Systems that do not reflect economic realities are dangerous. While the idea of paying a charge on every single IP package routed sounds like a nightmare to many Internet anarchists - the truth is that the fact that we are not paying is gearing up to be a real threat to free speech online since community run services are seizing to be sustainable.
Cough cough. Sorry but free speech doesn't mean that we have to PAY YOU to speak or even that
we have to listen at all. It simply means that
you won't be prevented from going about speaking
if you so wish. Social freedom != free bandwidth.
The price should be fair, and much lower than then the penny-per-page proposed above, at least for most definitions of "page" (server transfer costs seem between $.001 and $.01 per Megabyte at the moment) - but I fear for the future of the Web, and the net at large, if it does not come about.
Oh, you -fear-. Okay, I'm suitably caught
up in the crisis emotion now and willing to
open my wallet, especially to keep afloat such
QUALITY sites like goastse.cx, Alli's busy world, The I Hate Myself Poem and Diary, and the home page of everyone's favorite band FuckYou(TM), etc...
I'm sure I'll be moderated as a flame or
something, but ask a stupid question,
expect a sarcastic answer.
As far as 'economic realities', you're obviously
ignorant of one: This would cost a ton to
implement, and no one would want to play
along and pay a flat rate for content of,
well, let's say VARIED worth.
I would suggest making donations to free sites
that are struggling might be a better idea.
I have (*GASP*) actually done this myself,
as I feel that someone that goes to alot of
effort to create good content because they
WANT TO morally deserves payment.
The reason that advertising does not work on the Web is because the Web is nothing like TV or radio. TV and radio are linear, and with a linear medium you can force the viewer/listener to pay attention to an ad that interrupts the program.
Riiiiight, and so javascript popups, windows
that spawn new windows on close, forcing
people to click through 'sponsors' (read:
porn) to get to the meat of a site,
splitting a single document into several
pieces each separated by ads, and
requiring a working email to send spam
to before allowing access, need I name
more?
If anything, the internet gives ways to make
advertising EVEN MORE intrusive.
The entire tone of this article is irksome
to me, even with assurances that
popups and redirects will be free,
the very idea is silly, especially
considering we all know that the adds will
stay even if people are charging for page
views (cable TV, anyone?).
And, of course, the content. Most pages
simply aren't worth a penny.
Nice idea, if you're a PHB, but they've
got a hell of a tough sell here.
People like you are the reason software is so expensive for the rest of us. If everyone paid for games/software, then prices *should* go down. It's the same thing for retail stores. Theft drives prices up. If you play a game, be thoughtful enough to support the people and company that created it for you.
Right, and we all know there's never been
a software company that gouged on it's
prices? Right guys? =)
Seriously, don't get so worked up. Both
sides screw each other to some extent.
Anyone ever see any parallels between rabid
overclockers that pay more time and money
than it's worth to increase speed, and
rabid automobile enthusiasts that pour
money into building customized engines that
they'll never be able to really utilize?
To be blunt, there's some dickwaving going
on here, as always. 1900 to 2000? Big whippity
whoop, especially considering the effort
and cost dangers.
There's something more disturbing to me
about this. When did we start sub-dividing
speech into acceptable categories, and
unnacceptable ones? That is, when did the
concept of 'hate speech' as anything other
than 'speech' form?
Why can 'hate' be used as an aggrivating
factor to raise the sentance of a crime
(in the US, anyhow dunno about other places)?
If the person had a financial motive, for example, is it less of a crime?
I don't want to sound too doom and gloom,
but I have the fear that this war may already
be lost. The seeds are planted, people have
accepted the idea of limiting the freedoms
they've spent centuries trying to gain, just
on the promise that they can be protected
(a promise that continues to go unfulfilled).
You can't win as long as people believe in
the false premise that restricting legitimate
freedom will create saftey. I hate to
be so cliche, to be repetitive, but the
core of it is still that.
Think about it, when you call a bank to do phone banking or walk into a bank, you are identified by a a serious of numbers and/or signature. If you know the numbers OR you know how to fake the signature then you are who you say you are.
I'm sorry, but credit fraud and
identity theft is alot
easier than you think (I have family
that works with the fraud area in
American Express' Centurion Bank, and
it's alot of fun to hear war stories
about the stuff people pull, but a
little scary too.)
Anyway, back to my point, yes those security
measures do help, but they aren't perfect,
and alot of times people fail to enforce
them. So PAY ATTENTION TO THY BANK STATEMENTS,
PEOPLE =)
I can understand how someone could choose between, say, food or broadband. But So long as I have 50 bucks left over after the car and house are paid for, my ass ain't digging that goddamn modem out of the closet.
I will never willingly part with my broadband.
Having a good connection is just too damn
nice. Infact, out of the three of my
cell phone, my home phone, and my broadband,
I'm getting the home phone cancled. The
ratio of my use of it compared to the cost
is higher than the other two.
However, you still do not have the right to take their copyrights.
It's my opinion that they have too much
control over the copyrights, and their
artists too few. To be more blunt about
it, I don't see it as being their
copyright in the first place.
I hate to sing such a dull refrain,
but why are we still using those things?
Shouldn't we have some cheaper, fully
re-usable, and much cooler alternative
by now?
Oh, what's that, after the moon race
we chopped nasa's budget to nothing?
What's that, there's not enough commercial
reason to develop spaceflight? Oh, ok.
Sorry.
This is a really, really sad story. Eric created something wonderful, was a little bit incautious in how he tried to use his material, and ended up losing ownership of his own work. The worst part is that he has lost ownership not only of what he did, but also of whatever he or others might add to it later!
Abuses like this are why copyright law
needs to be burned and rewritten. (But that
will not happen until after the great cataclysm
destroys the power of the large corporations,
due to happen in 2039, so until then sit
tight =) )
If Apache was a commercial product they would have bought it long ago and we would all be using MS Apache.
And -that- is exactly why microsoft dislikes
open-sourcing.
MS is in the game of finding the next big
moneymaking niche and buying it out ahead
of time. That's always been a moneymaker for
them before, and it will continue to be...
as long as there are companies developing
those potential future killer-apps for them
to buy out.
I think a real big fear for them is that
the next one will come out of an open source
project, leaving them no way to take over.
Or I could be just spouting, like everyone else.
=) Time will tell, as always.
I read this as saying that the network owners are leaving their networks open on purpose. And really, why not? This is the way I have mine configured... Wireless Freenets anyone? If my machines are secure, why shouldn't I let the neighbor piggyback?
Well, do you want a cracker using your
network to launch attacks, and then just
driving away? And anyhow, even if you
decided you wanted to do that, you're
an indivdual...I think the idea of letting
anyone piggyback on their network would
be less appealing to businesses.
Hear, hear.. AT&T's digital box and guide are simply the WORST interfaces to TV viewing I've seen. I'm guessing you have the general instruments DCT box like me.. it's a slow and outdated platform. Changing channels (even analog) takes at least 3 seconds, and it's covered with ads (don't we pay for this service?). I called too, there is no other box available. I asked what type of digital system it was, so I could purchase a replacement box.. the rep told me that was illegal. I told her it wasn't, I had a right to own my equipment, but she wouldn't tell me anything more.
I also have that service and equipment.
GOD I HATE THAT THING. And yes, I've gone
through the same crap with talking to the
company about it.
And, to add some more off-topic bitching
about AT&T, I've had to physically chase
three of their door-to-door salesment (all
at once, they gang up now), who
kept knocking on my door repeatedly and
wouldn't go away. Then I called the police,
who blandly told me that since they
were a 'utility' they could come on the
property any time they like.
Gee, what was that about 'the land of the
free' again? Corporations are really
tilting the exploitation balance too far.
Of course. Remember, you're average TV watcher
has the attention span of a bacterium. They
channel surf, they talk on the phone
and watch TV at once, etc. I'm sure alot
of people think that's a useful feature because
otherwise they wouldn't know what they are watching.
Actually watching a program all the way
through isn't going to happening unless it
has sufficient shock, digust, or gossip
value.
I don't watch much TV anymore 'cause of
all this. Oh well. =)
It seems lately the fad is not the corner
but to box in the whole image with logos,
tickers, insets, factoids that no one knows
if they're true or not, etc...
How long until you can't even SEE the image
for the sheer amount of video cruft stacked
on it?
Obviously the people that design these
things don't look at them when
they're finished.
Go ahead flame me all you want... moderate me down for having an opinion that is different that that of yours, make fun of me because I have spelling or grammar errors (which by the way if that's all you can do is pathetic). You must realize that I care as much about your opinion as you do about mine.
Out of curiosity, if you don't care about
the opinions of people on Slashdot, why
are you trying so hard to make the point
that you don't care? Moreover, why are you
reading it at all?
C'mon and laugh with me, 'cause in the
end this is all just a complex game humanity
plays with itself. =)
Slashdot Mirror
Cough cough. Sorry but free speech doesn't mean that we have to PAY YOU to speak or even that we have to listen at all. It simply means that you won't be prevented from going about speaking if you so wish. Social freedom != free bandwidth.
The price should be fair, and much lower than then the penny-per-page proposed above, at least for most definitions of "page" (server transfer costs seem between $.001 and $.01 per Megabyte at the moment) - but I fear for the future of the Web, and the net at large, if it does not come about.
Oh, you -fear-. Okay, I'm suitably caught up in the crisis emotion now and willing to open my wallet, especially to keep afloat such QUALITY sites like goastse.cx, Alli's busy world, The I Hate Myself Poem and Diary, and the home page of everyone's favorite band FuckYou(TM), etc...
I'm sure I'll be moderated as a flame or something, but ask a stupid question, expect a sarcastic answer.
As far as 'economic realities', you're obviously ignorant of one: This would cost a ton to implement, and no one would want to play along and pay a flat rate for content of, well, let's say VARIED worth.
I would suggest making donations to free sites that are struggling might be a better idea. I have (*GASP*) actually done this myself, as I feel that someone that goes to alot of effort to create good content because they WANT TO morally deserves payment.
Okay, I'm dragging on here. Here's a summary:
Nice idea, but nobody's going to play along.
Riiiiight, and so javascript popups, windows that spawn new windows on close, forcing people to click through 'sponsors' (read: porn) to get to the meat of a site, splitting a single document into several pieces each separated by ads, and requiring a working email to send spam to before allowing access, need I name more?
If anything, the internet gives ways to make advertising EVEN MORE intrusive.
The entire tone of this article is irksome to me, even with assurances that popups and redirects will be free, the very idea is silly, especially considering we all know that the adds will stay even if people are charging for page views (cable TV, anyone?).
And, of course, the content. Most pages simply aren't worth a penny.
Nice idea, if you're a PHB, but they've got a hell of a tough sell here.
Right, and we all know there's never been a software company that gouged on it's prices? Right guys? =)
Seriously, don't get so worked up. Both sides screw each other to some extent.
Ones that did use it exhibted all sorts of unpleasant to catastrophic bugs.
I finally changed that machine back to 98se. Everything works fine again. So I suppose the milage for games under win2k varies widely!
To be blunt, there's some dickwaving going on here, as always. 1900 to 2000? Big whippity whoop, especially considering the effort and cost dangers.
Saying 'always' about anything is unrealistic.
Why can 'hate' be used as an aggrivating factor to raise the sentance of a crime (in the US, anyhow dunno about other places)? If the person had a financial motive, for example, is it less of a crime?
I don't want to sound too doom and gloom, but I have the fear that this war may already be lost. The seeds are planted, people have accepted the idea of limiting the freedoms they've spent centuries trying to gain, just on the promise that they can be protected (a promise that continues to go unfulfilled).
You can't win as long as people believe in the false premise that restricting legitimate freedom will create saftey. I hate to be so cliche, to be repetitive, but the core of it is still that.
Bleh.
Are they bulding those without wings and engines now?
I'm sorry, but credit fraud and identity theft is alot easier than you think (I have family that works with the fraud area in American Express' Centurion Bank, and it's alot of fun to hear war stories about the stuff people pull, but a little scary too.)
Anyway, back to my point, yes those security measures do help, but they aren't perfect, and alot of times people fail to enforce them. So PAY ATTENTION TO THY BANK STATEMENTS, PEOPLE =)
I will never willingly part with my broadband. Having a good connection is just too damn nice. Infact, out of the three of my cell phone, my home phone, and my broadband, I'm getting the home phone cancled. The ratio of my use of it compared to the cost is higher than the other two.
It's my opinion that they have too much control over the copyrights, and their artists too few. To be more blunt about it, I don't see it as being their copyright in the first place.
Oh, what's that, after the moon race we chopped nasa's budget to nothing? What's that, there's not enough commercial reason to develop spaceflight? Oh, ok. Sorry.
Abuses like this are why copyright law needs to be burned and rewritten. (But that will not happen until after the great cataclysm destroys the power of the large corporations, due to happen in 2039, so until then sit tight =) )
Hahahaha!!
Nice sig. =)
And -that- is exactly why microsoft dislikes open-sourcing.
MS is in the game of finding the next big moneymaking niche and buying it out ahead of time. That's always been a moneymaker for them before, and it will continue to be... as long as there are companies developing those potential future killer-apps for them to buy out.
I think a real big fear for them is that the next one will come out of an open source project, leaving them no way to take over.
Or I could be just spouting, like everyone else. =) Time will tell, as always.
While it's a noble goal, doing something because you think it will radically change the world overnight is foolish. No wonder you're burned out.
Kazaa has never worked for me. Nor gnutella-based clients either. Can't see what I'm doing wrong, but...
Well, do you want a cracker using your network to launch attacks, and then just driving away? And anyhow, even if you decided you wanted to do that, you're an indivdual...I think the idea of letting anyone piggyback on their network would be less appealing to businesses.
I also have that service and equipment. GOD I HATE THAT THING. And yes, I've gone through the same crap with talking to the company about it.
And, to add some more off-topic bitching about AT&T, I've had to physically chase three of their door-to-door salesment (all at once, they gang up now), who kept knocking on my door repeatedly and wouldn't go away. Then I called the police, who blandly told me that since they were a 'utility' they could come on the property any time they like.
Gee, what was that about 'the land of the free' again? Corporations are really tilting the exploitation balance too far.
Heheheheheh. I always have the uncontrollable urge to pull those static-stickers off any appliance. Makes it hard to walk through sears. =)
Of course. Remember, you're average TV watcher has the attention span of a bacterium. They channel surf, they talk on the phone and watch TV at once, etc. I'm sure alot of people think that's a useful feature because otherwise they wouldn't know what they are watching.
Actually watching a program all the way through isn't going to happening unless it has sufficient shock, digust, or gossip value.
I don't watch much TV anymore 'cause of all this. Oh well. =)
How long until you can't even SEE the image for the sheer amount of video cruft stacked on it?
Obviously the people that design these things don't look at them when they're finished.
Out of curiosity, if you don't care about the opinions of people on Slashdot, why are you trying so hard to make the point that you don't care? Moreover, why are you reading it at all?
C'mon and laugh with me, 'cause in the end this is all just a complex game humanity plays with itself. =)
There's not that much of a diffence between the two, often enough. =)
PS this is NOT a joke!!!!!! I find that VERY hard to believe.