Privacy? It's overrated. Terrorist? People with too much time on their hands anyway. But whether it works or not, Carnivore would make for a really mean Quake/UT server... Sorry, I just had to say it ^__^
On a side note, it seems incredibly easy for an organization to spoof carnivore by simply lighting off an email/ftp campaign with a bunch of bots; all the files containing the key words bomb,terrorism,nuclear,WTC,biological,anthrax,atta ck,target or whatever else trips Carni to dance.
I was the X-Box Martyr last time, so I'll give somebody else a chance on a topic that is guaranteed flame-bait on Slash. Be that as it may, I don't see MS-XBox taking a fall unless they get hurt really, really bad. After all, MS already knows they won't be making a profit until something like 2004 or 2005. The X-Box is already being funded with disposible income. Like you said, it's all about the living room and i can't see MS backing down from that easily. Any tactic that would make a dent in MS would probably hurt Sony just as badly. Isn't Sony already working on a PS3?
Personally, I like the Sony/MS/Nintendo standoff. The combination of these three big powerhouses means they either make great games (not simply OK ones) or die. Speaking of which, Nintendo's sales are going the way of the N64 in Japan, that is to say poorly. The X-Box I can understand. For the Cube, that's ominous. They need to come up with a killer app quick. Yay... Zelda 12. Whoohoo. Mario... Woot. I mean, Woot.
"it would be a handy thing in the living room if it ran a real OS."
It's a console, not a PC. The last thing I want to see on my purely entertainment device is a "real" OS messing up the works. What did you have in mind...? LINUX !? Go buy a freakin Gateway or something if you want a real OS. Dude, yer gettin' a Dell. For cryin out loud. MAKE yer own for $300.
I would like to see some of the other hacks for it though... I so desperatly want to change that 8gig HD into a 60gig so I can turn the thing into a.WMA base (I assume, since it is Microsoft, that it uses WMA and not MP3).
But then, the govenment doesn't monitor every piece of mail, every conversation or every package you send IRL, now does it? While I do think the net needs regulation of some sort, vacuuming up every piece of information out there is the easy way out.
Heh, if there's one reason why the Apple will eventially succeed, it's not nessisarily because of their hardware (God no! I work on that crap for a living) or their software, but because they got style. People like cute, even if it is useless. Luckily, Mac's are a step above useless.
Somehow, I doubt it can monitor all that traffic myself, especially when it's labelled "PlansForTheAttack.MP3". But your right. It does something.
Heh, of course, maybe they realized it too late and figure since they can't get anything useful out of it, they'll use it as a trogan to draw attention from the real projects. Heck, they could just be using it to run some liquid multi- player Quake servers for all I know =p
I know... Let's turn the net into the wild west, where the person with the fastest ping flooder wins. "Ugh! Ya got me sheriff!" While I would like to be so naive as to think that the net could survive without regulation, the sad facts are that the very thing that makes it so useful to us is the same thing that makes it useful to foriegn (and domestic) entities looking to do us harm. Yes, I know they can find other ways to do it, but not quite as quick and efficiently as on the net. Our entire society is rapidly going digital and that real estate is going to need some kind of defense and monitoring, just like the boarders of our nation.
The big debatable question is how you do it. I think it was an interview with Neal Stephonson posted to Slash that correctly noted that it's not nessisarily the monitoring of our lives, but whether that monitoring has a watchdog in place to keep the power from being abused. Personally, I think Alex has the right idea. You need a search warrent to enter an search a house and likewise you'd need something similar to access somebodies digital "life", both requiring just cause. I'm not saying that they're not prone to abuse, but it'd sure go a long ways in the right direction.
Unfortunately, the problem I see with Alex's system is not it's security, but in what Carny was originally designed to do. It is an evidence collector, designed to proactively track names and keywords, not wait for the e-police to have just cause to raid a database. Putting a search warrent lock on Carny defeats the entire purpose of having a system that illuminates potential problems before they happen. I think there acually needs to be a group that monitors everything the CIA/FBI/FIAA pulls from Carny and asks if it's A) relevant to the defense of our nation and B) Even ethical. That's the counter balance systems like Carnivore need, not simply a padlock.
He acually said that?! You gotta be kidding! HA! That line should be taught to every car salesman across the USA! "I would hate to think we could reach a point that, whenever you walk on to a car lot and you had to decide 'Do you want this', bells go off and people become worried."
I would also wonder what he has to say about not being given the choice to uninstall spyware when you uninstall the parent program... "If we gave people the choice to uninstall out programs when they uninstalled the parent, they might become worried and..." Well, you get the rest.
"If they were so committed to telling people, why the hell didn't they?
Because they are lying asses all the way to the bank. Xarfel nailed it. If all this spyware and theftware is so innocent and harmless as these companies claim, why don't they just come right out and tell you about it? Winamp does when you install it. It tells you up front that it monitors what you play and stream for anonomous statistical compiling, allowing you to opt-in or out. Why the difference in philosophies? Gee, kinda makes you wonder what, exactly they're hiding or why it takes an act of God fess up to it. And Kazaa saying "Oh, by the way, we installed software without your knowledge or permission that turns part of you computer into a virtual whore in addition to all the spyware we've added. We know you'll like this extra stuff, so we buried any mention of it five million lines down in a cryptic nigh-indesiphierable EULA for those without a degree in law. Enjoy your "free" music!" Now THAT generates consumer loyalty.
We all know and love companies who bury spyware agreements under a 5 million page EULA, but this is what I'm wondering... Say you agree to Brilliant's distributing networking deal and they start to use your computer for storage and bandwidth. What happens if I all of a sudden decide I hate Kazaa after a few months of use and burn it off my hard drive? Does a chunk of that of a compnaies valued information disappear? "Sorry, Jim, I can't get you those budget numbers because a Kazaa user formatted his HD..." You'd hope it gets backed up somewhere, somehow. The bandwidth is cool, but information storage on private computers strikes me as slightly risky, not to mention the insane hacking possibilities of said storage.
"(b) provide for an adult-only domain such as.prn where all non-child-safe sites (pr0n, hate speech, etc.) would be relegated--the sites would have to give up their.com/.org/.net domains they own today."
Acually, I kinda like the idea. I know I just love it when I accidentally misspell a URL by one letter and get dumped into pop-up porn trap. Or the fact you think you're going to visit a legit site only to find out it's been taken by a porn site. Heh, whitehouse.com anyone?
What I'm not so sure of is dumping everything (hate-speech porn, etc.) into one domain. First, who's going to determine which sites go and what's the criteria? Porn? That's easy. After that, anyone who expresses an opinion is subject to possibly being dumped into that domain. If my site has an anti-Palatinian editorial to the tune of something like: "The Palastinian's are being dumbasses with the whole suicide bombing thing and most of the Arab nations are ass-deep in terrorism" Is that a hate speech? After porn you start going into some really sticky territory. It'd be like dividing the net up into movie ratings. Given the number of sites, that'd be damn near impossible.
Porn is a pretty clear cut catagory. I could handle a.prn domain for those sites. It'd sure as heck free up a lot of names that should be used for legitiment sites and businesses. But speech? ooohh... Murky waters, that.
Isn't Tivo the same product that changed their product to something worse via those uncontrollable "updates"? If I remember right, more than a few people were upset because the product they bought all of a sudden lost the functionality they had originally purchased it for. kinda like the forever "New and Improved best yet hyper attack" version of AOL X.0
While it'd be fun to solely blame Oracle for the price gouging, isn't California the same state that locked itself into an insainly expensive contract to provide power during last year's shortage? You know, as long as they're on this "buying stuff they don't need" kick, I have a few things in my garage I'm selling for only a couple million...
"...because they're basically massively abusing the system."
There is a difference between "abusing the system" and the company of said system simply not accounting for the results of their actions. It's already been brought up by several other people on this board... You can hardly call it abuse when people acually take advantage of all the bandwidth you promised. "Oh wait... I didn't say it like that... What I really meant was limited unlimited high speed internet access within reason." It's the companies own damn fault for not being able to live up to their marketing claims, not the users. The applications the users are running is acually beside the point.
"...but 95% of the people on the biggest P2P networks are just downloading free music. They're not pushing anything..."
Partially correct. I'd agree these people (me included) aren't actively doing anything but creating traffic, but I'd think just their existances forces those who acually do push the envelope to account for them in future developement. Kind of like muscles. "Wow, that's an insain amount of bandwidth they're using! We had better: A) Build the muscle; make it stronger and more robust B) Limit it's growth, developement and potential."
Opinions are like armpits. Everybody has two and they both stink.
Hmmm... Come to think of it, this would be the Labels best way to kill the MP3 revolution if they could somehow (or if they haven't done it already) make deals with ISPs or convince them all this traffic is costing the money. If the act of sharing any sort of file becomes prohibitivly expensive for the average person, you'd surely stunt the digital music's expansion across the web.
Not that'd I be a fan of this measure. This kind of cap is another huge step down the road of a not-so-free internet (not talking $$$ either) Besides, since I could see the Labels being shortsighted enough to pull something like this, it'd be ironic because they'd ultimately be shooting themselves in the foot when the full-blown move to digital music finally comes. "I have to pay for the music and the ISP fee for extra traffic!?" Heh.
Oh goody. Another shortsighted weenie assuming that all P2P transactions are illegal. Do you ever speed in your car? Do LOTS of people speed in their cars? Gee, it's amazing we don't put 65mph caps on all cars or just outlaw them all together for the crimes commited in them. But you wouldn't whine and complain about THAT now would you? 9_9
Reminds me of what Simplenet used to do. "UNLIMITED SPACE ONLINE for a low monthly fee!" Unlimited, until users found out it was a great place to create gigantic MP3 archives. Once Simplenet found out what "unlimited" truly meant, MP3 archives were shutdown with a quickness (I'm sure legal pressure came to bear as well) Seems Telecom and Time Warner weren't the first to realize that their customers will acually use the services a company claims to provide without restriction. They weren't the first and they probably won't be the last. Victims of their own marketing. How ironic.
Nothing like cutting to the heart of the matter. And it's the absolute awful and hideous truth the labels don't want to face.
Your product costs me nothing to get now. Why should I continue doing business with you? Your good looks? Decent business practices (chuckle)? Because it's legal? Nah. I like music, but like the terrorism, you can only put up with so much crap before you don't care.
The guy above me is right about their mentality and a global market. Why are DVDs zoned? Just to deprive you of your favorite foriegn movie? It's all about the moneys and control. All that control goes poof once your media goes digital and so does your ability to make the optimum amount of money based on the country your selling in. Hell, this battle over music is just the rumblings of the storm. Just wait until you can get high speed par excellent quality movies for next to nothing (you can now, with sacrifice in speed or quality most of the time). And you said the future wasn't going to be exciting...
"But don't complain when the whole MP3 format becomes outlawed when no one uses it but pirates."
That is assnine. It'd be like prosecuting the car in a drunk driving accident. Since when do you outlaw the vehical when it's user commits a crime? Countless numbers of Fords have been used in an equally countless number of crimes, therefore we should ban all Fords, right? yet this it the kind of logic groups like the RIAA are using against us...
Thanks, i'll keep being a pirate-"Yarr!"-until the labels look for a win-win situation and stop gouging their customers, the pirates.
Slashdot Mirror
Privacy? It's overrated. Terrorist? People with too much time on their hands anyway. But whether it works or not, Carnivore would make for a really mean Quake/UT server... Sorry, I just had to say it ^__^
a ck,target or whatever else trips Carni to dance.
On a side note, it seems incredibly easy for an organization to spoof carnivore by simply lighting off an email/ftp campaign with a bunch of bots; all the files containing the key words bomb,terrorism,nuclear,WTC,biological,anthrax,att
I was the X-Box Martyr last time, so I'll give somebody else a chance on a topic that is guaranteed flame-bait on Slash. Be that as it may, I don't see MS-XBox taking a fall unless they get hurt really, really bad. After all, MS already knows they won't be making a profit until something like 2004 or 2005. The X-Box is already being funded with disposible income. Like you said, it's all about the living room and i can't see MS backing down from that easily. Any tactic that would make a dent in MS would probably hurt Sony just as badly. Isn't Sony already working on a PS3?
Personally, I like the Sony/MS/Nintendo standoff. The combination of these three big powerhouses means they either make great games (not simply OK ones) or die. Speaking of which, Nintendo's sales are going the way of the N64 in Japan, that is to say poorly. The X-Box I can understand. For the Cube, that's ominous. They need to come up with a killer app quick. Yay... Zelda 12. Whoohoo. Mario... Woot. I mean, Woot.
"it would be a handy thing in the living room if it ran a real OS."
.WMA base (I assume, since it is Microsoft, that it uses WMA and not MP3).
It's a console, not a PC. The last thing I want to see on my purely entertainment device is a "real" OS messing up the works. What did you have in mind...? LINUX !? Go buy a freakin Gateway or something if you want a real OS. Dude, yer gettin' a Dell. For cryin out loud. MAKE yer own for $300.
I would like to see some of the other hacks for it though... I so desperatly want to change that 8gig HD into a 60gig so I can turn the thing into a
That was bad... I guess Herbivore would collect only publicly availible information?
Live with it.
"Hey Judge Judy, I'm calling in a favor. I need a key to search the entire life history of my ex-Girlfriend..."
Or
"Here's a $50,000... Look the other way while I search for ______"
The government can't look through your mail, packages or monitor your every conversation in real life, why should they over the net?
But then, the govenment doesn't monitor every piece of mail, every conversation or every package you send IRL, now does it? While I do think the net needs regulation of some sort, vacuuming up every piece of information out there is the easy way out.
Heh, if there's one reason why the Apple will eventially succeed, it's not nessisarily because of their hardware (God no! I work on that crap for a living) or their software, but because they got style. People like cute, even if it is useless. Luckily, Mac's are a step above useless.
"What? need Joe's complete digital history? Let me hack into Carny and get it for you..."
Somehow, I doubt it can monitor all that traffic myself, especially when it's labelled
"PlansForTheAttack.MP3". But your right. It does something.
Heh, of course, maybe they realized it too late and figure since they can't get anything useful out of it, they'll use it as a trogan to draw attention from the real projects. Heck, they could just be using it to run some liquid multi- player Quake servers for all I know =p
I know... Let's turn the net into the wild west, where the person with the fastest ping flooder wins. "Ugh! Ya got me sheriff!" While I would like to be so naive as to think that the net could survive without regulation, the sad facts are that the very thing that makes it so useful to us is the same thing that makes it useful to foriegn (and domestic) entities looking to do us harm. Yes, I know they can find other ways to do it, but not quite as quick and efficiently as on the net. Our entire society is rapidly going digital and that real estate is going to need some kind of defense and monitoring, just like the boarders of our nation.
The big debatable question is how you do it. I think it was an interview with Neal Stephonson posted to Slash that correctly noted that it's not nessisarily the monitoring of our lives, but whether that monitoring has a watchdog in place to keep the power from being abused. Personally, I think Alex has the right idea. You need a search warrent to enter an search a house and likewise you'd need something similar to access somebodies digital "life", both requiring just cause. I'm not saying that they're not prone to abuse, but it'd sure go a long ways in the right direction.
Unfortunately, the problem I see with Alex's system is not it's security, but in what Carny was originally designed to do. It is an evidence collector, designed to proactively track names and keywords, not wait for the e-police to have just cause to raid a database. Putting a search warrent lock on Carny defeats the entire purpose of having a system that illuminates potential problems before they happen. I think there acually needs to be a group that monitors everything the CIA/FBI/FIAA pulls from Carny and asks if it's A) relevant to the defense of our nation and B) Even ethical. That's the counter balance systems like Carnivore need, not simply a padlock.
He acually said that?! You gotta be kidding! HA! That line should be taught to every car salesman across the USA! "I would hate to think we could reach a point that, whenever you walk on to a car lot and you had to decide 'Do you want this', bells go off and people become worried."
I would also wonder what he has to say about not being given the choice to uninstall spyware when you uninstall the parent program... "If we gave people the choice to uninstall out programs when they uninstalled the parent, they might become worried and..." Well, you get the rest.
"If they were so committed to telling people, why the hell didn't they?
Because they are lying asses all the way to the bank. Xarfel nailed it. If all this spyware and theftware is so innocent and harmless as these companies claim, why don't they just come right out and tell you about it? Winamp does when you install it. It tells you up front that it monitors what you play and stream for anonomous statistical compiling, allowing you to opt-in or out. Why the difference in philosophies? Gee, kinda makes you wonder what, exactly they're hiding or why it takes an act of God fess up to it. And Kazaa saying "Oh, by the way, we installed software without your knowledge or permission that turns part of you computer into a virtual whore in addition to all the spyware we've added. We know you'll like this extra stuff, so we buried any mention of it five million lines down in a cryptic nigh-indesiphierable EULA for those without a degree in law. Enjoy your "free" music!" Now THAT generates consumer loyalty.
We all know and love companies who bury spyware agreements under a 5 million page EULA, but this is what I'm wondering... Say you agree to Brilliant's distributing networking deal and they start to use your computer for storage and bandwidth. What happens if I all of a sudden decide I hate Kazaa after a few months of use and burn it off my hard drive? Does a chunk of that of a compnaies valued information disappear? "Sorry, Jim, I can't get you those budget numbers because a Kazaa user formatted his HD..." You'd hope it gets backed up somewhere, somehow. The bandwidth is cool, but information storage on private computers strikes me as slightly risky, not to mention the insane hacking possibilities of said storage.
"(b) provide for an adult-only domain such as .prn where all non-child-safe sites (pr0n, hate speech, etc.) would be relegated--the sites would have to give up their .com/.org/.net domains they own today."
.prn domain for those sites. It'd sure as heck free up a lot of names that should be used for legitiment sites and businesses. But speech? ooohh... Murky waters, that.
Acually, I kinda like the idea. I know I just love it when I accidentally misspell a URL by one letter and get dumped into pop-up porn trap. Or the fact you think you're going to visit a legit site only to find out it's been taken by a porn site. Heh, whitehouse.com anyone?
What I'm not so sure of is dumping everything (hate-speech porn, etc.) into one domain. First, who's going to determine which sites go and what's the criteria? Porn? That's easy. After that, anyone who expresses an opinion is subject to possibly being dumped into that domain. If my site has an anti-Palatinian editorial to the tune of something like: "The Palastinian's are being dumbasses with the whole suicide bombing thing and most of the Arab nations are ass-deep in terrorism" Is that a hate speech? After porn you start going into some really sticky territory. It'd be like dividing the net up into movie ratings. Given the number of sites, that'd be damn near impossible.
Porn is a pretty clear cut catagory. I could handle a
Isn't Tivo the same product that changed their product to something worse via those uncontrollable "updates"? If I remember right, more than a few people were upset because the product they bought all of a sudden lost the functionality they had originally purchased it for. kinda like the forever "New and Improved best yet hyper attack" version of AOL X.0
The subject title says it all.
While it'd be fun to solely blame Oracle for the price gouging, isn't California the same state that locked itself into an insainly expensive contract to provide power during last year's shortage? You know, as long as they're on this "buying stuff they don't need" kick, I have a few things in my garage I'm selling for only a couple million...
"...because they're basically massively abusing the system."
There is a difference between "abusing the system" and the company of said system simply not accounting for the results of their actions. It's already been brought up by several other people on this board... You can hardly call it abuse when people acually take advantage of all the bandwidth you promised. "Oh wait... I didn't say it like that... What I really meant was limited unlimited high speed internet access within reason." It's the companies own damn fault for not being able to live up to their marketing claims, not the users. The applications the users are running is acually beside the point.
"...but 95% of the people on the biggest P2P networks are just downloading free music. They're not pushing anything..."
Partially correct. I'd agree these people (me included) aren't actively doing anything but creating traffic, but I'd think just their existances forces those who acually do push the envelope to account for them in future developement. Kind of like muscles. "Wow, that's an insain amount of bandwidth they're using! We had better: A) Build the muscle; make it stronger and more robust B) Limit it's growth, developement and potential."
Opinions are like armpits. Everybody has two and they both stink.
Hmmm... Come to think of it, this would be the Labels best way to kill the MP3 revolution if they could somehow (or if they haven't done it already) make deals with ISPs or convince them all this traffic is costing the money. If the act of sharing any sort of file becomes prohibitivly expensive for the average person, you'd surely stunt the digital music's expansion across the web.
Not that'd I be a fan of this measure. This kind of cap is another huge step down the road of a not-so-free internet (not talking $$$ either) Besides, since I could see the Labels being shortsighted enough to pull something like this, it'd be ironic because they'd ultimately be shooting themselves in the foot when the full-blown move to digital music finally comes. "I have to pay for the music and the ISP fee for extra traffic!?" Heh.
Oh goody. Another shortsighted weenie assuming that all P2P transactions are illegal. Do you ever speed in your car? Do LOTS of people speed in their cars? Gee, it's amazing we don't put 65mph caps on all cars or just outlaw them all together for the crimes commited in them. But you wouldn't whine and complain about THAT now would you? 9_9
Reminds me of what Simplenet used to do. "UNLIMITED SPACE ONLINE for a low monthly fee!" Unlimited, until users found out it was a great place to create gigantic MP3 archives. Once Simplenet found out what "unlimited" truly meant, MP3 archives were shutdown with a quickness (I'm sure legal pressure came to bear as well) Seems Telecom and Time Warner weren't the first to realize that their customers will acually use the services a company claims to provide without restriction. They weren't the first and they probably won't be the last. Victims of their own marketing. How ironic.
Nothing like cutting to the heart of the matter. And it's the absolute awful and hideous truth the labels don't want to face.
Your product costs me nothing to get now. Why should I continue doing business with you? Your good looks? Decent business practices (chuckle)? Because it's legal? Nah. I like music, but like the terrorism, you can only put up with so much crap before you don't care.
The guy above me is right about their mentality and a global market. Why are DVDs zoned? Just to deprive you of your favorite foriegn movie? It's all about the moneys and control. All that control goes poof once your media goes digital and so does your ability to make the optimum amount of money based on the country your selling in. Hell, this battle over music is just the rumblings of the storm. Just wait until you can get high speed par excellent quality movies for next to nothing (you can now, with sacrifice in speed or quality most of the time). And you said the future wasn't going to be exciting...
Concise and to the point. "Yar-har-har, me Maties!"
"But don't complain when the whole MP3 format becomes outlawed when no one uses it but pirates."
That is assnine. It'd be like prosecuting the car in a drunk driving accident. Since when do you outlaw the vehical when it's user commits a crime? Countless numbers of Fords have been used in an equally countless number of crimes, therefore we should ban all Fords, right? yet this it the kind of logic groups like the RIAA are using against us...
Thanks, i'll keep being a pirate-"Yarr!"-until the labels look for a win-win situation and stop gouging their customers, the pirates.