Once ALL-DRM systems in place everywhere, Big Brother (Hollywood or the recording industries) will know how many times you've played your songs/movies/whatever and they'll be able to calculate the royalty payments accurately.
For artists that receive royalties from playback of their works, the artists will stand to make quite a bit of money, collectively.
So my question is this - Once all that data can be tallied properly and the evidence trails are secure and available, how will the recording studios cheat artists out of their money?
The companies are NOT doing all of this for the artists, no matter what they claim.
That begs a further question; will the artists stand to make a better living by cutting out the industry and striking a bargain directly with the people, or even use creative commons licensing for their works?
After all, it's better to make art for free than in the service of a villain.
Great thing about theories; they can be verified, myths can't be.
We have record of humans controlling the reproduction of organisms like plants and animals and impacting on their breed.
We also have fossil records of other, possibly intermediate forms of life.
So we have empirical evidence passed down through centuries of observation.
That doesn't deny the existance of a creator; the universe seems filled with all forms of molecules, and you have to wonder why any of these ever started biological processes and became sentient, if you want a mystery of God, look there.
If creationists are increasingly marginalized out of good educational institutions, there will be less and less of them in positions of influence to push the creationist agenda!
There are millions of Windows machines out there participating in a distributed SPAM relaying network.
I imagine if Microsoft 'enahances' Windows to do this even easier, it'll make it even easier for spammers to write the next-generation spamming-joe-jobbing apps.
Of course it is always wrong to create a virus, and this definitely qualifies as one.
Viruses cannot be guaranteed contained, so they are effectively releasing a virus into the wild.
The penalty should be the same as what has been meted out to Mitnick or anyone else convicted of writing a virus.
The difference here is the number of conspirators; where someone like mafiaboy worked alone, this instance is more reprehensible because there have to be a lot of RIAA and MPAA employees involved, along with the contractor.
You're right; my opinion is not fact, the very same way that theories in science are not fact.
I just have lots of experience that leads me to make my claims.
It ISN'T that Microsoft has not delivered lots of software; some of it was made by some truly great software developers, I'm not arguing that.
In fact, I give MS props for initially making a graphical operating system a possibility on the XT!
If you look at how others in that field were doing at the time, their hardware requirements were already much higher.
My reasons are that I've gotten to know Windows; I bought the original Windows 3.0 compiler and tools and eventually programmed all versions of Windows during many years.
It's exactly because I've seen so much of Windows that I can now assert *nix, especially Linux IS better.
The initial design considerations were much more thought-out with *nix.
Microsoft deserves credit for so many gyrations, of course. All the way from the insanely clever-but-ultimately-unworkable way they engineered Windows 95, throught to the terrific way they designed NT and eventually morphed it into Windows 2000.
To say that there is no talent at Microsoft would be a lie.
But overall, Microsoft's strategy has been to help THEMSELVES, without regard for hurting their users.
Look at how security is a joke on any typical Windows implementation. I'm not referring here to how you might lock windows down and turn it into a server, but rather the typical user's situation when they run Windows.
Quite a few of these problems result from illegitimate attempts to tie MS apps into the operating system, and lots of them are because there was no initial attention given to security when designing the operating system itself, and many others are there because the work was rushed.
With Linux, there hasn't been a "We've got to follow hot on the heels of Windows 95, because we need bigger margins!" mentality driving development.
Instead, Linux is designed around different requirements that add up to more stability, greater capacity and even greater freedom for the users.
Maybe because of that it took longer for it to mature, but it IS here now.
I only know a few Linux disributions, but it is a testament to its design concepts that some distros (Mandrake, Lindows) can chase the typical user, while other ports of it can be of use to engineering/research workshops.
And all these may in turn contribute back.
I just can't think of any compelling reason to run Windows anymore.
These are the numbers I used. I'm not sure how close that is to the rock we're talking about, but if it is anywhere close to it, it'll be quite a mess... Not a planet-killer, but even if it falls 100 KMs from a populated area, people will be burned by the air-blast.
Distance from Impact: 100.00 km = 62.10 miles Projectile Diameter: 800.00 m = 2624.00 ft = 0.50 miles Projectile Density: 8000 kg/m3 Impact Velocity: 17.00 km/s = 10.56 miles/s Impact Angle: 45 degrees Target Density: 2500 kg/m3 Target Type: Sedimentary Rock
I predict it'll just disintegrate until it's no bigger than a small dog's head.
Yes, it sounds like you've found a way to live within the constraints of your job. That is good.
But I do wonder; if you had linux machines, set up to whatever your users need (admittedly you'd probably need Crossover office), could you get better results?
Seems to me instead of advancing, PC users are more often than not dealing with the hassles of the OS they are running.
Apart from that, do your users really require I.E. ? There must be some combination of I.E. zone settings or the removal of I.E. and replacement of it with Mozilla or something else that could help you?
Why go on running Windows? If you can image a Linux machine with Wine and Crossover Office with the must-have apps, and the rest with native Linux, your users could still run their needed apps, but the disastrous side-effects would be limited.
Consider that it is possible that some of your infections might be from one machine being infected and then the virus/malware scanning the internal LAN to find others...
What you wrote about spywares convinces me that Windows really IS dead as a platform; no one will put up with that kind of abuse forever.
Here's to hoping that whatever solutions you end up choosing make this a good year for you.
Microsoft spent too much time trying to tie-up market-share, instead of architecting and designing their products to help clients.
By (inadvertently) harming their clients like that, they've built a monster, and now, short of scrapping most of their IE work, there is no way they will ever deliver anything robust and secure.
Of course, they WON'T go back and do it right, both because the corporate masters won't stand for it and the fact their development teams are committed to what they've done and their disgracious vision.
So it's game over for Microsoft, who couldn't deliver on what clients really needed.
In fact, they'll survive in computing the same way Mcdonalds survives in cuisine. Some would call that a success, but few would admit to eating there.
Go ahead and use Linux without fear of reprisal; SCO distributed Linux under the terms of the GPL in the UK. That means you are cleared to use it under the terms of the GPL.
SCO/MS will never make specific claims anyway, so who cares WHAT they say.
Seems like their WHOLE business model at this point is making noise.
I was in the class that took the very last semester of COBOL in university.
I sort of liked COBOL. Apart from those inscrutable environment (and others, whose names I forget) sections, it was pretty straightforward and had a natural ability to decompose numbers (because of the field declarations), which was probably part of its mission (manipulating monetary amounts, preventing rounding errors, etc...), but I digress.
The strange part is I actually got extra points from a teacher during an exam for coding all my solutions recursively.
Mind you, this was in Modula-2, not COBOL.
Perhaps my COBOL prof would have been OK with it, but he'd been teaching COBOL for about a decade, and it *might* have upset him, who knows.
Maybe that's at the heart of the old guard / new guard issue?
SPF is certainly a good idea, but I can't see layfolk filling out SPF-records in order to send e-mail...
I expect we'll see a growing trend of people either using disposable e-mail addresses or changing addresses periodically. I wonder if that will slow down the spammers.
Of course nothing will really get us anywhere until we eliminate the viruses that perpetuate the problem.
For me, that meant dumping Microsoft, as it's more trouble than anything else. I know they have a firewall now, but after going to the trouble of learning Linux, I find I really do like it better anyway. For everyone else I recommend Macs.
I think there should be NO software acknowledgements;
True end-to-end acknowledgements (I personally send you a confirmation message) are the only REAL way to know a message was delivered, read and understood anyway.
Slashdot Mirror
Bitter?/ 15/144224 6&tid=146&tid=187&tid=1
http://slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=05/01
Once ALL-DRM systems in place everywhere, Big Brother (Hollywood or the recording industries) will know how many times you've played your songs/movies/whatever and they'll be able to calculate the royalty payments accurately.
For artists that receive royalties from playback of their works, the artists will stand to make quite a bit of money, collectively.
So my question is this - Once all that data can be tallied properly and the evidence trails are secure and available, how will the recording studios cheat artists out of their money?
The companies are NOT doing all of this for the artists, no matter what they claim.
That begs a further question; will the artists stand to make a better living by cutting out the industry and striking a bargain directly with the people, or even use creative commons licensing for their works?
After all, it's better to make art for free than in the service of a villain.
> [...] it's a deliberately and grossly incomplete "truth" done specifically for religious reasons.
Certainly.
But it has caused lots of discussion.
I put myself in the place of a student seeing all the fuss this is causing.
It would catch my attention and make me wonder.
I expect many will be brave and seek the truth, it's in our nature, I believe.
It IS the truth;
Great thing about theories; they can be verified, myths can't be.
We have record of humans controlling the reproduction of organisms like plants and animals and impacting on their breed.
We also have fossil records of other, possibly intermediate forms of life.
So we have empirical evidence passed down through centuries of observation.
That doesn't deny the existance of a creator; the universe seems filled with all forms of molecules, and you have to wonder why any of these ever started biological processes and became sentient, if you want a mystery of God, look there.
Hey, that would solve the problem, wouldn't it?
If creationists are increasingly marginalized out of good educational institutions, there will be less and less of them in positions of influence to push the creationist agenda!
It's evolution in action.
Sucks for you though, I agree.
Printing the truth is unconstitutional!
For selling them such a dangerous, inferior product.
That should cool their heels.
I already know all the 'leet-speak I'm interested in.
There are millions of Windows machines out there participating in a distributed SPAM relaying network.
I imagine if Microsoft 'enahances' Windows to do this even easier, it'll make it even easier for spammers to write the next-generation spamming-joe-jobbing apps.
Kudos, Microsoft!
Of course it is always wrong to create a virus, and this definitely qualifies as one.
Viruses cannot be guaranteed contained, so they are effectively releasing a virus into the wild.
The penalty should be the same as what has been meted out to Mitnick or anyone else convicted of writing a virus.
The difference here is the number of conspirators; where someone like mafiaboy worked alone, this instance is more reprehensible because there have to be a lot of RIAA and MPAA employees involved, along with the contractor.
Someone will file a case and prove that the RIAA/MPAA are terrorists!
Maybe we can get capital punishment for them?
If we're lucky, they might sue SCO.
Nothing like the promise of lawsuits to drum up business.
Hi TeraCo,
You're right; my opinion is not fact, the very same way that theories in science are not fact.
I just have lots of experience that leads me to make my claims.
It ISN'T that Microsoft has not delivered lots of software; some of it was made by some truly great software developers, I'm not arguing that.
In fact, I give MS props for initially making a graphical operating system a possibility on the XT!
If you look at how others in that field were doing at the time, their hardware requirements were already much higher.
My reasons are that I've gotten to know Windows; I bought the original Windows 3.0 compiler and tools and eventually programmed all versions of Windows during many years.
It's exactly because I've seen so much of Windows that I can now assert *nix, especially Linux IS better.
The initial design considerations were much more thought-out with *nix.
Microsoft deserves credit for so many gyrations, of course. All the way from the insanely clever-but-ultimately-unworkable way they engineered Windows 95, throught to the terrific way they designed NT and eventually morphed it into Windows 2000.
To say that there is no talent at Microsoft would be a lie.
But overall, Microsoft's strategy has been to help THEMSELVES, without regard for hurting their users.
Look at how security is a joke on any typical Windows implementation. I'm not referring here to how you might lock windows down and turn it into a server, but rather the typical user's situation when they run Windows.
Quite a few of these problems result from illegitimate attempts to tie MS apps into the operating system, and lots of them are because there was no initial attention given to security when designing the operating system itself, and many others are there because the work was rushed.
With Linux, there hasn't been a "We've got to follow hot on the heels of Windows 95, because we need bigger margins!" mentality driving development.
Instead, Linux is designed around different requirements that add up to more stability, greater capacity and even greater freedom for the users.
Maybe because of that it took longer for it to mature, but it IS here now.
I only know a few Linux disributions, but it is a testament to its design concepts that some distros (Mandrake, Lindows) can chase the typical user, while other ports of it can be of use to engineering/research workshops.
And all these may in turn contribute back.
I just can't think of any compelling reason to run Windows anymore.
It's simple really;
I've known and used Windows since 1989.
I've known and used Linux since 2000.
And for the last year, I've used linux exclusively.
Linux is better, pound for pound.
Marketing BS won't change that.
I'm sure lots of astronomy buffs will snap those up.
Sort of a DIRECT commercialization of space! LOL
These are the numbers I used.
I'm not sure how close that is to the rock we're talking about, but if it is anywhere close to it, it'll be quite a mess...
Not a planet-killer, but even if it falls 100 KMs from a populated area, people will be burned by the air-blast.
Distance from Impact: 100.00 km = 62.10 miles
Projectile Diameter: 800.00 m = 2624.00 ft = 0.50 miles
Projectile Density: 8000 kg/m3
Impact Velocity: 17.00 km/s = 10.56 miles/s
Impact Angle: 45 degrees
Target Density: 2500 kg/m3
Target Type: Sedimentary Rock
I predict it'll just disintegrate until it's no bigger than a small dog's head.
Yes, it sounds like you've found a way to live within the constraints of your job. That is good.
But I do wonder; if you had linux machines, set up to whatever your users need (admittedly you'd probably need Crossover office), could you get better results?
Seems to me instead of advancing, PC users are more often than not dealing with the hassles of the OS they are running.
Apart from that, do your users really require I.E. ? There must be some combination of I.E. zone settings or the removal of I.E. and replacement of it with Mozilla or something else that could help you?
Why go on running Windows? If you can image a Linux machine with Wine and Crossover Office with the must-have apps, and the rest with native Linux, your users could still run their needed apps, but the disastrous side-effects would be limited.
Consider that it is possible that some of your infections might be from one machine being infected and then the virus/malware scanning the internal LAN to find others...
What you wrote about spywares convinces me that Windows really IS dead as a platform; no one will put up with that kind of abuse forever.
Here's to hoping that whatever solutions you end up choosing make this a good year for you.
Microsoft spent too much time trying to tie-up market-share, instead of architecting and designing their products to help clients.
By (inadvertently) harming their clients like that, they've built a monster, and now, short of scrapping most of their IE work, there is no way they will ever deliver anything robust and secure.
Of course, they WON'T go back and do it right, both because the corporate masters won't stand for it and the fact their development teams are committed to what they've done and their disgracious vision.
So it's game over for Microsoft, who couldn't deliver on what clients really needed.
In fact, they'll survive in computing the same way Mcdonalds survives in cuisine. Some would call that a success, but few would admit to eating there.
Go ahead and use Linux without fear of reprisal; SCO distributed Linux under the terms of the GPL in the UK. That means you are cleared to use it under the terms of the GPL.
SCO/MS will never make specific claims anyway, so who cares WHAT they say.
Seems like their WHOLE business model at this point is making noise.
Yeah, the buzz is growing, but it's called Linux!
I was in the class that took the very last semester of COBOL in university.
I sort of liked COBOL. Apart from those inscrutable environment (and others, whose names I forget) sections, it was pretty straightforward and had a natural ability to decompose numbers (because of the field declarations), which was probably part of its mission (manipulating monetary amounts, preventing rounding errors, etc...), but I digress.
The strange part is I actually got extra points from a teacher during an exam for coding all my solutions recursively.
Mind you, this was in Modula-2, not COBOL.
Perhaps my COBOL prof would have been OK with it, but he'd been teaching COBOL for about a decade, and it *might* have upset him, who knows.
Maybe that's at the heart of the old guard / new guard issue?
That's In-Yer-Face.
Not the same thing at all...
I believe it IS good to have as much authentication as possible, but not to the point where it would make the system brittle.
;-)
It just seems that the more security layers you have to go through, the more chance you have of something failing.
What if you wanted to communicate with a non-compliant e-mail recipient?
Obviously, if SPF becomes the law of the land, and EVERYONE starts using it, the problem of spam would go away, at least for a while
But it's the same phenomena slowing IPv6 adoption, things work (albeit with certain problems) now.
SPF is certainly a good idea, but I can't see layfolk filling out SPF-records in order to send e-mail...
I expect we'll see a growing trend of people either using disposable e-mail addresses or changing addresses periodically. I wonder if that will slow down the spammers.
Of course nothing will really get us anywhere until we eliminate the viruses that perpetuate the problem.
For me, that meant dumping Microsoft, as it's more trouble than anything else. I know they have a firewall now, but after going to the trouble of learning Linux, I find I really do like it better anyway. For everyone else I recommend Macs.
I think there should be NO software acknowledgements;
True end-to-end acknowledgements (I personally send you a confirmation message) are the only REAL way to know a message was delivered, read and understood anyway.
But obviously, no one will go for that idea.