Actually, more technology for us will mean less casualties for them--look at the GPS targeting, and other methods of pinpointing exactly where to put our missiles. Those will help us not to blow up civilian targets any more than we decide to (which, presumably, will be not at all). Of course, these are not foolproof--already one missile went off course and killed two poor civilian sheep (really!).
I've been thinking about it, too, and what's to stop someone from creating a scenario like this:
You want to download something. Doesn't much matter what. You click on the download link, and a page comes up saying, "If your download does not automatically start in 5 seconds, click here. While you're waiting, why not read the EULA?" You are (really) bored, so you actually take a look at the EULA. As you keep reading, you're horrified at the stuff it prohibits you from doing and the stuff it lets the writer do. Then you get to the bottom of the page. "By allowing the download to proceed, you indicate that you have agreed to all the above terms and conditions blah blah blah."
So, unless you can speed-read the whole thing in under 5 seconds and stop the download from starting, you've just signed your life away. I can't see that it's, conceptually, much more unreasonable than the current methods.
But that's not really right either; software isn't really information, except in its purest form, source code. By itself, information cannot do anything. Software, on the other hand, can. It can perform marvelous tasks at the click of a button. Now, it doesn't even need you to double-click on it; it can run automatically, or even, in some cases, download itself to your computer without your even clicking through a license agreement, run itself, and install itself so deeply you need to reformat and reinstall Windows to get it out. But simply calling it information simply doesn't do justice to it. Our problem is we are trying to use 18th century terminology and ways of thinking to regulate 21st century technology. Software is its own category and should be treated as such. There should be completely separate laws regulating it (and I, personally, think they shouldn't be too restrictive). We are still, fundamentally, using outmoded styles of thinking, and we need to update our--and especially our government's--ways of looking at the world.
That's generally a very good way of doing things, and there is a product called KeyServer for Mac that can do this with any product that doesn't do it for itself. However, there is a fatal flaw: disconnect the machine running the extra spawned copy, and there's no possible way it can tell that someone else is using another copy with the same license code, or whatever. It's one thing with a multiplayer game, where you have to be connected anyway, but with something like this, even if you need to put your work on a server, all you need to do is disconnect, work, close, reconnect, put it on the server.
Actually, not only has something like this happened, it was on slashdot--and it wasn't just some company, it was public schools that were hard-up to begin with. Granted, there was "piracy" going on, but it wasn't like it was malicious, or (and this pretty much applies to any case of small-time piracy) it wasn't hurting Microsoft any more than losing a penny down the sofa would hurt you or me.
Slashdot Mirror
Actually, more technology for us will mean less casualties for them--look at the GPS targeting, and other methods of pinpointing exactly where to put our missiles. Those will help us not to blow up civilian targets any more than we decide to (which, presumably, will be not at all). Of course, these are not foolproof--already one missile went off course and killed two poor civilian sheep (really!).
Dan Aris
I've been thinking about it, too, and what's to stop someone from creating a scenario like this:
You want to download something. Doesn't much matter what. You click on the download link, and a page comes up saying, "If your download does not automatically start in 5 seconds, click here. While you're waiting, why not read the EULA?" You are (really) bored, so you actually take a look at the EULA. As you keep reading, you're horrified at the stuff it prohibits you from doing and the stuff it lets the writer do. Then you get to the bottom of the page. "By allowing the download to proceed, you indicate that you have agreed to all the above terms and conditions blah blah blah."
So, unless you can speed-read the whole thing in under 5 seconds and stop the download from starting, you've just signed your life away. I can't see that it's, conceptually, much more unreasonable than the current methods.
Dan Aris
But that's not really right either; software isn't really information, except in its purest form, source code. By itself, information cannot do anything. Software, on the other hand, can. It can perform marvelous tasks at the click of a button. Now, it doesn't even need you to double-click on it; it can run automatically, or even, in some cases, download itself to your computer without your even clicking through a license agreement, run itself, and install itself so deeply you need to reformat and reinstall Windows to get it out. But simply calling it information simply doesn't do justice to it. Our problem is we are trying to use 18th century terminology and ways of thinking to regulate 21st century technology. Software is its own category and should be treated as such. There should be completely separate laws regulating it (and I, personally, think they shouldn't be too restrictive). We are still, fundamentally, using outmoded styles of thinking, and we need to update our--and especially our government's--ways of looking at the world.
Dan Aris
Welcome to the 21st Century.
There's also the issue of registry faults as an inadvertant form of copy protection...
:-P
What makes you so sure it's inadvertent...?
Dan Aris
That's generally a very good way of doing things, and there is a product called KeyServer for Mac that can do this with any product that doesn't do it for itself. However, there is a fatal flaw: disconnect the machine running the extra spawned copy, and there's no possible way it can tell that someone else is using another copy with the same license code, or whatever. It's one thing with a multiplayer game, where you have to be connected anyway, but with something like this, even if you need to put your work on a server, all you need to do is disconnect, work, close, reconnect, put it on the server.
Dan Aris
Actually, not only has something like this happened, it was on slashdot--and it wasn't just some company, it was public schools that were hard-up to begin with. Granted, there was "piracy" going on, but it wasn't like it was malicious, or (and this pretty much applies to any case of small-time piracy) it wasn't hurting Microsoft any more than losing a penny down the sofa would hurt you or me.
Dan Aris