let's throw a few files onto the P2P networks made up of terabytes of one character, compressed to a few bytes. Audio fingerprint servers should have fun with those
I say mod this guy up, +1 Funny!
But your method would never work. If we terrorized/DOSed the fingerprint-server the system wouldn't work... Oh wait...
Audiogalaxy was the best! I have never ever on a network anywhere been able to grab so much weird and uncommon music. I never had any trouble finding what I wanted and new interesting things.
By far the best music-service ever. Ofcourse it was plain out illegal, and I guess the labels didn't like users getting accustomed to a decen't digital music-service lifestyle. It would seriously undermind their dinasour-assess.
The shutdown of AudioGalaxy is one of the sadest things I can recall ever happening to the net.
have you ever noticed that the crimes with the harshest punishments are not neccessarily those that do the most harm but those that show defiance of the government's authority?
How suprising, go figure. Do you wanne shepard sheep or individuals? What presents least problems?
This is probably why governments worldwide are totally paranoid when it comes to weed. It's absolutely harmless, but it makes people unconformative. Which in the eyes of any government probably is a bad thing.
the trivial workaround is to use any kind of encrypted filesystem.
And the trivial solution, should this nonsense ever present a problem, is to use encrypted mediafiles, so that the p2p-app won't recognise any of the data. You know, like NOT or ROT13-encryption or anything equally adavanced:)
WTF? Do you know how a CPU works? Have you ever programmed in assembly language?
Well, I do, even at a basic cicuitry level, and yes, I have dony my assembly work. Not sure this goes for the parent poster, and he probably has a tinfoilhat somewhere, but he's idea is not all that messed up as it could seem.
His point being valid, he might just miss a valid source of paranoia. While the CPU only does what it's told, it's no guarantee that upcoming (Microsoft) OSes will grant access to sound- and video-hardware (with possible Fritz-chips in store) to none-authorized/signed/whatever applications.
And no, not everyone uses OpenSource-OSes. Not yet anyway, but things like this might change actually that.
Ok. I'm no oracle, but this is what i see. In this order:
Secured files:
These files are secured for you.
Secured & authorized files:
In the name of your security, the secure files must be authorized before playback.
Authorized files:
Security is implied, yet for a while. Un-authorized music is considered suspicious and mostly illegal.
Authorized musicians:
Poeple allowed to release music. Everything none-authorized is pirate-music, very much like pirate-radio. The RIAA has full control.
Authorized client:
People showing this system little respect are simply banned from using it, and thus has no access to audio medias. "No music for you!", the ironhand to keep control.
That might be a bit extreme, but I find the current climate so extreme I wouldn't believe this was possible 7-8 years ago. So who's to tell what's next?
So please tell me I have a tinfoil hat on my head, I just didn't notice, because I'd like this not to be true.
I believe a fair compromise protecting both the rights of the consumers and provoding an initiative for the producers would be to make copyright a monopoly on commercial distributions, rather than a monopoly on all distribution.
While your idea sounds, nice, idealistic yet realistic, somehow it lacks what is needed to make it work. Namely Defintions.
You especially fail to adress the fact that the *AAs seems relentless in the persuit of total domination (tm), aka "monopoly on all distribution".
Even if you define your distinctions, which in effect would be legal or "pirate" distributions, you'd still have the problem of corporate greed.
Your words sounds "interesting", but they represent nothing which can solve this conflict in a peacefull manner.
should be noted that communism / socialism hasn't exactly done a great job of feeding everyone either.
I hate to be be a bitch and point it out, but it works fine in Norway. And I believe that Sweden, Denmark and other socialistic democarcys are doing rather fine as well.
You guys just got to realise socialism is an idea, and a not a totalerian system. Socialism is about that the wealthy/resourcefull in society is obligated to help the less fortunate.
It might not be obvious, but this actually saves society money. Say, for example, if people aren't left to starve (actual, working social security), they won't have to steal or resort to crime in order to survive. And thus, less police is needed. Money saved.
I guess I can go on, but this post is probably offtopic enough allready.
So for a practical (and working) socialistic system, Norway and it's democracy is a good example.
Why is is that companies can be sued over the most minute parts of technology
Because most people don't have a fscking clue when it comes to technology?
Face it, we are geeks. We know how stuff works. We know it's generic, we know it's simple. But "people", as in people in general, don't. To them it's magic, simple as that.
What do we know? Maybe people believe that a website can "invent" new stuff, that others can't? What is certain is that people just expect things to work (like magic) and don't ever know that things works because there are established standards being applied.
Most people don't know technology, they just use it. I believe that is how things have been at most times in history.
It uses my patented method of inserting additional information-blocks into text-frames, making the sofisticated possibility of paragraphing text real.
In correctly presented forms these additional information-blocks would not be presented, but if the text-frame were to be displayed unprocessed, the text itself would be seperatable from the advanced information-blocks by human eyes. This system therefore also possesses the quality of information-redundancy.
I see that a lot of people here are in direct vioaltion of my patent, and they should all expect lawsuits.
They could potentially make more money this way out of indiduals then by having them buy CD's.
Er... They would have to keep selling CDs at least for a generation, so that people are accustomed the fact they are entitled to suing at random.
After people get accustomed to that, they can just stop selling music all together, because by then, corporations have been given the right to profit, regardless.
Oh, what a wonderfull future we will have! We can ofcourse hope that there's some balance in all this. That for every action there's a reaction.
When the pig-filthy greed-ridden corporations finally steps out too far, there might actually be some changes? I'm not saying revolution and all that, but maybe a few sane changes to the way coroporations are being allowed to run this world?
Take drug patents: it costs a lot of time and money to just come up with a drug worth patenting. Drug patents give incentives to corporations to create medicines to help people because they know they'll be able to regain a lot of the money they put into coming up with the medicine.
I sincerly hope that someday, you might be correct. Because right now patents are being used fof the exact opposite.
There is no continent in the world as AIDS-ridden as Africa. We all know this. So there is probably no bigger market either. However Africa doesn't represent a very wealthy part of our world. They can't afford to pay full price for AIDS-medicine.
If you google a little bit on the subject, it seems they are finding legal ways around the patent-system to get drugs anyway.
But the fact that the so called human-friendly medical-industry is willing to let an entire continents die, just because they don't profit enough, probably shows how bad the idea of drug-patents really are.
It gives a monopoly to be a life-saver, but no duty. How bad is that? No really. That's just awful.
The real problem from MS's point of view is that NS was becoming a platform which sat on top of any host OS that could run the browser. NS was, in effect, trying to make the OS innocuous, unimportant.
Yes. As I recall that was inherently the meaning of the world-wide-web as a means of publishing information.
I can see how Microsoft had a hard time coping which such a concept. Bastards.
but i guess the main point is not absolute security but to make copying as hard as possible until joe sixpack just doesnt care to copy but instead just buys it.
As long as someone is capable of doing it, it will end up on Kazaa or your-favorite-p2p. Exactly how will this be hard for Joe Sixpack?
Could you explain to me how giving away a browser benefitted Microsoft?
It made Microsoft-HTML the standard which websites had to support, and in such made Microsoft Windows and MSIE the products which were necassery in order to get everything done on the web.
Now, you need a Windows-desktop to be able to enjoy all the content on the web.
Slashdot Mirror
I say mod this guy up, +1 Funny!
But your method would never work. If we terrorized/DOSed the fingerprint-server the system wouldn't work... Oh wait...
Audiogalaxy was the best! I have never ever on a network anywhere been able to grab so much weird and uncommon music. I never had any trouble finding what I wanted and new interesting things.
By far the best music-service ever. Ofcourse it was plain out illegal, and I guess the labels didn't like users getting accustomed to a decen't digital music-service lifestyle. It would seriously undermind their dinasour-assess.
The shutdown of AudioGalaxy is one of the sadest things I can recall ever happening to the net.
I want the net to be free again. *sigh*
How suprising, go figure. Do you wanne shepard sheep or individuals? What presents least problems?
This is probably why governments worldwide are totally paranoid when it comes to weed. It's absolutely harmless, but it makes people unconformative. Which in the eyes of any government probably is a bad thing.
And the trivial solution, should this nonsense ever present a problem, is to use encrypted mediafiles, so that the p2p-app won't recognise any of the data. You know, like NOT or ROT13-encryption or anything equally adavanced :)
However, I don't think that'll ever be necassery.
I think the quote you are looking for is this one:
- Edwards' Law
Well, I do, even at a basic cicuitry level, and yes, I have dony my assembly work. Not sure this goes for the parent poster, and he probably has a tinfoilhat somewhere, but he's idea is not all that messed up as it could seem.
His point being valid, he might just miss a valid source of paranoia. While the CPU only does what it's told, it's no guarantee that upcoming (Microsoft) OSes will grant access to sound- and video-hardware (with possible Fritz-chips in store) to none-authorized/signed/whatever applications.
And no, not everyone uses OpenSource-OSes. Not yet anyway, but things like this might change actually that.
Ok. I'm no oracle, but this is what i see. In this order:
These files are secured for you.
In the name of your security, the secure files must be authorized before playback.
Security is implied, yet for a while. Un-authorized music is considered suspicious and mostly illegal.
Poeple allowed to release music. Everything none-authorized is pirate-music, very much like pirate-radio. The RIAA has full control.
People showing this system little respect are simply banned from using it, and thus has no access to audio medias. "No music for you!", the ironhand to keep control.
That might be a bit extreme, but I find the current climate so extreme I wouldn't believe this was possible 7-8 years ago. So who's to tell what's next?
So please tell me I have a tinfoil hat on my head, I just didn't notice, because I'd like this not to be true.
So... We're down to 15 companies then? Find one of SCOs 15 customers within the "top 1000"-company-list and you know the suit!
While your idea sounds, nice, idealistic yet realistic, somehow it lacks what is needed to make it work. Namely Defintions.
You especially fail to adress the fact that the *AAs seems relentless in the persuit of total domination (tm), aka "monopoly on all distribution".
Even if you define your distinctions, which in effect would be legal or "pirate" distributions, you'd still have the problem of corporate greed.
Your words sounds "interesting", but they represent nothing which can solve this conflict in a peacefull manner.
I hate to be be a bitch and point it out, but it works fine in Norway. And I believe that Sweden, Denmark and other socialistic democarcys are doing rather fine as well.
You guys just got to realise socialism is an idea, and a not a totalerian system. Socialism is about that the wealthy/resourcefull in society is obligated to help the less fortunate.
It might not be obvious, but this actually saves society money. Say, for example, if people aren't left to starve (actual, working social security), they won't have to steal or resort to crime in order to survive. And thus, less police is needed. Money saved.
I guess I can go on, but this post is probably offtopic enough allready.
So for a practical (and working) socialistic system, Norway and it's democracy is a good example.
You sir, are mistaken :)
Ok, the letters themselves may not be random, but it's still a nice piece of code!
The Microwave heating abilities were discovered when fried pigeons kept falling down around a radar-center somwhere. (No, I didn't bother to google)
It was definetly not an invention out of a ingenious mind, more like a random discovery when doing something completely unrelated.
Out of chaos/not-chaos, this would have to be chaos. But I'd rather say coincidental.
Because most people don't have a fscking clue when it comes to technology?
Face it, we are geeks. We know how stuff works. We know it's generic, we know it's simple. But "people", as in people in general, don't. To them it's magic, simple as that.
What do we know? Maybe people believe that a website can "invent" new stuff, that others can't? What is certain is that people just expect things to work (like magic) and don't ever know that things works because there are established standards being applied.
Most people don't know technology, they just use it. I believe that is how things have been at most times in history.
My software creates paragraphs.
It uses my patented method of inserting additional information-blocks into text-frames, making the sofisticated possibility of paragraphing text real.
In correctly presented forms these additional information-blocks would not be presented, but if the text-frame were to be displayed unprocessed, the text itself would be seperatable from the advanced information-blocks by human eyes. This system therefore also possesses the quality of information-redundancy.
I see that a lot of people here are in direct vioaltion of my patent, and they should all expect lawsuits.
This does not, however, apply to parent poster.
Er... They would have to keep selling CDs at least for a generation, so that people are accustomed the fact they are entitled to suing at random.
After people get accustomed to that, they can just stop selling music all together, because by then, corporations have been given the right to profit, regardless.
Oh, what a wonderfull future we will have! We can ofcourse hope that there's some balance in all this. That for every action there's a reaction.
When the pig-filthy greed-ridden corporations finally steps out too far, there might actually be some changes? I'm not saying revolution and all that, but maybe a few sane changes to the way coroporations are being allowed to run this world?
Patent-ese? Which one? Would it be legal-ese, weasel, jargon, mumble, doublespeak, incomprehension or oxymortion?
Communication-inhibitors have many different shapes and names you know....
You forgot the buyer computer!
Yes, I know. That wouldn't even remotely (*w00t*) make sense, but in this new litigation- and barratry-based economy, obviously anything goes.
We're all waiting for that revelution you know. But I'd expect the right to bash Republican ass and smoke weed, or I'm not in :)
I sincerly hope that someday, you might be correct. Because right now patents are being used fof the exact opposite.
There is no continent in the world as AIDS-ridden as Africa. We all know this. So there is probably no bigger market either. However Africa doesn't represent a very wealthy part of our world. They can't afford to pay full price for AIDS-medicine.
So the drug-co's are using patents to make sure they don't get any drugs at all. That's corporate greed for you.
If you google a little bit on the subject, it seems they are finding legal ways around the patent-system to get drugs anyway.
But the fact that the so called human-friendly medical-industry is willing to let an entire continents die, just because they don't profit enough, probably shows how bad the idea of drug-patents really are.
It gives a monopoly to be a life-saver, but no duty. How bad is that? No really. That's just awful.
Yes. As I recall that was inherently the meaning of the world-wide-web as a means of publishing information.
I can see how Microsoft had a hard time coping which such a concept. Bastards.
Why not \.? Because that would be back-slash-dot.
Funny you should say that, as I thought of a handy anti-DRM slogan right now.
DRM is to media and playback, what fathers are to girlfriends and sex.
Ok, so now I am a geek.
As long as someone is capable of doing it, it will end up on Kazaa or your-favorite-p2p. Exactly how will this be hard for Joe Sixpack?
It made Microsoft-HTML the standard which websites had to support, and in such made Microsoft Windows and MSIE the products which were necassery in order to get everything done on the web.
Now, you need a Windows-desktop to be able to enjoy all the content on the web.
I bet Microsoft will consider this a benefit.
Only if it's a part of the system kernel.