Get ready to pay postage on every e-mail you send out.
That however could be a good thing. Spam will die off very quickly. Unless some bright legislator gets pushed the idea that every e-mail a person receives should be taxed. Kinda like how you pay for cell phone calls whether you make the call or receive it.
It was to my mother. She never read the books (fantasy is not her thing), but loved the movie and could see why my father and I read them and loved them. Not long ago I showed her a trailer for The Two Towers. All she could say was "Gandalf's alive!?"
She's got two parents who although they work for the Federal Government (even one in software engineering) don't have personal computers. They just have their 'work' laptops.
Meanwhile cousin Dave has been searching desparately for a cheap way to give this girl a step up in the computer literacy dept.
God bless AOL. (I may have cancelled you and gotten a cable modem, but you were my first step into a larger world.)(well there was that 'Prodigy' thing but that didn't last long.)
...They're usually cut up to shreds taking out half of the good bits (Cursing, nudity, violence)and another half of the plot. Why are the studios so afraid of everyone copying TV signals? We've been doing that for years. There are two reasons to have a VCR:
First to watch VHS tapes
Second to record video signals from the TV
What else would you use the thing for? Door stop when it's broken status stumps the repair guys at the video store? Nifty deconstruction project? It seems everyone has been jumping on this 'Copy-Protection' bandwagon. Every other day or so on Slashdot there's some story about how this industry or that industry is trying to stop their customers from making copies. It can be anything from Software, to Movies, to Music, to now...TV!
IMHO all these industries would be better off setting up a watchdog program to see what people most copy or download etc. If something is so sought after that thousands of people are going hoponline and spend hours downloading it (and/or the copy-protection cracking devices and software needed to watch it), then they should take note that that's one of the things people want. Obviously the consumers are scrambling to get the thing, so they must want more of it. It's not like companies aren't already watching your every move online to determine what you want so they can offer to sell it to you. Why not just look at our habits at the source. If you copy protect a TV show and people chose to watch another rival show on the same time, and then hop online to download the show they missed maybe the broadcasters would get the idea that yes one show beat out another, but people still want to watch both. It seems to me it'd be more profitable to offer these digital broadcasts to the consumers to download just after the show airs.
If you give people what they want they will love you for it. Or haven't you noticed how/.ers have all run in droves to buy Philips products and support the one company out their that seems to be against the copy-protected CDs. Why the companies making MP3 players don't realize that the RIAA is trying to put them out of business and aren't screaming their heads off I don't know. I know I would. Oh wait I already am.
It's an impressive building designed to withstand all sorts of disaster movie ideas. So what?
As we've all seen time and time again the real threat to computer systems does not come in the form an earthquake, tidal wave, or random highjacked 767. The real threats rear their ugly heads when some idiot user doesn't update his M$Outlook security package, or takes his password out of the dictionary.
I'm not trying to say that physical threats to computer systems aren't important. By all means they are usually the last thing people think about. But the data here is only being protected from physcially being damaged and or lost. There's nothing in that article about firewall's, encryption, open access ports, faulty software, defective hardware, etcetera ad naseum.
The protection of data by the building is just one part of the problem of everything becoming digital. It's by no means the end all solution.
It's all well and good that companies want to make more money off of other companies. It's the little guy who gets caught in the middle as usual.
But there is another side to this. Higher Education. Many universities (like mine) have VPN's for commuters. My school alone has nearly 7,000 commuters out of a total of 9,000 students. Everything we do is online. Distance Learning courses, access to the online databases in the library, Registration, Webboards for classes, etc. We can even pay our bills online. But with these regulations it means that college students are classified in the same league as telecommuters.
Imagine a psychological therapy with a biofeedback tuned to give the patient music that will help his or her mood. Similar to bringing yourself out of a funk with progressively "happier" music.
Now imagine an improperly set chip sending a minimally depressed person into a spiralling downturn ending in suicide.
And then imagine "A Clockwork Orange," "1984," "Brave New World."...etc. We give a lot of power to our silicon interfaces (whatever form they may take) Nevertheless where does our control of the situation end, and someone/thing else's begin?
And Digital Media is not the same as tangible items.
"Digital transmission of a work does not implicate the alienability of a physical artifact.
When a work is transmitted, the sender is not exercising common-law dominion over an item of
personal property; he is exercising the central copyright right of reproduction with respect to the intangible work. Conversely, the copyright owner's reproduction right does not interfere at all with the ability of the owner of the physical copy to dispose of ownership or possession of that
copy, since the first sale doctrine applies fully with respect to the tangible object (e.g., the user's hard drive) in which the work is embodied."
In other words when you copy anything in a digital form it's not only as good as the original it's IDENTICAL. Which means...
"The concerns that animate the first sale doctrine do not apply to the transmission of works in digital form."
I.E. Fair use laws DO NOT apply in terms of digital media.
Slashdot Mirror
Get ready to pay postage on every e-mail you send out.
That however could be a good thing. Spam will die off very quickly. Unless some bright legislator gets pushed the idea that every e-mail a person receives should be taxed. Kinda like how you pay for cell phone calls whether you make the call or receive it.
Gateway Timeout
The following error occurred:
Server unreachable
----
Please contact the administrator
Good video game at least
Mod appropriately
It was to my mother. She never read the books (fantasy is not her thing), but loved the movie and could see why my father and I read them and loved them. Not long ago I showed her a trailer for The Two Towers. All she could say was "Gandalf's alive!?"
*snuggle with a loved one*
Restraining Order
Luckily no one signed up for their upgrade plan. They'd all be paying annual fees to upgrade their software while there weren't any upgrades at all.
...for my 4 year old cousin.
She's got two parents who although they work for the Federal Government (even one in software engineering) don't have personal computers. They just have their 'work' laptops.
Meanwhile cousin Dave has been searching desparately for a cheap way to give this girl a step up in the computer literacy dept.
God bless AOL. (I may have cancelled you and gotten a cable modem, but you were my first step into a larger world.)(well there was that 'Prodigy' thing but that didn't last long.)
What's an "illegitimate" sound recording? And who says so?
...They're usually cut up to shreds taking out half of the good bits (Cursing, nudity, violence)and another half of the plot. Why are the studios so afraid of everyone copying TV signals? We've been doing that for years. There are two reasons to have a VCR:
First to watch VHS tapes
Second to record video signals from the TV
What else would you use the thing for? Door stop when it's broken status stumps the repair guys at the video store? Nifty deconstruction project? It seems everyone has been jumping on this 'Copy-Protection' bandwagon. Every other day or so on Slashdot there's some story about how this industry or that industry is trying to stop their customers from making copies. It can be anything from Software, to Movies, to Music, to now...TV!
IMHO all these industries would be better off setting up a watchdog program to see what people most copy or download etc. If something is so sought after that thousands of people are going hoponline and spend hours downloading it (and/or the copy-protection cracking devices and software needed to watch it), then they should take note that that's one of the things people want. Obviously the consumers are scrambling to get the thing, so they must want more of it. It's not like companies aren't already watching your every move online to determine what you want so they can offer to sell it to you. Why not just look at our habits at the source. If you copy protect a TV show and people chose to watch another rival show on the same time, and then hop online to download the show they missed maybe the broadcasters would get the idea that yes one show beat out another, but people still want to watch both. It seems to me it'd be more profitable to offer these digital broadcasts to the consumers to download just after the show airs.
If you give people what they want they will love you for it. Or haven't you noticed how /.ers have all run in droves to buy Philips products and support the one company out their that seems to be against the copy-protected CDs. Why the companies making MP3 players don't realize that the RIAA is trying to put them out of business and aren't screaming their heads off I don't know. I know I would. Oh wait I already am.
It's an impressive building designed to withstand all sorts of disaster movie ideas. So what?
As we've all seen time and time again the real threat to computer systems does not come in the form an earthquake, tidal wave, or random highjacked 767. The real threats rear their ugly heads when some idiot user doesn't update his M$Outlook security package, or takes his password out of the dictionary.
I'm not trying to say that physical threats to computer systems aren't important. By all means they are usually the last thing people think about. But the data here is only being protected from physcially being damaged and or lost. There's nothing in that article about firewall's, encryption, open access ports, faulty software, defective hardware, etcetera ad naseum.
The protection of data by the building is just one part of the problem of everything becoming digital. It's by no means the end all solution.
It's all well and good that companies want to make more money off of other companies. It's the little guy who gets caught in the middle as usual.
But there is another side to this. Higher Education. Many universities (like mine) have VPN's for commuters. My school alone has nearly 7,000 commuters out of a total of 9,000 students. Everything we do is online. Distance Learning courses, access to the online databases in the library, Registration, Webboards for classes, etc. We can even pay our bills online. But with these regulations it means that college students are classified in the same league as telecommuters.
Imagine a psychological therapy with a biofeedback tuned to give the patient music that will help his or her mood. Similar to bringing yourself out of a funk with progressively "happier" music.
Now imagine an improperly set chip sending a minimally depressed person into a spiralling downturn ending in suicide.
And then imagine "A Clockwork Orange," "1984," "Brave New World." ...etc. We give a lot of power to our silicon interfaces (whatever form they may take) Nevertheless where does our control of the situation end, and someone/thing else's begin?
And Digital Media is not the same as tangible items.
"Digital transmission of a work does not implicate the alienability of a physical artifact. When a work is transmitted, the sender is not exercising common-law dominion over an item of personal property; he is exercising the central copyright right of reproduction with respect to the intangible work. Conversely, the copyright owner's reproduction right does not interfere at all with the ability of the owner of the physical copy to dispose of ownership or possession of that copy, since the first sale doctrine applies fully with respect to the tangible object (e.g., the user's hard drive) in which the work is embodied."
In other words when you copy anything in a digital form it's not only as good as the original it's IDENTICAL. Which means...
"The concerns that animate the first sale doctrine do not apply to the transmission of works in digital form."
I.E. Fair use laws DO NOT apply in terms of digital media.