Re:I'll mention that to Steve Jobs ...
on
PressPlay + Roxio?
·
· Score: 1
Damn our reality knocks! You definitely sound like you believe that people shouldn't have to pay for music. Not everyone believes the same, however. That doesn't make us suckers.
It's not that I don't think people should pay. But I've met many, many more people that think there's absolutely nothing wrong with downloading music through P2P. I've met more people who vehemently state they'll never buy CDs again (as long as there's a way to get it free) than I have people willing to pay for music. Yes, it's a pretty small sampling of the world in general, but I think it is representative. Just my opinion of course.
Are 128Kbps songs worth 99 cents? I wouldn't pay a dime for a 128Kbps song. Right now I'm paying what... 4 decent songs on a CD... $3 to encode as high a bitrate as I want. If they offer 384Kbps for 99 cents, then yeah, I'd consider it worthwhile.
How many of those 275 million Americans have a Mac? If you don't have a Mac, then you can't buy from Apple. So people who don't have Mac's don't count in figuring the percentage of peopl who are buying music from Apple right now. Divide 30,000 by Apple's installed base right now, and then you'll get a relevant percentage of people actually paying for digital music. And you'll find the percentage is high enough to give RIAA executives wet dreams and nightmares, all at the same time.
According to the Washington Post in 2000, around 50% of the homes had computers. With 4% Mac share, that's 5.5 million macs. 30k users is still less than 1% of Mac users out there using the service.
Wet dreams and nightmares; the RIAA's expectations have always been unrealistic; their wet dreams are everyone using this service and getting at least *some* money from online sales; their nightmares is a complete revamping of music sales and the end of high profit CD sales. Both nightmares and dreams include the end of P2P or any illegal file sharing, which won't happen, as I said previously, with this service alone- it will take a lot more to kill P2P music sharing.
Clearly, we made better use of that time than they did. They slacked off instead of evolving, so they don't get to be in the same rank.
I think it's the other way around. I've worked in the tech field for 15 years now, and it'll be another 30+ years before I get to sit on my ass all day scratching my balls and eating bananas...
Re:I'll mention that to Steve Jobs ...
on
PressPlay + Roxio?
·
· Score: 2
I'll mention that to Steve Jobs...
and the folks at Apple Music Store. They'll be glad to know that their efforts won't work.
The only thing that Apple has EVER proven is the ol' saying "there's a sucker born every minute"... remember the good ol' Performa machines? You had to be a sucker to buy one.
Out of 275 million americans, some 30,000 people bought songs? That's.01% of the american public... not to impressive in my book. These people are probably people who *buy* CDs in the first place- they are, after all, Mac owners and have bought into the whole "spend more money for *quality*" philosophy. Essence preceeds existence type thing.
Wait until it hits the *real* world, PC users who are much more frugal about spending money on things they can just download for free. The numbers of users downloading won't put a dent in P2P music services (at least not on its own).
How long? They already do, DVD players and CSS for one. Lexmark printers are another.
If this becomes popular, I forsee xbox hackers running linux and snort not only to leech bandwidth, but to steal cable- it's an ideal platform to do it.
And I doubt MS would be too upset that you're stealing from (and thus lowering the revenue of) AOL-TW...
Microsoft buys the right to sue everyone that pushes Linux.
No. In order to do that, they would have to buy it, not license it.
No, it doesn't. Anybody can sue anybody else at any time for any reason. That's the American legal system. Now, if there's no legal justification for the suit, it *should* get tossed. But if MS can argue the case, or keep the case open long enough, you're going to settle out of court like everyone else of large corporations, of the BSA, RIAA, MPAA... the mere threat of a lawsuit makes people settle because most people don't have the money to prove the large corporations and associations are falsly accusing them.
Re:Meanwhile, a LEGAL and FUNCTIONAL PC
on
Hacking the XBox
·
· Score: 4, Insightful
which runs the Linux OS can be had from wal-mart for >$100 less.
I'm sorry, I don't see the appeal of this?
Not that we haven't gone over this a thousand times on/., but:
XBox- Great graphics to a TV (which most people already have). Great stereo output.
WalMart PC- crappy video, crappy sound, cheap components all around. Still need to buy a monitor. Only available through mail order, that's at least $30 shipping (plus tax since Wal-Mart has a physical presence in your state). Doesn't fit in TV console, doesn't look good sitting on top of VCR. Doesn't play DVDs. Doesn't play xbox games. Doesn't play many games at all. Need to get IR mouse/kb or you can't use it from the couch.
You're probably too young to remember this, but the reasons the Commodore 64 sold so well was it was much cheaper than other computers, but mostly because you could plug it right into the TV. The IBM PCjr selling for $1000 was too expensive for most people, but a C64 and tape drive could be had for $200 (or less!) and plugged right into the TV. That's what introduced millions of us to computers- the fact we didn't need to buy an expensive monitor. And the awesome COLOR graphics, sound, the the sheer number of games available, put the C64 into many homes. Oh, and most retailers were willing to sell the C64 at a loss to get customers in to buy the accessories and games.
If MS were to market a "game" that consisted of Windows, Word and Excel, with a cheap xbox printer, I think it could create a HUGE market for the xbox, similar what happened with the C64.
Re:I always wondered...
on
Spam, Milord
·
· Score: 1
Of what gets through, most is from one penis spammer and one porno spammer. They each send the exact same spam several times a day. My guess is that in addition to the matter of filters, they realise that their spams are in competition with everyone else's spams. Nobody ever reads all their spam; at most, you'll glance at one or two then nuke the lot. So, the spammer's best means of making sure it's THEIR spam that gets read is - send many copies.
Is it multiple copies from the same spammer, or is the "advertiser" (and I use that word loosly) using multiple spammer to send the same message? Spammers have different lists, different relays, might be on different blacklists. It'd make sense to use multiple spammers in one shot to reach the most people in the short time frame you have your PO Box open and phone number connected.
The Sacagawea dollar coin went the way of the Susan B because they kept printing singles.
No, they went that way because nobody used them.
They are too heavy to carry. I have a couple sitting in the ashtray of my car in case I need to get a soda or something, but I never carry any in my pocket- they're just too bulky to replace singles.
Second, most vending machines still don't accept them. They get stuck, and you lose a buck.
Third, you ever try slipping a dollar coin into a stripper's g-string?
Seriosuly, this would not even be legal in the state of California
Did you look at it? It's not the standard AK 30 round clip but the short sporting clip which holds 10 rounds, legal to sell and own under the current laws.
Bringing it on a plane... I certainly wouldn't. Pass it through the xray, they see a strange electronic device with batteries... what are they gonna think? You pull it out and it's a magazine to an AK and you're toast. Hell, it might even contain some chemical powder residue detectible by the sniffers, then you're really hosed.
I personally believe that if we were to be the only life in the Universe that this would be divine intervention simply because of the statistics, would you agree?
And Drakaea elastica must also be a work of God, because, statistically, it's unlikely that a flower would grow to be shaped and scented so similar to a female wasp that males attempt to mate witht he flower.
If someone discovers that there are rebroadcasts of 40's baseball games with encoded secret plans,
will the DMCA sue the aliens for rights violations? Shut E.T. down, Napster-style?
Well, MLB will probably sue; you know after every game, they always say something like "this game may not be broadcast without the written consent of the commissioner and MLB teams..."
So the first contact will probably be some sort of extraterrestial fax requesting permission said...
Alan Greenspan is asking some tough questions about the correct balance between rewarding innovators and inhibiting follow-on innovators
What balance? Doesn't rewarding innovators with a patent naturally inhibit follow-on innovators?
From the speech: How appropriate is our current system--developed for a world in which physical assets predominated--for an economy in which value increasingly is embodied in ideas rather than tangible capital?
Can't wait to see what they come up with at the conference. We've been saying the patent system needs an overhaul, wonder if they'll reach the same conclusions we've reached here.
It would be like if you changed the biological classification system so that bears were no longer Mammals. What difference does this make to the bears? None. What difference does this make in how we relate to bears? None.
Of course it matters. Pluto rules Scorpio, but more importantly the Eighth House, which is the house of Sex. Now, you may not believe in astrology, and think it's a bunch of crap... but are you willing to risk losing the House of Sex over some silly naming convention?
Sure, call the others planets, astrologists will have to figure out where the fit in. But don't mess with the House of Sex!
Also, wasn't there a case where Polaroid tried to keep (Kodak? or was it the other way around) from making film for their cameras? (and then in the Mainframe arena there was some lawsuit between IBM and Amdahl where IBM was trying to keep Amdahl's tape units out of IBM's mainframes - IBM lost as I recall). These are all pretty fuzzy rememberances, perhaps someone who knows these cases could comment? Anyway, something seems pretty screwy here, it seems like there is a lot of precedent out there that is totally opposite of this ruling
In the Polaroid case, Kodak negotiated a settlement in the patent infringement case, which included not selling any more of the instant cameras or film. A class-action suit was quickly filed against Kodak on behalf of the thousands or millions of people who now had useless cameras, and refund were offered. Not much into reading the papers in 1986 and I missed out on it. I was pissed when I finally went to use the camera and found the film wasn't available. Never bought Polaroid again, and I rarely buy anything from Kodak.
So it's similar, Polaroid used Patent Law while Lexmark is using the DMCA. I don't think it's a precedent, but if anything it probably goes to support the Lexmark case.
breaking up windows would destroy the OS when the antitrust suit was on?
Their arguement was about taking IE out of Windows. The article talks about breaking up OfficeXP into individual packages, WordXP and ExcelXP, so you aren't forced to buy the entire Office suite.
Do you keep 7 months of receipts? 7 months of bills? Because if law enforcement can use 7 months worth of your communications patterns in court against you, you would better have at least 7 months worth of documentation with which to defend yourself.
Come on, even hard drives are still warrantied for one year. That means you gotta keep your receipt if you're gonna prove it died within warranty.
I keep all receipts and bills for three years at the very least. First, in case something does come up, like the IRS declining deductions they accepted in the past years- those deductions are worth more than than keeping a couple boxes of old bills. Second, warranties, especially the extended warranties which businesses conveniently forget I have until I show them the receipt. Third, insurance purposes, in case of theft or fire. Lastly, when I sell something off, it's good to have the receipt so I can figure out how much it's worth (for taxes if applicable).
And yeah, to prove that no, I did not call that person, that call does not appear on my bill.
Do you even understand that statement? How such a flippant comment says so much about a killer mountain that takes lives without mercy, taking some of the best (and some of the not so best) mountaineers mankind ever produced.
There's a world of difference between pitting yourself against mother nature, knowing that even the smallest mistake can lead to the the deaths of you and your entire team; and being out $200 because you shorted out the GPU of the xbox.
Its like Kennedy said, we do it not becauase we can or should, we do it because its there.
At least get the damn thing right. He never said because it was there. He didn't imply man climbed mountains because they were there. He did say
We choose to go to the moon. We choose to go to the moon in this decade and do the other things, not because they are easy, but because they are hard, because that goal will serve to organize and measure the best of our energies and skills, because that challenge is one that we are willing to accept, one we are unwilling to postpone, and one which we intend to win, and the others, too.
Man, a simple google search would have made you look insightful instead of clueless.
Yeah, hear what you're saying. It's not much worse than banning the books outright... actually it does seem worse, like entrapment. Anyway, I bought all those books in a college town used book store with cash, best way to buy a book.
I think I'll start checking out pro-goverment books at the library... look good on my permanent record. Any recommendations?
Doesn't Kazza search files based on a common fingerprint though? How am I going to find 5 people to download "cowboyneil uncut.mpg" from when they all have a different fingerprint.
It's not in giving the file different fingerprints, it's in giving the traffic in general good encryption. Searching, downloads, etc... it should all be encrypted.
My only other concern with this... how much processor gets sucked down while encrypting/unencrypting 5-10 different files, at several segments per file, at 128bit+ encryption?
They're not talking about encrypting individual files. SSL Encapsulation is encrypting the traffic between peers, so sniffers cannot see what is being sent and prevent man-in-the-middle attacks.
Slashdot Mirror
Damn our reality knocks! You definitely sound like you believe that people shouldn't have to pay for music. Not everyone believes the same, however. That doesn't make us suckers.
It's not that I don't think people should pay. But I've met many, many more people that think there's absolutely nothing wrong with downloading music through P2P. I've met more people who vehemently state they'll never buy CDs again (as long as there's a way to get it free) than I have people willing to pay for music. Yes, it's a pretty small sampling of the world in general, but I think it is representative. Just my opinion of course.
Are 128Kbps songs worth 99 cents? I wouldn't pay a dime for a 128Kbps song. Right now I'm paying what... 4 decent songs on a CD... $3 to encode as high a bitrate as I want. If they offer 384Kbps for 99 cents, then yeah, I'd consider it worthwhile.
How many of those 275 million Americans have a Mac? If you don't have a Mac, then you can't buy from Apple. So people who don't have Mac's don't count in figuring the percentage of peopl who are buying music from Apple right now.
Divide 30,000 by Apple's installed base right now, and then you'll get a relevant percentage of people actually paying for digital music. And you'll find the percentage is high enough to give RIAA executives wet dreams and nightmares, all at the same time.
According to the Washington Post in 2000, around 50% of the homes had computers. With 4% Mac share, that's 5.5 million macs. 30k users is still less than 1% of Mac users out there using the service.
Wet dreams and nightmares; the RIAA's expectations have always been unrealistic; their wet dreams are everyone using this service and getting at least *some* money from online sales; their nightmares is a complete revamping of music sales and the end of high profit CD sales. Both nightmares and dreams include the end of P2P or any illegal file sharing, which won't happen, as I said previously, with this service alone- it will take a lot more to kill P2P music sharing.
Clearly, we made better use of that time than they did. They slacked off instead of evolving, so they don't get to be in the same rank.
I think it's the other way around. I've worked in the tech field for 15 years now, and it'll be another 30+ years before I get to sit on my ass all day scratching my balls and eating bananas...
I'll mention that to Steve Jobs ...
and the folks at Apple Music Store. They'll be glad to know that their efforts won't work.
.01% of the american public... not to impressive in my book. These people are probably people who *buy* CDs in the first place- they are, after all, Mac owners and have bought into the whole "spend more money for *quality*" philosophy. Essence preceeds existence type thing.
The only thing that Apple has EVER proven is the ol' saying "there's a sucker born every minute"... remember the good ol' Performa machines? You had to be a sucker to buy one.
Out of 275 million americans, some 30,000 people bought songs? That's
Wait until it hits the *real* world, PC users who are much more frugal about spending money on things they can just download for free. The numbers of users downloading won't put a dent in P2P music services (at least not on its own).
How long? They already do, DVD players and CSS for one. Lexmark printers are another.
If this becomes popular, I forsee xbox hackers running linux and snort not only to leech bandwidth, but to steal cable- it's an ideal platform to do it.
And I doubt MS would be too upset that you're stealing from (and thus lowering the revenue of) AOL-TW...
Microsoft buys the right to sue everyone that pushes Linux.
No. In order to do that, they would have to buy it, not license it.
No, it doesn't. Anybody can sue anybody else at any time for any reason. That's the American legal system. Now, if there's no legal justification for the suit, it *should* get tossed. But if MS can argue the case, or keep the case open long enough, you're going to settle out of court like everyone else of large corporations, of the BSA, RIAA, MPAA... the mere threat of a lawsuit makes people settle because most people don't have the money to prove the large corporations and associations are falsly accusing them.
which runs the Linux OS can be had from wal-mart for >$100 less. I'm sorry, I don't see the appeal of this?
/., but:
Not that we haven't gone over this a thousand times on
XBox- Great graphics to a TV (which most people already have). Great stereo output.
WalMart PC- crappy video, crappy sound, cheap components all around. Still need to buy a monitor. Only available through mail order, that's at least $30 shipping (plus tax since Wal-Mart has a physical presence in your state). Doesn't fit in TV console, doesn't look good sitting on top of VCR. Doesn't play DVDs. Doesn't play xbox games. Doesn't play many games at all. Need to get IR mouse/kb or you can't use it from the couch.
You're probably too young to remember this, but the reasons the Commodore 64 sold so well was it was much cheaper than other computers, but mostly because you could plug it right into the TV. The IBM PCjr selling for $1000 was too expensive for most people, but a C64 and tape drive could be had for $200 (or less!) and plugged right into the TV. That's what introduced millions of us to computers- the fact we didn't need to buy an expensive monitor. And the awesome COLOR graphics, sound, the the sheer number of games available, put the C64 into many homes. Oh, and most retailers were willing to sell the C64 at a loss to get customers in to buy the accessories and games.
If MS were to market a "game" that consisted of Windows, Word and Excel, with a cheap xbox printer, I think it could create a HUGE market for the xbox, similar what happened with the C64.
Of what gets through, most is from one penis spammer and one porno spammer. They each send the exact same spam several times a day. My guess is that in addition to the matter of filters, they realise that their spams are in competition with everyone else's spams. Nobody ever reads all their spam; at most, you'll glance at one or two then nuke the lot. So, the spammer's best means of making sure it's THEIR spam that gets read is - send many copies.
Is it multiple copies from the same spammer, or is the "advertiser" (and I use that word loosly) using multiple spammer to send the same message? Spammers have different lists, different relays, might be on different blacklists. It'd make sense to use multiple spammers in one shot to reach the most people in the short time frame you have your PO Box open and phone number connected.
The Sacagawea dollar coin went the way of the Susan B because they kept printing singles.
No, they went that way because nobody used them.
They are too heavy to carry. I have a couple sitting in the ashtray of my car in case I need to get a soda or something, but I never carry any in my pocket- they're just too bulky to replace singles.
Second, most vending machines still don't accept them. They get stuck, and you lose a buck.
Third, you ever try slipping a dollar coin into a stripper's g-string?
Seriosuly, this would not even be legal in the state of California
Did you look at it? It's not the standard AK 30 round clip but the short sporting clip which holds 10 rounds, legal to sell and own under the current laws.
Bringing it on a plane... I certainly wouldn't. Pass it through the xray, they see a strange electronic device with batteries... what are they gonna think? You pull it out and it's a magazine to an AK and you're toast. Hell, it might even contain some chemical powder residue detectible by the sniffers, then you're really hosed.
And set up a cheap SEP field... oh wait, that's how you'd make it invisible...
Why, I would move it with a teaspoon, naturally. How much more Zen can you get than that?
Well, a zen master would use chopsticks...
I personally believe that if we were to be the only life in the Universe that this would be divine intervention simply because of the statistics, would you agree?
And Drakaea elastica must also be a work of God, because, statistically, it's unlikely that a flower would grow to be shaped and scented so similar to a female wasp that males attempt to mate witht he flower.
If someone discovers that there are rebroadcasts of 40's baseball games with encoded secret plans, will the DMCA sue the aliens for rights violations? Shut E.T. down, Napster-style?
Well, MLB will probably sue; you know after every game, they always say something like "this game may not be broadcast without the written consent of the commissioner and MLB teams..."
So the first contact will probably be some sort of extraterrestial fax requesting permission said...
Good - The two year wait may discourage the frivolous inventions we see, like say This one [crazypatents.com]
Frivolous? Maybe, since it's only force-sensing. Now, if it were force-feedback, think of the possibilities in the VR world...
Alan Greenspan is asking some tough questions about the correct balance between rewarding innovators and inhibiting follow-on innovators
What balance? Doesn't rewarding innovators with a patent naturally inhibit follow-on innovators?
From the speech: How appropriate is our current system--developed for a world in which physical assets predominated--for an economy in which value increasingly is embodied in ideas rather than tangible capital?
Can't wait to see what they come up with at the conference. We've been saying the patent system needs an overhaul, wonder if they'll reach the same conclusions we've reached here.
It would be like if you changed the biological classification system so that bears were no longer Mammals. What difference does this make to the bears? None. What difference does this make in how we relate to bears? None.
Of course it matters. Pluto rules Scorpio, but more importantly the Eighth House, which is the house of Sex. Now, you may not believe in astrology, and think it's a bunch of crap... but are you willing to risk losing the House of Sex over some silly naming convention?
Sure, call the others planets, astrologists will have to figure out where the fit in. But don't mess with the House of Sex!
Also, wasn't there a case where Polaroid tried to keep (Kodak? or was it the other way around) from making film for their cameras? (and then in the Mainframe arena there was some lawsuit between IBM and Amdahl where IBM was trying to keep Amdahl's tape units out of IBM's mainframes - IBM lost as I recall). These are all pretty fuzzy rememberances, perhaps someone who knows these cases could comment? Anyway, something seems pretty screwy here, it seems like there is a lot of precedent out there that is totally opposite of this ruling
In the Polaroid case, Kodak negotiated a settlement in the patent infringement case, which included not selling any more of the instant cameras or film. A class-action suit was quickly filed against Kodak on behalf of the thousands or millions of people who now had useless cameras, and refund were offered. Not much into reading the papers in 1986 and I missed out on it. I was pissed when I finally went to use the camera and found the film wasn't available. Never bought Polaroid again, and I rarely buy anything from Kodak.
So it's similar, Polaroid used Patent Law while Lexmark is using the DMCA. I don't think it's a precedent, but if anything it probably goes to support the Lexmark case.
you should eliminate all humans first.
Yeah! That'll leave world full of psychopaths with us geeks building road-warrioresque ORVs and maintaining the oil rigs...
breaking up windows would destroy the OS when the antitrust suit was on?
Their arguement was about taking IE out of Windows. The article talks about breaking up OfficeXP into individual packages, WordXP and ExcelXP, so you aren't forced to buy the entire Office suite.
Do you keep 7 months of receipts? 7 months of bills? Because if law enforcement can use 7 months worth of your communications patterns in court against you, you would better have at least 7 months worth of documentation with which to defend yourself.
Come on, even hard drives are still warrantied for one year. That means you gotta keep your receipt if you're gonna prove it died within warranty.
I keep all receipts and bills for three years at the very least. First, in case something does come up, like the IRS declining deductions they accepted in the past years- those deductions are worth more than than keeping a couple boxes of old bills. Second, warranties, especially the extended warranties which businesses conveniently forget I have until I show them the receipt. Third, insurance purposes, in case of theft or fire. Lastly, when I sell something off, it's good to have the receipt so I can figure out how much it's worth (for taxes if applicable).
And yeah, to prove that no, I did not call that person, that call does not appear on my bill.
Huh? Think Mt Everest - because it is there.
Do you even understand that statement? How such a flippant comment says so much about a killer mountain that takes lives without mercy, taking some of the best (and some of the not so best) mountaineers mankind ever produced.
There's a world of difference between pitting yourself against mother nature, knowing that even the smallest mistake can lead to the the deaths of you and your entire team; and being out $200 because you shorted out the GPU of the xbox.
Its like Kennedy said, we do it not becauase we can or should, we do it because its there.
At least get the damn thing right. He never said because it was there. He didn't imply man climbed mountains because they were there. He did say
We choose to go to the moon. We choose to go to the moon in this decade and do the other things, not because they are easy, but because they are hard, because that goal will serve to organize and measure the best of our energies and skills, because that challenge is one that we are willing to accept, one we are unwilling to postpone, and one which we intend to win, and the others, too.
Man, a simple google search would have made you look insightful instead of clueless.
WD39... it mixed with the water instead of repelling it.
Yeah, hear what you're saying. It's not much worse than banning the books outright... actually it does seem worse, like entrapment. Anyway, I bought all those books in a college town used book store with cash, best way to buy a book.
I think I'll start checking out pro-goverment books at the library... look good on my permanent record. Any recommendations?
Doesn't Kazza search files based on a common fingerprint though? How am I going to find 5 people to download "cowboyneil uncut.mpg" from when they all have a different fingerprint. It's not in giving the file different fingerprints, it's in giving the traffic in general good encryption. Searching, downloads, etc... it should all be encrypted. My only other concern with this... how much processor gets sucked down while encrypting/unencrypting 5-10 different files, at several segments per file, at 128bit+ encryption?
They're not talking about encrypting individual files. SSL Encapsulation is encrypting the traffic between peers, so sniffers cannot see what is being sent and prevent man-in-the-middle attacks.