes in the results of the Human Genome Project and spits out the source code to DeCSS or a Metallica MP3.
--
And if someone forced you to take the jumper off because it had an indecent image on it, could you claim that they were breaking your protection device and can be sued under DMCA?
--
Go back and read RMS's paper... Stealing physical property is a zero-sum game. Unauthorized duplication of information isn't... the author's work becomes less valuable, but it might be the case that the new copy is valuable enough to more than make up the difference. This seems kind of like communism, but I think that the ultimate criteria to any scheme should be "overall good to society".
If your ultimate criteria is "the good of the individual", then one should be allowed to steal, rape, pilage, make obnoxious first posts, and be a karma whore.
It's generally assumed that authors don't have complete control over the usage of their works. For instance, most
--
The value (to the public) of all published works is [number of published works] x [average value of a published work].
The number of published works can be increased by giving the authors incentives-- potential for earnings because of copyrights. The value of each published work can be increased by allowing anyone to copy it-- If everyone gets to use it, then that particular work realizes its full value to society.
When copyright law was created, it was hard to copy things... the value of a published work was virtually fixed, so the total value to society was higher if more works were created. It was a decision that didn't really need to be made. A common misconception resulted... that authors have complete control over their published works.
However, now that copying takes much less effort, society can choose to increase the amount of copying allowed. The question is whether the increased number of people that could use each work would be worth the fewer number of works that would be published. If the public decided that it's more valuable to freely copy, then copyright law would have to be changed.
Some groups believe that if authors had no monetary incentive to create published works, then no one would publish anything. The OSS movement shows that people have additional reasons to produce and publish works.
On an individual basis, if copying is freely allowed, the net result could be that each individual gets to use MORE works, even if fewer works are being published.
--
They said... Networks were designed to share data, that's what networks do, and it's a very useful thing. Napster is a system that aids in sharing data. So napster seems no different from any network. Napster might aid in finding things, but that's what google etc. do too. Implied in this was that unless the internet is shut down, such data sharing is going to continue because it's a fundamental operation.
--
How would you do this on P2P systems that don't send out a "do you have this file?" request to every client? I guess with P2S2P systems like napster, the proxy could be incorporated into the server...
In addition to letting users use any client they like, proxies would allow P2P networks to span more areas. If some firewall manages to stop one particular P2P system, then another P2P system could be used to reconnect the island to the main network.
--
Hrm... couldn't this be construed as soon-to-be-illegal? Napster simply gives directions to data, helping people to infringe copyrights 80% of the time. So Fox-local gives directions to programs which give directions to data, helping people to infringe copyrights sometimes.
--
As far as I can see, if the fans want an easy way to find new and interesting crap, and the authors want an easy way for new people to discover their crap, then big corporations shouldn't make it necessary for consumers to boycott the whole process just because of the middlemen (or women).
--
Bluetooth is being touted as two things. The first is as a replacement for wires. This is certainly happening now. But just because you can string a wire between two devices doesn't mean they'll talk to each other.
The second thing Bluetooth is being touted as is a way to do dynamic networking, and it will make everything talk to everything. However, even TCP/IP isn't included in the spec, so some devices my choose to not support it. In the area of service discovery, there are there different standards that are being pushed... Sun's, Microsoft's, and an open group pushing Salutation. I like Jini the best because its drivers can be used on any platform and the devices can carry their drivers with them. But it doesn't specify a common transport.
Bluetooth seems to only make the Physical, DataLink, and Network layers standard. With more than half of the 7 layer burrito in limbo, I don't know how the protocol stack can hold up.
--
- U.S. networks do seem to dominate global Internet topology -- they provide transit for 71.4% of the total skitter paths that neither originate nor end in the U.S.
So Echelon-style spying need not be very sophisticated? Just a couple taps at major backbones...--
For instance, Metallica has released roughly 12 CD's in the US, but if you searched for them on Napster, you'd be hard pressed to download even 48 distinct songs unless you spend many hours in diligent search. Well... even if you would have done it before the whole Metallica vs. their fans battle. I wasn't able to find 48 distinct songs back then.
--
--
Also readable via recyclable electrons here.
--
Yeah, but the more they push, the more face they risk losing.
--
Is there a law against this? If WalMart wants to sell pencils for $20, shouldn't it be allowed to?
I guess the issue is whether or not this falls under "fair use"? Would the MySimons spend money on development and servers if they knew they wouldn't be able to get any revenue from it, even from banner ads?
--