I like the idea of DRM. I'd love to register every piece of software on my hard drive. If a virus comes through my email filter, it can't run.
Ok, I was about to moderate someone else, but this is hard to pass up on. DRP will *not* help you in that situation. It just won't. NO amount of DRM will defend you from yourself...
A virus comes though your email filter and you click it (or, I hear, Outlook allows things to run without a click from the user), then the virus will run just like one of the programs you have registered. And trust me, you really do not want to register every piece of software on your hard-drive... soon you'll be clicking yes without thinking. And before you argue this point -- tell me, why does the software signing window on browsers have "Always trust this source" check box? Because people are to lazy to read the warning sign every time.
Just out of curiosity, how many people consider a 'fair' price point to be greater than $0.00?
A lot. But few people want to pay as much as they would for an overpriced CD, when they are downloading music. I mean, I am downloading it on my paid connection, I am burning it to my CD-R (on which RIAA tax has been paid). Why in the world would I pay $2/song, so that the same CD that costs $18 in the store will cost me $16-$22 downloaded?
The music has to cost 25c to 50c/song. At most. This is how much I would pay. Perhaps $1/single hit or something... but when I total up the cost of the albom it really can't be the same as the store price.
I for one think there's plenty of promise in a pay-per-download music service.
There is plenty of promise in pay-per-download music service. There is. It's only that NO ONE HAS TAPPED THAT POTENTIAL YET. The existing services are *ridiculous*. I am waiting for a service that will
1. Have a lot of selection. Not just the mainstream, not just the independants, not most of the bands. But rather just about everything. I really can't be bothered to figure out which services I have to subscribe to, to get a full view of music selection.
2. Will offer mp3 in high quality. Propriatory players do not cut it, I really don't want to lose all music that I have paid for if I stop subscribing. I don't like propriatory players (or even worse burners), but I do like my portable mp3 player.
3. Will not even attempt to sell streaming. Even if there is a lot of it for cheap. I have cable and still streaming can be laggy and it overloads the network. Local caches and file downloads exist for a good reason. (a radio-like subscription is exempt, I am talking about pay-per-stream model)
4. Will NOT charge me $10 or more a month. I don't want to pay for the priviledge of buying music. I don't want any pressure regarding how much music I should buy to compensate the monthly fee.
5. Charging $2 or even $1 per song is NOT CHEAP. Cheap is 25c to maybe 50c depending on the song. $1/song can easily bring to same $13-$15 per albom, but now I get no CD.
I know that several services cover *some* of the complaints that I have. I am not aware of one that covers all.
And before I stop bitching:), I'd like to point out the most amazing fact about all the existing services. If they have control over what you burn (i.e. not mp3 providers) they fix the number of tracks-to-burn WITHOUT an option to purchase more. That strongly remainds me of Soviet Union where I was born... In US, though, I thought that the seller WANTS you to buy more stuff and would never prevent you from doing so.
...about which that I have been wondering for a long, long while:
Why is it that MMOG's charge a fee of 40-50 bucks just like any other game would and yet they also require a non-trivial monthly fee. I would expect a monthly fee game to at least be cheaper than others. So this answers it:
Right now, Walton theorizes, the model works in the United States because it's based off of a packaged goods model - people have already invested $40-50 to buy the box and take it home, so they're more willing to justify that expense by subscribing.
So that's it! I personally think that if they had incorporated the start-up fee into monthly subscription they would have far more customers. I know that I would probably try subscribing if it were so. When again, I value whatever social life I still have left, so maybe they have saved me:)
...as long as they don't resort to Register.com/Verisign tactics like fake expiration notices and renewing domains without asking me first.
No, that's not good enough. I have stopped dealing with Amazon about a year ago, and I am proud to say I have not purchased anything from them since. They tend to have the pretty unfriendly and unhelfpful customer service. Returns and order changes require a miracle to happen. (Ignoring the patent issues and such).
Of course they do tend to have relatively low prices... The "negative margin" busness entry approach explains that...
There is no specific legislation in Norway to protect digital content, but Johansen's program
has been criminalized in the United States under the Digital Copyright Millennium Act.
He is not being tried in US, he does not live in US, he didn't write the DeCSS (or its GUI rather) in US? And it's not illegal in Norway to do what he did. So what are the prosecution's charges?
"If they want to buy from remanufacturers, that's fine. It's our job to make them not want to."'
WOW. A company actually believes in customer choice! And they think that it is the COMPANY's job to attract customers and are NOT trying to use their LEGAL DEPARTMENT's and DMCA for the purpose. HP deserves to take have Lexmark's market share.
Head spinning too fast... where is this world going to? Next thing you know, RIAA might start trusting customers with music!
And who is going to charge that penalty? The government? The German University perhaps? You?
Problem is that I know that I am going to pay if they DO find something, or at least concentrate enough attention to me. But are they going to pay if they needlessly harass me? I think not.
My point is that the BSA wasted bandwidth, needlessly scared a sysadmin at a German university, and may have even violated the DMCA in doing so. Again... Wow, that was stupid of them
Actually, NO IT IS NOT. It would have been stupid of them if YOU had the resources to sue them and they did not have the resources to defend themselves. As things stand now, it is the opposite so they have nothing to fear.
I am surprized they don't send all the thread letters to *everyone*. Sortof like junk mail. Either they scare someone into buying licences/ taking down a server or they won't. No risks, no problem.
I would think that a lot of non-trolls think
so, even if this one is a troll. Maybe not in such a uncompromising manner, but still. Just like not everyone undestands or knows why DMCA is bad, the same way some people do not understand the importance of privacy (especially while they more or less have it still).
No, no, mod the parent up!
There should be a mod +1 "Common misconception shared by many".
The parent is *serious*, it seems. I think a couple of good replies have been posted and modded up already. But please, mod him up or put up an explanation for him. Unless its a troll do not mod him down and pretend he does not exist.
if they didn't show some flexibility in app bundling (Office apps, NOT Windows), then they Taiwanese gov't wouldn't be very supportive when it came to cracking down on piracy.
Whereas in US MS can just bribe the politicians with money to crack on piracy, in Taiwan it has to play nice with the PEOPLE and lower prices/unbundle Windows.
Looks like Taiwan government got a better deal for its citizens...
...it seems that the deregulation does not force them to do it. So why would they? I am more amazed that FCC gives them anything for free, and expects that they would actually do something on a verbal promise? Welcome to capitalism -- to get a company (especially a monopoly!) to do something for the public good, they *must* be forced to do it.
Any time I mention DSL as a non-viable option in many locations, I get./ readers pouncing on me and claiming that it's everywhere. Well, DSL isn't everywhere, and nothing is changing in that respect.
As an edu admin myself, I have a repsonsibility for the content of my networks, which includes those nodes attached to them.
Things can not be that bad... Phone companies aren't responsible for allowig terrorists to use their lines? US Post Office is not responsible for the anthrax mailings, right? How could you be responsible for mp3 trading on your network...?
Microsoft's development model is fundamentally flawed from a security perspective, because it squarely places featureset additions above security.
Indeed. And not only featureset but usability and user-friendliness factor are also placed above security issues.
As a result we have a dominant OS that's insecure and a secure OS that's mostly unusable by anyone who is not a third generation sysadmin. In all that rush no one had the time to write an OS that's is BOTH secure and user-friendly. Flame away:)
Oh, a deadlock. AOL bad. Succeed despite RIAA claims good. AOL succeed good. but AOL bad...:)
More seriously, though, this is another stillborn service. Paying $18 for 1CD of music (What if I want an albom that's got 11 tracks? WTF do I do??). and unlimited dowloads in some proprietary format... How could it be very successfull?
$18 for unlimited download and streams? DRMed music using AOL propriatory player?? 10 tracks a month to burn? using AOL propriatory burner? doesn't sound good to me at all
Note there is STILL NO PAY-PER BURN ability at the moment. How long have those services existed? A year? Two? Why is it that they have a fixed set of tracks-to-burn? Are they even aware that they are serving customers that might want... *gasp*... 11 tracks?
I, personally, *would* use a cheap mp3 service instead of gnutella... But it has to be mp3 (for my own players/burner...) and I fail to see why should I pay for priviledge of buying music from someone (i.e. monthly fee).
... that it is only the originator of the bill (or, optionally, some other mega-corporation) that can actually *stop* the bill.
And though Berman wasn't deterred by complaints from consumer advocates, the concerns voiced by Hollywood studios -- among the biggest beneficiaries of the bill,
Why is that the only concern is whether some of the big sponsors are against a bill? (I know it's a rethorical question... but still). Who the hell elected this guy, may I ask?
I think representatives chose to ignore the voters, because they lack competition... I/my family strongly dislike our state Senator. We voted for her opponent, but she was not even close to winning.
All spammers would have to query the "national do-no-email" database before sending out their crap.
And query the database they will! For addresses to use for sending their crap, that is. If opting-out usually makes your account receive more crap, do you think a do-not email list will do something else?
Problem is, that headers are forged. Now if there was a way to fine the seller of the product, that would be great... (i know it's not straightforward, I know... but one can dream:)
The bottom line is that people just won't pay for something if they can get it for free, be it software, music, or what have you.
Bullsh*t. Of course they will. If it is inexpensive, convinient and provides incentives to purchase. I know this example has been beaten to death, but what about bottled water industry? They are doing fine, though water is availble... *gasp*... in every house for free. Actually, strike "inexpensive" from my previous list. I am paying anywhere from $1 to $2 for a regular small bottle of water. People will buy a product if it is convinient and provides incentives to purchase it.
Please do remember that the kids in the porno pictures are real persons, with real lives hopefully. They have been taken advantage of (raped?) and photographed/filmed while this was going on.
Actually, there are two kinds of kiddie porn, I believe. The kind there they have actual kids filmed (and people who do THAT should be hanged and quartered and so on). And then there is the kind where they use a concenting 18-year olds who LOOK like they are 14 or even less. Now the second part is perfectly legal and might be a good thing for preventing ACTUAL abuse.
Linux Servers are running without reboot for years.
Haven't managed a linux server, so I'll take your word for it. But windows is geared towards the desktop market, right? At least that's what it dominates the most. When the interview mentions MS Word, it is talking about the desktop application. So why should I compare Linux server to Windows desktop? Linux desktops simply DO NOT run for years.
It came from a tech satire website. The interview did not take place. You may now put down the pitchforks and torches...
If you just want to blindly start swinging because it's Bill Gates, then fine, do your swinging. But if you want to join the world of grownups, maybe it would be useful to think critically.
I would like to welcome you to Slashdot and let you know that grownups hang out elsewhere... any anti bill/MS statement is accepted without any thought.
Slashdot Mirror
Ok, I was about to moderate someone else, but this is hard to pass up on. DRP will *not* help you in that situation. It just won't. NO amount of DRM will defend you from yourself...
A virus comes though your email filter and you click it (or, I hear, Outlook allows things to run without a click from the user), then the virus will run just like one of the programs you have registered. And trust me, you really do not want to register every piece of software on your hard-drive... soon you'll be clicking yes without thinking. And before you argue this point -- tell me, why does the software signing window on browsers have "Always trust this source" check box? Because people are to lazy to read the warning sign every time.
A lot. But few people want to pay as much as they would for an overpriced CD, when they are downloading music. I mean, I am downloading it on my paid connection, I am burning it to my CD-R (on which RIAA tax has been paid). Why in the world would I pay $2/song, so that the same CD that costs $18 in the store will cost me $16-$22 downloaded?
The music has to cost 25c to 50c/song. At most. This is how much I would pay. Perhaps $1/single hit or something... but when I total up the cost of the albom it really can't be the same as the store price.
There is plenty of promise in pay-per-download music service. There is. It's only that NO ONE HAS TAPPED THAT POTENTIAL YET. The existing services are *ridiculous*. I am waiting for a service that will
1. Have a lot of selection. Not just the mainstream, not just the independants, not most of the bands. But rather just about everything. I really can't be bothered to figure out which services I have to subscribe to, to get a full view of music selection.
2. Will offer mp3 in high quality. Propriatory players do not cut it, I really don't want to lose all music that I have paid for if I stop subscribing. I don't like propriatory players (or even worse burners), but I do like my portable mp3 player.
3. Will not even attempt to sell streaming. Even if there is a lot of it for cheap. I have cable and still streaming can be laggy and it overloads the network. Local caches and file downloads exist for a good reason. (a radio-like subscription is exempt, I am talking about pay-per-stream model)
4. Will NOT charge me $10 or more a month. I don't want to pay for the priviledge of buying music. I don't want any pressure regarding how much music I should buy to compensate the monthly fee.
5. Charging $2 or even $1 per song is NOT CHEAP. Cheap is 25c to maybe 50c depending on the song. $1/song can easily bring to same $13-$15 per albom, but now I get no CD.
I know that several services cover *some* of the complaints that I have. I am not aware of one that covers all.
And before I stop bitching :), I'd like to point out the most amazing fact about all the existing services. If they have control over what you burn (i.e. not mp3 providers) they fix the number of tracks-to-burn WITHOUT an option to purchase more. That strongly remainds me of Soviet Union where I was born... In US, though, I thought that the seller WANTS you to buy more stuff and would never prevent you from doing so.
Why is it that MMOG's charge a fee of 40-50 bucks just like any other game would and yet they also require a non-trivial monthly fee. I would expect a monthly fee game to at least be cheaper than others. So this answers it:
Right now, Walton theorizes, the model works in the United States because it's based off of a packaged goods model - people have already invested $40-50 to buy the box and take it home, so they're more willing to justify that expense by subscribing.
So that's it! I personally think that if they had incorporated the start-up fee into monthly subscription they would have far more customers. I know that I would probably try subscribing if it were so. When again, I value whatever social life I still have left, so maybe they have saved me :)
No, that's not good enough. I have stopped dealing with Amazon about a year ago, and I am proud to say I have not purchased anything from them since. They tend to have the pretty unfriendly and unhelfpful customer service. Returns and order changes require a miracle to happen. (Ignoring the patent issues and such).
Of course they do tend to have relatively low prices... The "negative margin" busness entry approach explains that...
There is no specific legislation in Norway to protect digital content, but Johansen's program has been criminalized in the United States under the Digital Copyright Millennium Act.
He is not being tried in US, he does not live in US, he didn't write the DeCSS (or its GUI rather) in US? And it's not illegal in Norway to do what he did. So what are the prosecution's charges?
WOW. A company actually believes in customer choice! And they think that it is the COMPANY's job to attract customers and are NOT trying to use their LEGAL DEPARTMENT's and DMCA for the purpose. HP deserves to take have Lexmark's market share.
Head spinning too fast... where is this world going to? Next thing you know, RIAA might start trusting customers with music!
Problem is that I know that I am going to pay if they DO find something, or at least concentrate enough attention to me. But are they going to pay if they needlessly harass me? I think not.
Actually, NO IT IS NOT. It would have been stupid of them if YOU had the resources to sue them and they did not have the resources to defend themselves. As things stand now, it is the opposite so they have nothing to fear.
I am surprized they don't send all the thread letters to *everyone*. Sortof like junk mail. Either they scare someone into buying licences/ taking down a server or they won't. No risks, no problem.
I would think that a lot of non-trolls think so, even if this one is a troll. Maybe not in such a uncompromising manner, but still. Just like not everyone undestands or knows why DMCA is bad, the same way some people do not understand the importance of privacy (especially while they more or less have it still).
There should be a mod +1 "Common misconception shared by many".
The parent is *serious*, it seems. I think a couple of good replies have been posted and modded up already. But please, mod him up or put up an explanation for him. Unless its a troll do not mod him down and pretend he does not exist.
Whereas in US MS can just bribe the politicians with money to crack on piracy, in Taiwan it has to play nice with the PEOPLE and lower prices/unbundle Windows.
Looks like Taiwan government got a better deal for its citizens...
Open Office for Windows reads .doc files just fine in 95-99% cases. And that's the last percent that gets you.
Any time I mention DSL as a non-viable option in many locations, I get ./ readers pouncing on me and claiming that it's everywhere. Well, DSL isn't everywhere, and nothing is changing in that respect.
Things can not be that bad... Phone companies aren't responsible for allowig terrorists to use their lines? US Post Office is not responsible for the anthrax mailings, right? How could you be responsible for mp3 trading on your network...?
Indeed. And not only featureset but usability and user-friendliness factor are also placed above security issues. :)
As a result we have a dominant OS that's insecure and a secure OS that's mostly unusable by anyone who is not a third generation sysadmin. In all that rush no one had the time to write an OS that's is BOTH secure and user-friendly. Flame away
More seriously, though, this is another stillborn service. Paying $18 for 1CD of music (What if I want an albom that's got 11 tracks? WTF do I do??). and unlimited dowloads in some proprietary format... How could it be very successfull?
$18 for unlimited download and streams? DRMed music using AOL propriatory player?? 10 tracks a month to burn? using AOL propriatory burner? doesn't sound good to me at all
Note there is STILL NO PAY-PER BURN ability at the moment. How long have those services existed? A year? Two? Why is it that they have a fixed set of tracks-to-burn? Are they even aware that they are serving customers that might want... *gasp*... 11 tracks?
I, personally, *would* use a cheap mp3 service instead of gnutella... But it has to be mp3 (for my own players/burner...) and I fail to see why should I pay for priviledge of buying music from someone (i.e. monthly fee).
And though Berman wasn't deterred by complaints from consumer advocates, the concerns voiced by Hollywood studios -- among the biggest beneficiaries of the bill,
Why is that the only concern is whether some of the big sponsors are against a bill? (I know it's a rethorical question... but still). Who the hell elected this guy, may I ask?
I think representatives chose to ignore the voters, because they lack competition... I/my family strongly dislike our state Senator. We voted for her opponent, but she was not even close to winning.
And query the database they will! For addresses to use for sending their crap, that is. If opting-out usually makes your account receive more crap, do you think a do-not email list will do something else?
Problem is, that headers are forged. Now if there was a way to fine the seller of the product, that would be great... (i know it's not straightforward, I know... but one can dream :)
50% funny? 50% funny??? People parent is not funny, this IS how things ARE.
Bullsh*t. Of course they will. If it is inexpensive, convinient and provides incentives to purchase. I know this example has been beaten to death, but what about bottled water industry? They are doing fine, though water is availble... *gasp*... in every house for free. Actually, strike "inexpensive" from my previous list. I am paying anywhere from $1 to $2 for a regular small bottle of water. People will buy a product if it is convinient and provides incentives to purchase it.
Actually, there are two kinds of kiddie porn, I believe. The kind there they have actual kids filmed (and people who do THAT should be hanged and quartered and so on). And then there is the kind where they use a concenting 18-year olds who LOOK like they are 14 or even less. Now the second part is perfectly legal and might be a good thing for preventing ACTUAL abuse.
Haven't managed a linux server, so I'll take your word for it. But windows is geared towards the desktop market, right? At least that's what it dominates the most. When the interview mentions MS Word, it is talking about the desktop application. So why should I compare Linux server to Windows desktop? Linux desktops simply DO NOT run for years.
It came from a tech satire website. The interview did not take place. You may now put down the pitchforks and torches...
If you just want to blindly start swinging because it's Bill Gates, then fine, do your swinging. But if you want to join the world of grownups, maybe it would be useful to think critically.
I would like to welcome you to Slashdot and let you know that grownups hang out elsewhere... any anti bill/MS statement is accepted without any thought.