In my area (Dallas), cable has two lines, A and B. At least in my house, the data comes in on the A line, which has all the basic services, as well as the local channels. So no, you won't get free HBO just by splicing your cable internet line into your Hauppage WinTV. And who wants to watch broadcast TV anyway?
And as other people have said, lots of places have filters that block TV access anyway. Believe me, if there was an easy way to get free cable, I would know it; my uncle is a service tech for AT&T broadband.
They don't need to give you an incentive because they own the copyrights to the music.
They have it, they know you want it, and they know that the law is on their side. Unfortuantely the RIAA does not in and of itself have any customers, so it's not technically a monopoly, but it sure feels like one.
Yes, this may be great for those people who demand data to be "just that more secure", but this would never be popular on the consumer side. For one, their location changes constantly. And the number of changes would be prohibitive for the company to keep on verifying and changing and all that nonsense.
And two, people don't want to be limited to whatever platform the media companies want for them. The fact that car phones failed, or that people made tapes from vinyl all the time attests to that.
The only possibility I can think of would be the need for secure live feeds. But then wouldn't the receiving end have to pay a large fee for the equipment to process the data?
By clicking on the "I agree" button or whatever other method of coercion the software vendor chose to implement, you are (technically speaking) "agreeing" to concede certain rights.
So if I somehow hack the installer to bypass the EULA, does that mean I never agreed to it, and therefore has no effect on me?
Or would hacking violate the DMCA? Damned if you do, damned if you don't, apparently. Ah well, as long as I don't get caught, who cares, eh?
The article makes some nice points, and a lot of them I agree with. Personally, I think they should have brought up the monetary concerns a bit more, namely the fact that studio time costs a pretty penny, as well as does the distribution process for CDs, but that's forgivable.
The main problem I see with this pseudo-utopia of free information is the copyrights. Or rather, that the artists don't own them.
Copyrights, as far as I know, seemed to originate so as to promote creative and scientific work. Namely, being able to reap the rewards of coming up with something that people would want to buy. Now with the media moguls, the only thing promoting new work is that it's usually specifically stated in the artist's contract. "Make more or we'll sue", or something along those lines.
Now as far as I know, the bands still make most of their money from concerts and going on tour (as they should). With the digital age and the prospect of infinte supply, the media companies' business models are doomed to fail.
How about this for an idea: Force the distributors to give up the copyrights and give them back to the artist. Tear up all the old contracts. Now, instead of the monopolistic practices that they're using now, they may actually have to fight one another. Come up with new ways of making money from the distribution process that doesn't involve shafting both the consumer and the artist.
I'm sure everybody would be surprized at how quickly and effeciently the companies would change their business model if they knew they had to fight with one another to get contracts. And they would have to stay competitive or the artist could just pick up and leave.
I'm sure some of you more monetarily gifted than me can figure out a way to make money without actually holding the contracts. A percentage of sales, perhaps? Or maybe the artist paying the company to provide a service? There will still be the problem of who has the last say when it comes to media exposure, but I think that's what agents are for anyway. Take that job away from the Universals as well.
An idealized notion, I'm sure, but from my understanding of the situation, that's the key problem at this point in time...
This loss of productivity does not necessarily mean an individual can't find the UI elements that allow him or her to be productive on any computer. Rather, it is a more subtle issue that deals with the subconscious.
I don't know, I personally think it's the exact opposite. If you look at your standard Win9x or 2k/xp interface, generally they all look alike. Sure, your background is different, and the title bar may be a sightly different shade of blue, but it's not that big of a deal. I have yet to see somebody get lost on one of those machines, except in the case that they're a complete computer n00b.
The real productivity losses are when the paradigm shifts drastically. I'll be perfectly honest, the first time I sat down at a box running afterstep I didn't know what to do... And I'm sure almost everybody who sat down at my machine (I had the kickass gaming machine the hall in the dorm I lived on) running lightstep was completely lost. Some things about OS9 are annoying to me (namely the lack of a maximise button, and the fact that the mouse sensivitivy seems so low by default), although I haven't really gotten a chance to use OSX yet. But once I'm past that learning curve (may be 30 seconds, may be 5 minutes) as long as everything makes sense, it really doesn't matter after the fact.
Actually I just thought of something. If you're concerned about productivity, instead of making everything look exactly the same, make it behave exactly the same. I'm thinking specifically of shortcut keys. What is copy on a Mac? Apple+C or something? I dunno. Then again most [l]users don't use shortcut keys anyway.
And what's this little quote?
It is easy to create an image -- for example, one which looks like a bunch of open, overlapping windows -- that can make the computer a lot harder to use. You'll try to close a window, but it won't close because it is an image of a window. Lots of yuks, followed by lots of annoyance.
Wow, that makes almost as much sense as, well, something nonsensical. Sure, I can make it really annoying for somebody to use their computers, but that doesn't mean the ability to do that means I automatically will.
Of course people have been telling that to the companies that put out copy protected CDs for quite a while now, but they haven't been listening either... Hmm...
I need to lay off the crack, my inability to form a coherent thought process is impeding my karma whoring!
I'm not sure if this is true or not, but I heard you could manually degauss monitors with a magnet by going in circular motions from the center and working your way outward.
So if you have an old color monitor that's messed up, you just may be able to fix it. Of course, keep the magnets away from your RAID 0+1 array...
[Usenet] "As a Usenet discussion grows longer, the probability of a comparison involving Nazis or Hitler approaches one." There is a tradition in many groups that, once this occurs, that thread is over, and whoever mentioned the Nazis has automatically lost whatever argument was in progress. Godwin's Law thus practically guarantees the existence of an upper bound on thread length in those groups. However there is also a widely- recognized codicil that any intentional triggering of Godwin's Law in order to invoke its thread-ending effects will be unsuccessful.
Okay, Microsoft bundles a browser with their OS. Why not? It's the best thing for the end user in the end, and if MS designed their OS to use certain parts of their browser instead of others, good for them, they just saved having to write code more than once.
If they are persuing the IE thing because of Netscape, wouldn't a more suitable antitrust piece of evidence be the deals that MS made with OEMs saying "you cannot do this"? After all, those illegal deals (because MS is a monopoly) are the main source of the problem, not MS bundling XXX app with Windows.
I THINK the keygen that's being talked about (maybe not the one encoded above, haven't looked at it) is something that allows you to activate XP, not necessarily a CD key.
IOW: I think this thing is supposed to give you a number to type in that is the same thing that MS gives you if you call saying "uh, yea, I changed hardware and now I need to activate again".
Of course, I could be wrong.
And also, of course, I'm not being hassled by these activation woes.
*nix is pretty much capable of supporting itself, it's just that if you remove the "oh I can't run this in Linux" problem that people will have basically no reason NOT to switch over, if they want to.
I mean, look at the devices they're adding into it. Standard PC components with a bit more multimedia flair such as an FM tuner and a cable-ready TV tuner card.
The only thing that will make this thing worth while is if it actually pulls together some kick-ass software to bring the "multimedia hub" to the masses. Apples has done a great job of this, and it might be possible for MTV to pull of something major in the PC world.
Of course, I have yet ot actually see any software come out of MTV, so I doubt this will be useful at all.
Then again, it probably wouldn't be that useful to begin with. I mean, what good stuff is on the cable/fm airways to begin with?;)
If you've got an X-Box in your living room, you might be more likely to purchase games for it.
For some reason, I was reminded of the file-sharing market.
If people have the opportunity to try XBox games on their PC (maybe even buy one or two, or at least borrow from a friend or rent), then they may get interested enough in the console itself (as an emulator probably wouldn't go as fast as the box itself nor have the online capabilities) and then they get more interested in more games, and the cycle continues.
You are right, though. There are a lot of indirect relationships.
Slashdot Mirror
In my area (Dallas), cable has two lines, A and B. At least in my house, the data comes in on the A line, which has all the basic services, as well as the local channels. So no, you won't get free HBO just by splicing your cable internet line into your Hauppage WinTV. And who wants to watch broadcast TV anyway?
And as other people have said, lots of places have filters that block TV access anyway. Believe me, if there was an easy way to get free cable, I would know it; my uncle is a service tech for AT&T broadband.
Have a kid.
Well, if you think about it, that kid is going to go up and get laid for you, since s/he is going to be spreading at at least part of your seed.
So you'll still have the end result of getting laid without getting laid. Sucks, but hey, whatever.
"If demand goes down when the CD is restricted, then they MUST lower prices."
On a side note, isn't that traditional defintion of a monopoly? When they don't have to give into supply and demand?
They don't need to give you an incentive because they own the copyrights to the music.
They have it, they know you want it, and they know that the law is on their side. Unfortuantely the RIAA does not in and of itself have any customers, so it's not technically a monopoly, but it sure feels like one.
Anyone notice how the artists at the top of the charts don't have CDs worth having?
Yes, this may be great for those people who demand data to be "just that more secure", but this would never be popular on the consumer side. For one, their location changes constantly. And the number of changes would be prohibitive for the company to keep on verifying and changing and all that nonsense.
And two, people don't want to be limited to whatever platform the media companies want for them. The fact that car phones failed, or that people made tapes from vinyl all the time attests to that.
The only possibility I can think of would be the need for secure live feeds. But then wouldn't the receiving end have to pay a large fee for the equipment to process the data?
"All your Yahoo are belong to us!"
I'll probably be moderated negatively for that.
Well, how DID you react? I hope you returned the CD to the store.
Obviously, if the CD is uncopyable, then the store would have logical reason to not let you return it, no?
So THAT's what we've been imagining all those beowulf clusters of machines to do...
So if I somehow hack the installer to bypass the EULA, does that mean I never agreed to it, and therefore has no effect on me?
Or would hacking violate the DMCA? Damned if you do, damned if you don't, apparently. Ah well, as long as I don't get caught, who cares, eh?
The article makes some nice points, and a lot of them I agree with. Personally, I think they should have brought up the monetary concerns a bit more, namely the fact that studio time costs a pretty penny, as well as does the distribution process for CDs, but that's forgivable.
The main problem I see with this pseudo-utopia of free information is the copyrights. Or rather, that the artists don't own them.
Copyrights, as far as I know, seemed to originate so as to promote creative and scientific work. Namely, being able to reap the rewards of coming up with something that people would want to buy. Now with the media moguls, the only thing promoting new work is that it's usually specifically stated in the artist's contract. "Make more or we'll sue", or something along those lines.
Now as far as I know, the bands still make most of their money from concerts and going on tour (as they should). With the digital age and the prospect of infinte supply, the media companies' business models are doomed to fail.
How about this for an idea: Force the distributors to give up the copyrights and give them back to the artist. Tear up all the old contracts. Now, instead of the monopolistic practices that they're using now, they may actually have to fight one another. Come up with new ways of making money from the distribution process that doesn't involve shafting both the consumer and the artist.
I'm sure everybody would be surprized at how quickly and effeciently the companies would change their business model if they knew they had to fight with one another to get contracts. And they would have to stay competitive or the artist could just pick up and leave.
I'm sure some of you more monetarily gifted than me can figure out a way to make money without actually holding the contracts. A percentage of sales, perhaps? Or maybe the artist paying the company to provide a service? There will still be the problem of who has the last say when it comes to media exposure, but I think that's what agents are for anyway. Take that job away from the Universals as well.
An idealized notion, I'm sure, but from my understanding of the situation, that's the key problem at this point in time...
Ah, such is a sign of the times, where the kids don't have enough attention span to realize that all of their items are for the PS2.
I mean, seriously, do the USB keyboard and mice NOT work on other devices or something?
SUE THEM!!!
The GPL was made for a reason. What better reason than making easy money off lawsuits, no?
The real productivity losses are when the paradigm shifts drastically. I'll be perfectly honest, the first time I sat down at a box running afterstep I didn't know what to do... And I'm sure almost everybody who sat down at my machine (I had the kickass gaming machine the hall in the dorm I lived on) running lightstep was completely lost. Some things about OS9 are annoying to me (namely the lack of a maximise button, and the fact that the mouse sensivitivy seems so low by default), although I haven't really gotten a chance to use OSX yet. But once I'm past that learning curve (may be 30 seconds, may be 5 minutes) as long as everything makes sense, it really doesn't matter after the fact.
Actually I just thought of something. If you're concerned about productivity, instead of making everything look exactly the same, make it behave exactly the same. I'm thinking specifically of shortcut keys. What is copy on a Mac? Apple+C or something? I dunno. Then again most [l]users don't use shortcut keys anyway.
And what's this little quote?
Wow, that makes almost as much sense as, well, something nonsensical. Sure, I can make it really annoying for somebody to use their computers, but that doesn't mean the ability to do that means I automatically will.
Of course people have been telling that to the companies that put out copy protected CDs for quite a while now, but they haven't been listening either... Hmm...
I need to lay off the crack, my inability to form a coherent thought process is impeding my karma whoring!
I'm not sure if this is true or not, but I heard you could manually degauss monitors with a magnet by going in circular motions from the center and working your way outward.
So if you have an old color monitor that's messed up, you just may be able to fix it. Of course, keep the magnets away from your RAID 0+1 array...
Sorry, no dice.
Okay, Microsoft bundles a browser with their OS. Why not? It's the best thing for the end user in the end, and if MS designed their OS to use certain parts of their browser instead of others, good for them, they just saved having to write code more than once.
If they are persuing the IE thing because of Netscape, wouldn't a more suitable antitrust piece of evidence be the deals that MS made with OEMs saying "you cannot do this"? After all, those illegal deals (because MS is a monopoly) are the main source of the problem, not MS bundling XXX app with Windows.
I THINK the keygen that's being talked about (maybe not the one encoded above, haven't looked at it) is something that allows you to activate XP, not necessarily a CD key.
IOW: I think this thing is supposed to give you a number to type in that is the same thing that MS gives you if you call saying "uh, yea, I changed hardware and now I need to activate again".
Of course, I could be wrong.
And also, of course, I'm not being hassled by these activation woes.
Not to mention that doing pratically ANYTHING seven hours a day is bad for your health. Repetitive stress disorders, and all that nonsense.
*nix is pretty much capable of supporting itself, it's just that if you remove the "oh I can't run this in Linux" problem that people will have basically no reason NOT to switch over, if they want to.
It's all about choices.
Ahh, forget it...
I mean, look at the devices they're adding into it. Standard PC components with a bit more multimedia flair such as an FM tuner and a cable-ready TV tuner card.
;)
The only thing that will make this thing worth while is if it actually pulls together some kick-ass software to bring the "multimedia hub" to the masses. Apples has done a great job of this, and it might be possible for MTV to pull of something major in the PC world.
Of course, I have yet ot actually see any software come out of MTV, so I doubt this will be useful at all.
Then again, it probably wouldn't be that useful to begin with. I mean, what good stuff is on the cable/fm airways to begin with?
When a matter particle comes into contact with an antimatter particle, they annihilate each other and produce kinetic energy.
Why bother with antimatter? I had the same effect with my last marriage.
If you've got an X-Box in your living room, you might be more likely to purchase games for it.
For some reason, I was reminded of the file-sharing market.
If people have the opportunity to try XBox games on their PC (maybe even buy one or two, or at least borrow from a friend or rent), then they may get interested enough in the console itself (as an emulator probably wouldn't go as fast as the box itself nor have the online capabilities) and then they get more interested in more games, and the cycle continues.
You are right, though. There are a lot of indirect relationships.
labels still fret that consumers will pirate great gobs of downloadable music and put them out of business.
In that case I'm going to purposely pirate Backstreet Boys to make them go bankrupt.