At any rate, the SCt held in Eldred that the current terms, while long, are still indeed temporary.
Are you suggesting that SCoTUS is infallible? This discussion began with a question of morality, and although at times I would certainly hope most people would accept SCoTUS as the Absolute Moral Authority on the Earth, that (thankfully) does not make it so.
Why do you feel like you're entitled to redistribute the copyrighted works of others?
Because that is precisely the intent of legal protection of intellectual property. The idea was to give a temporary monopoly on the distribution of a work in exchange for having encouraged the development of that work. The point of copyright law is to encourage the free (beer and speech) exchange of these works by contributing them to the public domain.
Now not only has the temporality of that social contract been voided, but we are in an age now where the content industry has been granted law enforcement privileges, and can actually dictate how I may use my own tangible property.
The gloves have been off for a very long time. Because I will not be surprised when someone truly innocent (morally and legally) gets prosecuted by the effort, I will not pretend that the current state of justice makes sense. This means that Joe file trader is, in my opinion, every bit as innocent as Joe Sixpack was during Prohibition.
Everyone here yelled "Its not the technology, stupid, is the file traders, go after them instead!"
What about those of us who have been quite genuine in our statements that the world is a new marketplace of information and that the **AA's business models just aren't going to work anymore. Do we get to speak out against the Copyright Gestapo when they pillage some poor kid's life savings?
Let this be a lesson to all you "voice of moderation" types. Sometimes there is no middle ground.
Among Novell people. Netware's logging and auditing has always been excellent, and we would take advantage of this by leaving directories lying around named "admin" or similar, that were located outside normal userspace. This means that only people with more rights than normal users could access the file. It was an excellent way to weed out excess privileges on the network, especially when walking into a previously ill managed mess.
Just to point out that the RIAA et. al. seem to be serious about this "antipiracy" stuff...
After an earlier story about Kazaa Lite making use of a database of Evil(tm) netblocks to attempt to hide the identity of file sharers from the content Gestapo, I decided to do a little experiment.
I went here and obtained and converted a list for use with iptables - so that traffic from these hostile networks would be logged and blocked. I run a very active but 100% legal Mutella node./var/log/messages damn near filled up the disk with connection attempts coming from the hostile networks.
I suppose there's more to this than tinfoil hat paranoia.
By that rationale, Apollo, (with 15 successful instances out of 17 attempts, and only a handful of those were in full translunar flight configuration) would be flaming pre-alpha spaghetti code proof of concept. It's amazing that the production version of the SB4 assembly wasn't called "foo".
I'd really love to be able to ditch Word, but for long (100+ pages)
I'm in the same boat, but I've noticed that Word goes nuts with documents that big and/or complex. We've seen Visio add-ons appear and disappear, changes get garbled, etc, when the document is that big. The only thing holding me back from pushing OO as a solution is that I don't want to become the OO support bitch. This may seem hypocritical considering my very pro- free software stance, but you must understand, I work for a Fucked Company. The stupity is just too much to try to overcome.
I would have already done so by now. The Verizon ruling would have been my motivation, were I running an illegal node at the time. I personally do run a very active mutella node, but it's 100% legit.
Second generation P2P networks like Gnutella do nothing to obfuscate your IP address. When the service is running, it is possible to determine your IP and what data you are hosting on your node. No firewall can prevent this information from becoming known.
In other P2P networks. Freenet and GNUnet both offer crypto and anonymity. Freenet isn't a P2P app in the pure sense. It's more of an underground www. GNUnet has better anonymity (theoretically - due to it's ability to resist traffic analysis attacks), but it is a younger project.
When it's time to retreat from gnutella, these represent the next stage in the information war.
I am saying that that would be THEIR answer, not mine. OSS is truly a lovely concept.
Well, I don't necessarily think that OSS is the only alternative to what we have now. I support the idea of temporary monopolies on intellectual property, and in making money off of closed source content based on that model. The problem is that the current system has absolutely no regard whatsoever for that temporality, relegating the argument to what rights we can eke out in the name of fair use.
Without that temporality, however, no public good is realized from the encouragement of the arts, industry, and sciences. It is of much greater public interest, therefore, to define and strictly enforce that temporality than it is to prohibit sharing files.
WHERE THE HELL DID YOU GET THESE INDIAN ELEPHANTS FROM?
You know, this reminds me of a question my father-in-law asked me this weekend. He pointed to a green house and asked "What color is that green house?"
Is the term "punk", as used to describe a social group, still in circulation? When I left off, punks were mohawked Sid Vicious types in the '80s, and seemed to turn into what everyone called "goths" in the '90s (discounting the many splinter groups). What is a modern punk?
Regarding your old Sentra, I suggest covering the elephants with carpet padding to make them more aerodynamic.
Well, I've since discovered that the problem derives from the laminar airflow on the ears of African elephants. Indian elephants have never been a problem. Barring local restrictions against hauling livestock at or near supersonic speeds on a two lane highway, I've been able to get Indian elephants up over Mach 1 many times.
I am a technology expert witness and have worked in several criminal cases. Almost all technology-related cases are pleaded because defense firms don't know anything about how to challenge the evidence.
If you "feel the calling" of bringing your technical knowledge to a practice in law, let me profoundly encourage you, no matter which side you choose, prosecution or defense. We can use knowledge all around, and could certainly stand to see a few like yourself become judges.
Hehe. Fair enough. Poor word useage on my part. I tend to get a little passionate about this stuff. Apologies.
minor acts aren't agressively pursued unless there's a big financial gain in it for the enforcement agency (speeding tickets/parking tickets)
That is true. I took your original comment to mean that prosecutors used morality as a guide regarding who to go after. I know from direct personal experience that this is not the case. You've raised an excellent example of another reason why prosecutors don't fight crime per se. - they go after the money.
Here, the answer has to be "See the constitution."
Which part, exactly? The bit about freedom of speech, due process, or unreasonable search and seizure?
Oh, the Constitution's justification, in case you've forgotten or haven't read it (which is fine if you're not a USAian) is that progress in arts and sciences is encouraged by offering and enforcing a monopoly on creations.
I am honored to stand in the light of your profound and clearly transcendent wisdom and intellect, but I am confused by your lack of mentioning the time limitation of that monopoly. Since it is the time limitation that establishes the public good of protecting copyrights and patents, it would seem to me that it is somewhat more than a negligible detail, but rather the other side of the IP law coin.
I do agree with you that the terms of that monopoly are far to onerous, and need to be reduced; but this isn't their concern, nor is it something that they can do anything about.
If my qestion had been "What can you do to make the terms of that monopoly less onerous?", then I would agree with you that this would be a poor forum for the question.
I'm sure the recovery of lost tax revenue from people pirating music is more than enough to pay for their "billable hours".
I'm confused. The last time I checked, the cause of the decline in music sales was in dispute. Does the revenue lost by my personal boycott of the RIAA justify the use of my taxes to prosecute me? If so, then I really need to get on board with this whole circular marketing concept. It looks like you could make a lot of money that way.
Slashdot Mirror
You:
I just installed .52 and boy, is it unusably slow.
From a parent (and much more justifiably up-modded) post:
2c Leave it up 24/7 for a few days before you judge speed. You need to let the blood circulate :)
this is because Gilette Mach 3 Razor Blades are the most shoplifted item in Britain.
Huh? You Brits don't use hemorrhoid cream? That explains a lot.
No need to pay a computer geek to work his magic on your broken Windows box.
Uh, if you're paying computer geeks to get your video drivers installed for you, then any post you make to this discussion is automatically off-topic.
At any rate, the SCt held in Eldred that the current terms, while long, are still indeed temporary.
Are you suggesting that SCoTUS is infallible? This discussion began with a question of morality, and although at times I would certainly hope most people would accept SCoTUS as the Absolute Moral Authority on the Earth, that (thankfully) does not make it so.
Why do you feel like you're entitled to redistribute the copyrighted works of others?
Because that is precisely the intent of legal protection of intellectual property. The idea was to give a temporary monopoly on the distribution of a work in exchange for having encouraged the development of that work. The point of copyright law is to encourage the free (beer and speech) exchange of these works by contributing them to the public domain.
Now not only has the temporality of that social contract been voided, but we are in an age now where the content industry has been granted law enforcement privileges, and can actually dictate how I may use my own tangible property.
The gloves have been off for a very long time. Because I will not be surprised when someone truly innocent (morally and legally) gets prosecuted by the effort, I will not pretend that the current state of justice makes sense. This means that Joe file trader is, in my opinion, every bit as innocent as Joe Sixpack was during Prohibition.
Everyone here yelled "Its not the technology, stupid, is the file traders, go after them instead!"
What about those of us who have been quite genuine in our statements that the world is a new marketplace of information and that the **AA's business models just aren't going to work anymore. Do we get to speak out against the Copyright Gestapo when they pillage some poor kid's life savings?
Let this be a lesson to all you "voice of moderation" types. Sometimes there is no middle ground.
Among Novell people. Netware's logging and auditing has always been excellent, and we would take advantage of this by leaving directories lying around named "admin" or similar, that were located outside normal userspace. This means that only people with more rights than normal users could access the file. It was an excellent way to weed out excess privileges on the network, especially when walking into a previously ill managed mess.
Just to point out that the RIAA et. al. seem to be serious about this "antipiracy" stuff...
After an earlier story about Kazaa Lite making use of a database of Evil(tm) netblocks to attempt to hide the identity of file sharers from the content Gestapo, I decided to do a little experiment.
I went here and obtained and converted a list for use with iptables - so that traffic from these hostile networks would be logged and blocked. I run a very active but 100% legal Mutella node. /var/log/messages damn near filled up the disk with connection attempts coming from the hostile networks.
I suppose there's more to this than tinfoil hat paranoia.
I'm an idiot.
s/SB4/S4B/g
By that rationale, Apollo, (with 15 successful instances out of 17 attempts, and only a handful of those were in full translunar flight configuration) would be flaming pre-alpha spaghetti code proof of concept. It's amazing that the production version of the SB4 assembly wasn't called "foo".
You omitted the real problem. We're not committed to spending what it will really take to do what we want NASA to do.
I'd really love to be able to ditch Word, but for long (100+ pages)
I'm in the same boat, but I've noticed that Word goes nuts with documents that big and/or complex. We've seen Visio add-ons appear and disappear, changes get garbled, etc, when the document is that big. The only thing holding me back from pushing OO as a solution is that I don't want to become the OO support bitch. This may seem hypocritical considering my very pro- free software stance, but you must understand, I work for a Fucked Company. The stupity is just too much to try to overcome.
I would have already done so by now. The Verizon ruling would have been my motivation, were I running an illegal node at the time. I personally do run a very active mutella node, but it's 100% legit.
Second generation P2P networks like Gnutella do nothing to obfuscate your IP address. When the service is running, it is possible to determine your IP and what data you are hosting on your node. No firewall can prevent this information from becoming known.
In other P2P networks. Freenet and GNUnet both offer crypto and anonymity. Freenet isn't a P2P app in the pure sense. It's more of an underground www. GNUnet has better anonymity (theoretically - due to it's ability to resist traffic analysis attacks), but it is a younger project.
When it's time to retreat from gnutella, these represent the next stage in the information war.
I am saying that that would be THEIR answer, not mine. OSS is truly a lovely concept.
Well, I don't necessarily think that OSS is the only alternative to what we have now. I support the idea of temporary monopolies on intellectual property, and in making money off of closed source content based on that model. The problem is that the current system has absolutely no regard whatsoever for that temporality, relegating the argument to what rights we can eke out in the name of fair use.
Without that temporality, however, no public good is realized from the encouragement of the arts, industry, and sciences. It is of much greater public interest, therefore, to define and strictly enforce that temporality than it is to prohibit sharing files.
WHERE THE HELL DID YOU GET THESE INDIAN ELEPHANTS FROM?
You know, this reminds me of a question my father-in-law asked me this weekend. He pointed to a green house and asked "What color is that green house?"
I was stunned into silence.
Is the term "punk", as used to describe a social group, still in circulation? When I left off, punks were mohawked Sid Vicious types in the '80s, and seemed to turn into what everyone called "goths" in the '90s (discounting the many splinter groups). What is a modern punk?
haha! Okay, mod parent funny.
Regarding your old Sentra, I suggest covering the elephants with carpet padding to make them more aerodynamic.
Well, I've since discovered that the problem derives from the laminar airflow on the ears of African elephants. Indian elephants have never been a problem. Barring local restrictions against hauling livestock at or near supersonic speeds on a two lane highway, I've been able to get Indian elephants up over Mach 1 many times.
Shit, I can field that one for you.
I am a technology expert witness and have worked in several criminal cases. Almost all technology-related cases are pleaded because defense firms don't know anything about how to challenge the evidence.
If you "feel the calling" of bringing your technical knowledge to a practice in law, let me profoundly encourage you, no matter which side you choose, prosecution or defense. We can use knowledge all around, and could certainly stand to see a few like yourself become judges.
Since when do companies who benefit from the enforcement of the law need to be owned by citizens?
So your point is to dismiss the idea that the government should act in the interests of its people?
By the way, you may want to change your sig:
Reason, free market capitalism, and individualism (emphasis mine)
um, i'll call your bullshit and raise you two.
Hehe. Fair enough. Poor word useage on my part. I tend to get a little passionate about this stuff. Apologies.
minor acts aren't agressively pursued unless there's a big financial gain in it for the enforcement agency (speeding tickets/parking tickets)
That is true. I took your original comment to mean that prosecutors used morality as a guide regarding who to go after. I know from direct personal experience that this is not the case. You've raised an excellent example of another reason why prosecutors don't fight crime per se. - they go after the money.
Here, the answer has to be "See the constitution."
Which part, exactly? The bit about freedom of speech, due process, or unreasonable search and seizure?
Oh, the Constitution's justification, in case you've forgotten or haven't read it (which is fine if you're not a USAian) is that progress in arts and sciences is encouraged by offering and enforcing a monopoly on creations.
I am honored to stand in the light of your profound and clearly transcendent wisdom and intellect, but I am confused by your lack of mentioning the time limitation of that monopoly. Since it is the time limitation that establishes the public good of protecting copyrights and patents, it would seem to me that it is somewhat more than a negligible detail, but rather the other side of the IP law coin.
I do agree with you that the terms of that monopoly are far to onerous, and need to be reduced; but this isn't their concern, nor is it something that they can do anything about.
If my qestion had been "What can you do to make the terms of that monopoly less onerous?", then I would agree with you that this would be a poor forum for the question.
I'm sure the recovery of lost tax revenue from people pirating music is more than enough to pay for their "billable hours".
I'm confused. The last time I checked, the cause of the decline in music sales was in dispute. Does the revenue lost by my personal boycott of the RIAA justify the use of my taxes to prosecute me? If so, then I really need to get on board with this whole circular marketing concept. It looks like you could make a lot of money that way.