Since everyone here is whining about how the new CD's will limit their legal rights to copy CD's for their own use (as if that's all they do), maybe someone could take the time to think of a better idea to prevent people from violating copyrights while preserving natural rights. I bet some slashdot readers could come up with a reasonable technology that would preserve everyone's rights, the listener's and the musician's.
After all, it's one thing to say "Musicians should share their music for free," but to steal the work of an unwilling party is theft, plain and simple. The musicians (and the record companies that market them) do own their work -- if they hadn't created it, no one else would have the privilege of listening to it. And if a particular artist's music or attitude doesn't appeal to you, don't listen to their music. But respect their wishes and don't steal their music -- that's just childish.
That's right, prisons are profitable, and the more people they lock up, the more profitable they are.
I don't buy for one second that punishments are geared toward making money for the prison system.
The idea of members of the DoJ sitting around, brainstorming new crime classifications to net them more money is ridiculous. Where is the government going to get this extra money to pay for each new inmate's care? Maybe you'd care to "put the costs side-by-side" for me?
Yes, criminals who are very intent on achieving their purpose will go about their business other ways. However, with the anonymity of the internet decreased somewhat, that will make this much more difficult. If police can monitor phone conversations, email, instant messages... etc, criminals have to make a much more concerted effort to be not discovered. And in the extra time it will take to communicate, we could be hot on their trail. No one expects any technology to 100% remove terrorism or crime from our society; we're simply looking for a comparative advantage.
As for Joe Schmoe, if encryption software must provide a government back-door, the change-over is probably seamless for him. He may have to download another program and install it (which, granted, isn't easy for everyone), but after that the implementation details are hidden from Joe. He doesn't have to do anything different than before.
Privacy won't be completely lost; it's not as if everyone will have free access to everyone else's emails. Obviously, this is excessive. However, the authorities who have the power to prevent criminals from striking will have access to emails when necessary (admittedly, I don't know under what circumstances Carnivore can be used now, or what the circumstances will be in the future.) At any rate, I am prepared to surrender my freedom of privacy for a much greater freedom: the freedom from harm.
Privacy is a funny thing. Everyone has secrets about himself that he would rather keep private: sometimes because having his secret revealed would be embarrassing, or would have legal ramifications, or numerous other reasons. Sometimes it's just assuring to know that there are some things you can keep private. Everyone deserves this freedom, right?
And yet, wouldn't it also be reassuring to know that people who are plotting your death wouldn't be able to keep that a secret? Don't you wish you could make the killers, the thiefs, and the serious do-badders give up their privacy without compromising your own?
Sadly, it's not so easy.
There are certainly times where privacy is invaded for petty reasons; for example, take the various spy services the web offers. Any Joe Schmuck with a few bucks can find out close personal details about anyone. That seems wrong to me.
However, I have no problem with the FBI scouring communications to detect potential suspects in major cases. I trust the FBI to be mature, not using Carnivore or related technologies for petty purposes. I will certainly stand and hand in the freedom to commit an anonymous crime for the peace of mind that everyone else has done the same.
Are ALL Compressions Tools of the Devil?
on
DivX;) Goes Legit
·
· Score: 2, Funny
Think of the ramifications of making compression illegal! Would that include even non-data compression? Would the streetcorner player have to hang up his accordion? Would the house wife or husband (for political correctness) be forced to burn their sponges?
Or maybe the real answer is to have someone police files being sent, and stretch them out... inserting extra bits everywhere... THAT would work! =D
-z3r0byt3
Slashdot Mirror
Since everyone here is whining about how the new CD's will limit their legal rights to copy CD's for their own use (as if that's all they do), maybe someone could take the time to think of a better idea to prevent people from violating copyrights while preserving natural rights. I bet some slashdot readers could come up with a reasonable technology that would preserve everyone's rights, the listener's and the musician's.
After all, it's one thing to say "Musicians should share their music for free," but to steal the work of an unwilling party is theft, plain and simple. The musicians (and the record companies that market them) do own their work -- if they hadn't created it, no one else would have the privilege of listening to it. And if a particular artist's music or attitude doesn't appeal to you, don't listen to their music. But respect their wishes and don't steal their music -- that's just childish.
That's right, prisons are profitable, and the more people they lock up, the more profitable they are.
I don't buy for one second that punishments are geared toward making money for the prison system. The idea of members of the DoJ sitting around, brainstorming new crime classifications to net them more money is ridiculous. Where is the government going to get this extra money to pay for each new inmate's care? Maybe you'd care to "put the costs side-by-side" for me?
Yes, criminals who are very intent on achieving their purpose will go about their business other ways. However, with the anonymity of the internet decreased somewhat, that will make this much more difficult. If police can monitor phone conversations, email, instant messages... etc, criminals have to make a much more concerted effort to be not discovered. And in the extra time it will take to communicate, we could be hot on their trail. No one expects any technology to 100% remove terrorism or crime from our society; we're simply looking for a comparative advantage.
As for Joe Schmoe, if encryption software must provide a government back-door, the change-over is probably seamless for him. He may have to download another program and install it (which, granted, isn't easy for everyone), but after that the implementation details are hidden from Joe. He doesn't have to do anything different than before.
Privacy won't be completely lost; it's not as if everyone will have free access to everyone else's emails. Obviously, this is excessive. However, the authorities who have the power to prevent criminals from striking will have access to emails when necessary (admittedly, I don't know under what circumstances Carnivore can be used now, or what the circumstances will be in the future.) At any rate, I am prepared to surrender my freedom of privacy for a much greater freedom: the freedom from harm.
Privacy is a funny thing. Everyone has secrets about himself that he would rather keep private: sometimes because having his secret revealed would be embarrassing, or would have legal ramifications, or numerous other reasons. Sometimes it's just assuring to know that there are some things you can keep private. Everyone deserves this freedom, right?
And yet, wouldn't it also be reassuring to know that people who are plotting your death wouldn't be able to keep that a secret? Don't you wish you could make the killers, the thiefs, and the serious do-badders give up their privacy without compromising your own?
Sadly, it's not so easy.
There are certainly times where privacy is invaded for petty reasons; for example, take the various spy services the web offers. Any Joe Schmuck with a few bucks can find out close personal details about anyone. That seems wrong to me.
However, I have no problem with the FBI scouring communications to detect potential suspects in major cases. I trust the FBI to be mature, not using Carnivore or related technologies for petty purposes. I will certainly stand and hand in the freedom to commit an anonymous crime for the peace of mind that everyone else has done the same.
Think of the ramifications of making compression illegal! Would that include even non-data compression? Would the streetcorner player have to hang up his accordion? Would the house wife or husband (for political correctness) be forced to burn their sponges? Or maybe the real answer is to have someone police files being sent, and stretch them out... inserting extra bits everywhere... THAT would work! =D -z3r0byt3