You missed his point entirely. He just pointed out one of the most outstanding abbilities and qualities of P2P-networks, which makes it differ from all previous known types of networks. Which is: (tada)
On a P2P-network there is no immense load on one single provider/server if a particular file/download/article/whatever is extemely popular, requested or wanted. The load is distributed out trough the network, and (I'm allmost sorry to say:) there can be no slashdot effect.
And their [artists] work is more likely to be made available in exciting new ways if it can't be stolen in the process.
So... Let me get this RIAA-d00d right... If the medium you buy gets more restricted and less widespread, it will magically be exposed to a new era of creativity and new forms of distribution?
The only new thing I see is DRM, and that's not progress. It's the opposite.
So I guess these people are not the ones pushing DMCAs down our throat, not the ones pushing forward requiring that there be only DRM-consumer electronics, not the ones who intensionally limits global trade by putting regional codes on DVDs and making it a crime to bypass them and not at all the ones who by law try to inhibit technological development.
They are obviously nowhere near controlling us. I'm sorry. I was wrong.
This might be flamebait, I dunno. But let's these mothers for Terrorism. No seriously.
These days it seems obvious that reason and evidence is not required, as long as president Bush announces that someone is indeed terrorists.
And these mothers are terrorising American economy, no doubt. Let's see how much they can do about their patents in Cuba (where basic human rights seems to be ignored)!
I don't care what has in fact been patented. If it can be used to stop a "Buy it now"-button from existing, it is a "Buy it now"-button patent to me, and to eBay btw. And that is not technology. And it should not be patentable.
Didn't you know. A button on a webpage is technology. I'll place alot of buttons on my webpage. In fact I'll generate every single one possible with latin letters with a killer script, and patent all of them.
Now it's my technology. Muahahahaha!
And when I'm done being silly, I'm frightened shitless that there are people who actually think like this. And that there are laws to support them.
How is technological development going to be even a possibility, given circumstances like this? This is fucked.
Are you aware that those two are responsable for a great deal of bloodshed?
Anarchy and freedom responsible for blodshed? I ment anarchy as in A Good Thing(TM), as in people residing to common sense rather than laws bought by major corporations, and patent laws ensuring lawyersa lifetime of works.
When the courts are used for extortion of the weak and not justice, well... Who the FUCK cares about laws anymore?
I'm suggesting that these tools be used as tools & not as instruments.
WHAT?!? You mean the pop-artists would actually have to know their "art" and not just cash paychecks? That artists would have to be, well artists according to the old art-related meaning?
I find it even more amusing that the RIAA has replaced their people with bots. Heres why:
We all claim the RIAA mainly is a representative for music-distributers that are no longer necasery. And then they start doing their dirty work (which is all they do, apperantly) with bots!
They have thus proven our claim is correct, by employing technology to do their work, instead of doing it themselves:)
Oh. And this is meant to be moderated funny, not insightfull, if anyone cares to spend modarator points on such a lousy post.
And as you surely know: FFT stands for Fast Fourier Transform and is one special implementation which is not a complete Fourier Transform. I'll not go into boring details here, as you seem informed enough:)
As I know little specific about MDCT I will not go out on a troll raid either, but it's still a Cosine-based transform. Hence a Fourier-derivate work.
So my point still stands. Given a proper transform (I never mentioned FFT), you will keep phase information even in the frequency-domain, and a frequency-domain analysis will not be inferiour to a time-domain based analysis.
OpenBSD made comments critisising the way US foreign-policys are doen these days. Just as Bill Clinton did.
I don't know how things are in the US these days, but if using your right to free speech makes you a terrorist or incapable of recieving state benefits... You are all prisoners allready.
The people outside the US are not. If you take them into account. Which you should. As the US has decided that national borders and sovereignity doesn't mean squad, this involves everyone.
The US is now harrasing any country worldwide who are not willing to be voluntarely assfucked by the US.
Why? Terrorism... To stop it, in case there were any confusion. Some might believe that they wanted more.
It was effectively shut down by making the unreasonable and technically impossible restriction that it must be 100% sure that no copyrighted music could be transferred with Napster. That's silly.
Yes, you're right. It's silly that Napster should have been required to make sure that its service couldn't be used for widespread and anonymous piracy.
So you probably think that CD-burners should be banned by law until it made sure that you cant inridge on copyright using them? Didnt think so.
To demand that a system is 100 percent free for abuse to remain legal is to ban -all- technology. Why you think this is a reasonable demand for Napster or P2P-systems in specific I can not see.
No system can be made bulletproof. Making such a demand is outright redicoulous and a witness of absolute incompetence.
Considering how P4 3.06Ghz actually runs at 3Ghz and does much better at important tasks such as encoding video, instead of synthetic benchmarks, we therefore conclude AMD is officially dead.
So you do not believe that Intel got where they got today becuase of competition and pressure? You sincerely believe that Intel wouldn't sit back on their lazy ass and inflate prices, if there were no copmetition?
But actually having something that looks secure and robust is in fact far more complex, even that too might be just good snakeoil.
I, for once, will oppose that statement. In theory at least.
Complex is harder to grasp, harder to gain insight. Simplicity is security. At least you'll easier gain knowledge of your system, which by far can provide security like nothing else.
If there are simple "laws", uncovering holes in them is alot easier. And if you can keep the simplicity, while covering those holes, you'll be alot more secure than any large and complex system.
But I guess this just is a theoretical approach, which won't be applicable to real-life situations?
Slashdot Mirror
You missed his point entirely. He just pointed out one of the most outstanding abbilities and qualities of P2P-networks, which makes it differ from all previous known types of networks. Which is: (tada)
On a P2P-network there is no immense load on one single provider/server if a particular file/download/article/whatever is extemely popular, requested or wanted. The load is distributed out trough the network, and (I'm allmost sorry to say :) there can be no slashdot effect.
(That's in theory, then we got Kazaa.)
So... Let me get this RIAA-d00d right... If the medium you buy gets more restricted and less widespread, it will magically be exposed to a new era of creativity and new forms of distribution?
The only new thing I see is DRM, and that's not progress. It's the opposite.
IDIOCY.
Never Underestimate the Power of Stupid People in Large Groups.
(C) Despair inc.
So I guess these people are not the ones pushing DMCAs down our throat, not the ones pushing forward requiring that there be only DRM-consumer electronics, not the ones who intensionally limits global trade by putting regional codes on DVDs and making it a crime to bypass them and not at all the ones who by law try to inhibit technological development.
They are obviously nowhere near controlling us. I'm sorry. I was wrong.
This might be flamebait, I dunno. But let's these mothers for Terrorism. No seriously.
These days it seems obvious that reason and evidence is not required, as long as president Bush announces that someone is indeed terrorists.
And these mothers are terrorising American economy, no doubt. Let's see how much they can do about their patents in Cuba (where basic human rights seems to be ignored)!
I don't care what has in fact been patented. If it can be used to stop a "Buy it now"-button from existing, it is a "Buy it now"-button patent to me, and to eBay btw. And that is not technology. And it should not be patentable.
Seems pretty obvious to me.
Didn't you know. A button on a webpage is technology. I'll place alot of buttons on my webpage. In fact I'll generate every single one possible with latin letters with a killer script, and patent all of them.
Now it's my technology. Muahahahaha!
And when I'm done being silly, I'm frightened shitless that there are people who actually think like this. And that there are laws to support them.
How is technological development going to be even a possibility, given circumstances like this? This is fucked.
No. He patented automated SMS-sending from a SMS-server. But don't tell him, or there will be mobile-hell to see.
Anarchy and freedom responsible for blodshed? I ment anarchy as in A Good Thing(TM), as in people residing to common sense rather than laws bought by major corporations, and patent laws ensuring lawyersa lifetime of works.
When the courts are used for extortion of the weak and not justice, well... Who the FUCK cares about laws anymore?
I smoke pot by the way. I'm a criminal.
In a way this is good. All respect for patent-law will be anihilated if anything like this goes trough with tthe blessing of law.
This is just a first step towards worldwide anarchy and freedom! (At least I hope so :)
WHAT?!? You mean the pop-artists would actually have to know their "art" and not just cash paychecks? That artists would have to be, well artists according to the old art-related meaning?
Bad consumer! Even worse: Communist!
If you're gonna fly a plane using your PDA... For God's sake, don't use Windows CE or PocketPC! Worms/Virii could do massive dammage there :-)
Google for CSS2. In CSS2 you are allowed not only to alter specific tags, but alter specific tags, given specific conditions, like the IMG-SRC=tag.
I find it even more amusing that the RIAA has replaced their people with bots. Heres why:
We all claim the RIAA mainly is a representative for music-distributers that are no longer necasery. And then they start doing their dirty work (which is all they do, apperantly) with bots!
They have thus proven our claim is correct, by employing technology to do their work, instead of doing it themselves :)
Oh. And this is meant to be moderated funny, not insightfull, if anyone cares to spend modarator points on such a lousy post.
I'm sure following O'Reilly's CSS-Anarchists guide, you'll find a fluid way of providing new iamges in the CSS as well. Or just removing them :)
And as you surely know: FFT stands for Fast Fourier Transform and is one special implementation which is not a complete Fourier Transform. I'll not go into boring details here, as you seem informed enough :)
As I know little specific about MDCT I will not go out on a troll raid either, but it's still a Cosine-based transform. Hence a Fourier-derivate work.
So my point still stands. Given a proper transform (I never mentioned FFT), you will keep phase information even in the frequency-domain, and a frequency-domain analysis will not be inferiour to a time-domain based analysis.
And as all people who have taken advanced math knows: Sound can be described with equal precision in the time-domain and in the frequency-domain.
It's called a Fourier-transform.
And in the frequency-domain you still got phase, in case you wondered. It's covered by the use of imaginary-numbers.
So analysing the signal in the frequency-domain should uncover the same errors as an analysis in the time-domain, if it's extensive enough, that is.
I don't bother going into the theorys behind this, but google for Fourier-transforms and wise up :)
Well. For all those tech-savy who don't like the colors... Ever heard about user-css? It can be made domain-specific and all, you know :)
It won't kill you as fast as the plague, but if you stick to Windows, in the near future .NET will be mandatory.
OpenBSD made comments critisising the way US foreign-policys are doen these days. Just as Bill Clinton did.
I don't know how things are in the US these days, but if using your right to free speech makes you a terrorist or incapable of recieving state benefits... You are all prisoners allready.
The people outside the US are not. If you take them into account. Which you should. As the US has decided that national borders and sovereignity doesn't mean squad, this involves everyone.
The US is now harrasing any country worldwide who are not willing to be voluntarely assfucked by the US.
Why? Terrorism... To stop it, in case there were any confusion. Some might believe that they wanted more.
So you probably think that CD-burners should be banned by law until it made sure that you cant inridge on copyright using them? Didnt think so.
To demand that a system is 100 percent free for abuse to remain legal is to ban -all- technology. Why you think this is a reasonable demand for Napster or P2P-systems in specific I can not see.
No system can be made bulletproof. Making such a demand is outright redicoulous and a witness of absolute incompetence.
So you do not believe that Intel got where they got today becuase of competition and pressure? You sincerely believe that Intel wouldn't sit back on their lazy ass and inflate prices, if there were no copmetition?
Naivity ensues obviosuly.
We would at least have to stop SPAM and worms from "authenticated" Microsoft Outlook-users fooled into opening this-weeks-malicious-attachment.
And death to all FWDs!
I, for once, will oppose that statement. In theory at least.
Complex is harder to grasp, harder to gain insight. Simplicity is security. At least you'll easier gain knowledge of your system, which by far can provide security like nothing else.
If there are simple "laws", uncovering holes in them is alot easier. And if you can keep the simplicity, while covering those holes, you'll be alot more secure than any large and complex system.
But I guess this just is a theoretical approach, which won't be applicable to real-life situations?