This seems to be what big corps do from time to time to regain a few points in the market.
Remember way back when, when Atari (then owned by Warner), was split into the Arcade, Home Computer, and Consoles divisions? Did it change anything? Not really. Atari still died a slow, horrible death - although at least the new owners of the name help it sorta live on...
But Time-Warner certainly aren't the only ones who do this. I've watched G.E. spilt up divisions, only to put them back together again in six months time.
Just because you voted for Kerry and lost doesn't mean you can't raise taxes on your own! What a GREAT stocking stuffer - just in time for the holidays!
Maybe I'm not hearing it, but it seems that all electronica has really done is bring back the analog synth sound with the ease of use of digital tools. True, there's sample manipulation and the like, but I'm not sure how innovative that really is.
"yahhhhhh.... YEAH! yahhhhh..... YEAH", dance music was done back in the eight-o's - even if it was done w/tape loops.
I'd mod you up if I could. The basic harmonic scale and chord base hasn't changed; the way to express it has. The music industry used this as a wedge for every generation. If things don't change soon, the parents AND the kids will be listening to the same stuff.
Maybe that wouldn't be a disaster or anything, but it sure would be weird!
Yeah, that was me - same idea, different post, so sue me. Think of all the crap people go on about that isn't even on topic!
I think this is a very relevant point and one the record industry doesn't want to admit to. When they stopped embracing technology, they lost their competitive edge.
No, I DJ for our school dances - trust me I've heard it and you're misunderstanding me. I didn't say it all 'sucked' - I said it wasn't innovative. Taking a riff from 'Jack and Diane' or some old Queen song are old tricks in pretty wrapping (better sample processing). Is this innovation? Maybe. Seems more like recycling to me though - and another cut some music company gets for the sample.
I'll tell you how, because it's painfully true. The music industry has built it's business by offering something new to each generation of kids. Honestly, what's new lately? The artist examples you give have been around since the 90's - at least. I was taling about THIS decade.
It can be argued that music is continually evolving and I agree with that except that the previous few decades have shown far more music innovation that has arguably happened for thousands of years. The presentation of recorded music, ways of recording it, and whole new instruments fueled a lot of original material - stuff you could honestly say didn't sound like anything before it. Maybe I'm old, but I'm not hearing what THIS generation's music is doing to be different.
Just because it's on the Internet doesn't mean the music itself has changed much. For instance, there were similarities in New Wave to the preceeding Disco era, but there were extremely distinctive differences (mostly in instrumentation). I'm not sure mating a grunge band with a DJ is all that innovative, but for the sake of argument, I'll bite on that one.
I think the main reason why music sales have declined is indeed an innovation problem - but it may not be the record company's fault (for once).
In every decade you had technical innovation - whether it was 4 track recording in the 60's, the emergence of prog rock and sophisticated recording techniques in the 70's, synthesizers in the 80's, or rap/rock fusion in the 90's.
Question: What has the 2000's offered that previous decades have not? Answer: Not too much. For the first time, there's no real innovation in the sound itself - there's simply nothing that hasn't already been done, no tech that a generation can call their own.
If the music seems lame, it's because it is - it's all been done before.
I think Microsoft would almost have to make a system-wide policy. Something exclusive like, 'Only run these applications'. Something like... Uh... The Mac.;)
I don't fully agree with you. There are students who have gotten this crapware on their computers and cannot get rid of it.
I used to believe, like you, that programs like Gator, Comet Cursor, Kazaa, and Date Manager were mostly responsible, but with all the bugs in IE (not all of which are patched), I'm finding this stuff installed without a host app.
Look at something like VX/2. Here's a piece of work that appears on a system unbidden and apparently can't be uninstalled without a LOT of work. So it's not a virus because it spys on you? Seems to qualify as a virus to me.
I agree that the anti-virus people have been hit upside the head with this but they need to see this as an OPPORTUNITY and STEP UP. Hell, half the discovery work is fully available to them from the Adaware/Spybot people.
I've been going through this with Sophos (our school's anti-virus vendor) recently. The following is the beginning of an exchange between me and them. Frankly, I think that the anti-virus vendors also need to get their act together and stop all this fence sitting bullshit.
I don't care if a user 'willingly' installs this crapware - these are the SCHOOL'S computers, not theirs. Our policy is to not allow these programs on our network - PERIOD. I feel that Sophos is not doing their job in helping me control some of this uninstallable crapware like CWS.
Here's the exchange:
**
To whom it may concern...
As the sole administrator of of our small school network I am responsible for the integrity of our machines - software and hardware. Like everyone, we are struggling with spyware and related issues. Recently, we've been finding spyware that is installing itself without permission and attaching itself to.DLL files. Some of these cannot be cleaned by the traditional methods (AdAware/Spybot). For instance one of these 'VX2' has been found on a few computers here. It cannot be deleted, or when it is, it mysteriously comes back.
Question: What is the difference between a malicious spyware application and a trojan virus? What is Sophos planning to do about this type of vicious software? In short, when can I expect Sophos to start eliminating this sort of virus?
Thanks,
Chuck Hunnefield Technology Coordinator
***
Chuck,
Adware and spyware are usually considered one issue by many people. In reality, the adware and spyware lables applies to those applications that you've put on your machine intentionally. Many people are unaware of these things since they very rarely read EULAs and have no idea what's really being placed on their machines. Spyware, however, can sometimes cross into the malware catagory if it's functionality prevents a very obvious security vulnerability or if the application behaves in a way that is different to how the user was told it would behave. Malware is the umbrella term for applications that have made their way onto your machine without your consent and usually without your knowledge. Most trojans that we detect can easily be labled "malware" and vice versa.
If you have samples of files that you believe fall under this malware heading, by all means submit it to supportus@sophos.com and our virus lab analysts will look at the sample, evaluate it's functions and determine how to classify the files. If it is found to be malicious, then we'll certainly add detection for it in our engine and/or release an IDE for it.
If it is not malicious and is not something that'd be considered viral, then we will not currently have detection for it.
So to briefly answer your final question, Sophos has always and will continue to detect malicious files that reside on your machines.
Regards Michael *** Sophos Technical Support
***
Michael,
First of all, thank you for your quick response. I'm afraid I have to disagree with you about the labels 'adware' and 'spyware' being intentionally installed. Increasingly we are seeing these 'applications' (and I use this term loosely) getting installed through holes in I.E. or the OS. A perfect example would be this 'VX2' application. I feel fairly certain that nothing my users did invited this software onto their computer.
I fully understand how difficult your situation is concerning applications willingly installed by users. Applications like Comet Cursor, Gator/Claria, Weatherbug, and Date Manager are WELL known to me. And it may well be that software like VX2 is also installed through these means; but regardless of how it got there, it's unwelcome there now. Should ANY software be allowed to install itself and/or not allow user removal? I think this is covered under the new anti-spyware law recently passed by the U.S. Congress. If an app like VX2 downloads other applications unbidden and worms it's way through
" Too bad it'll be several months till I'll be able to play it.. damn PS2 only releases!"
I'm certain you'll be able to play it on the PC in all it's low res texture 'glory' sometime next year.
I don't mind it if these guys to console-only releases, but it REALLY pisses me off when my nice, 10-times-faster-than-the-PS/2 computer's capability is wasted.
"Right now, it's hard to prove that (for instance) riot police really beat the crap out of innocent people at a demonstration...."
Actually given the 'crap' that some of these helpful citizen demonstrators do to the police and bystanders alike; it's a wonder they aren't beaten more often.
Not that I condone that sort of thing but remember: The camera will likely be pointed in BOTH directions eventually...
"When idiots like these guys at MIT go about making devices built on the misconception that fair use is a cast in stone notion..."
Forgetting for a moment that this is not a fair use issue, please keep in mind that it is the **AA's of the world enforcing their copyrights. It is the **AA's who have extended (seemingly indefinately) copyright law, stifling innovation and expression.
And please, don't speak of the 'spirit' of a law. **AA lawyers know no bounds. Laws need definition because there will always be those on both sides who will challenge them. It's like saying, 'Did G.W. Bush LIE about weapons of mass destruction or was he MISLEAD?' Guess it depends on your belief system, doesn't it?
Do you honestly believe that the original founders or lawmakers intended the 'spirit' of indefinate copyright extensions? Even then they understood what such practices would mean - an unbreakable hegemony of information brokers.
Look, games like Halo 2 are only 10% useful in single player (especially when it's in FRENCH!) You know and I know that 99% of XBOX owners out there will buy the game, regardless of whether it's modded or not. This is especially true when you realize that you can't play the game online without a legal copy anyway...
I guess when you can't fight on the side of truth then you can always try and rewrite it after the fact.
See Darl? This is why the old guard from Caldera warned you not to go after the 'open source crowd'. Your page of lies will be dissected by hundreds of others on Groklaw. The best thing is, this time instead of shooting off your mouth, your words will be in some web cache.
Choose your topics wisely Darl. You will be watched...
"What the music industry chooses to promote is irrelevant to the issue of whether downloading music is ethical or not."
No, it's wholly relevant Mr. Anonymous. The fact is that the airwaves and vast majority of music outlets are controlled by an industry that doesn't give a damn what it puts out until THEY get hurt.
I'm not talking about legal statutes here either. Yes, of course downloading copyrighted material is illegal, but HOW illegal is it exactly? More than doing 56 MPH in a 55 MPH zone? More than promotion of unhealthy lifestyles to children? More than murder?
No one weeps for the industry because EVERYONE knows how corrupt it is. Wrong perhaps, then then so is issuing subpoenas to 75 year old grandmothers for music piracy. Suppose there will be any recompense for those lives they hurt in their witch hunt?
"...all people have to do is STOP STEALING MUSIC. it's not that hard, and there's plenty of alternatives now. no excuses left to download music illegally."
A large quantity of incompatible DRM technologies that don't work well together is hardly an 'alternative'. Buying music encoded at 128 Mbits instead of something less lossy is again, not optimal.
The RIAA/MPAA will need to embrace the promise of PtoP or continue to suffer it's wrath. And before you get on the high horse of morality, let's examine the types of 'music' being sold to kids both visually (MTV - when they show 'music'), and audibly; then note it's impact.
When the recording industry glorifies and promotes criminal activity, sex and violence, why shouldn't the kids follow that simple example? They can be gang-bangers and that's 'ok', but heaven help them if they download a song? Something's very wrong here...
Look, what REALLY made Stern popular was the curious balance he had between being married and constantly tempted; between the FCC and finding funny and unique ways to get around the rules. What has happened now is that all of what made him a unique curiousity is going away. His indulgence is going to ruin him and cause him to lose an audience.
His marriage is done, and for most of his listeners, sex isn't much of a mystery anymore. This was one item that a lot of both women and men admired him for - the fact that he didn't give in to temptation. That was the beginning of the end IMHO.
This gig on Sirius will probably start out dirty and 'controversial', and may even gain a few million listeners, but in the end it won't matter. It won't be censored - it won't be 'edgy' because without his fight against the station or the FCC, the REAL story behind Stern's success fades.
Slashdot Mirror
HD-DVD discs are red
Blu-ray's are blue
Pioneer loves UV
Which one's for you?
(bows)
This seems to be what big corps do from time to time to regain a few points in the market.
Remember way back when, when Atari (then owned by Warner), was split into the Arcade, Home Computer, and Consoles divisions? Did it change anything? Not really. Atari still died a slow, horrible death - although at least the new owners of the name help it sorta live on...
But Time-Warner certainly aren't the only ones who do this. I've watched G.E. spilt up divisions, only to put them back together again in six months time.
Just because you voted for Kerry and lost doesn't mean you can't raise taxes on your own! What a GREAT stocking stuffer - just in time for the holidays!
Maybe I'm not hearing it, but it seems that all electronica has really done is bring back the analog synth sound with the ease of use of digital tools. True, there's sample manipulation and the like, but I'm not sure how innovative that really is.
"yahhhhhh.... YEAH! yahhhhh..... YEAH", dance music was done back in the eight-o's - even if it was done w/tape loops.
I'd mod you up if I could. The basic harmonic scale and chord base hasn't changed; the way to express it has. The music industry used this as a wedge for every generation. If things don't change soon, the parents AND the kids will be listening to the same stuff.
Maybe that wouldn't be a disaster or anything, but it sure would be weird!
Yeah, that was me - same idea, different post, so sue me. Think of all the crap people go on about that isn't even on topic!
I think this is a very relevant point and one the record industry doesn't want to admit to. When they stopped embracing technology, they lost their competitive edge.
No, I DJ for our school dances - trust me I've heard it and you're misunderstanding me. I didn't say it all 'sucked' - I said it wasn't innovative. Taking a riff from 'Jack and Diane' or some old Queen song are old tricks in pretty wrapping (better sample processing). Is this innovation? Maybe. Seems more like recycling to me though - and another cut some music company gets for the sample.
I'll tell you how, because it's painfully true. The music industry has built it's business by offering something new to each generation of kids. Honestly, what's new lately? The artist examples you give have been around since the 90's - at least. I was taling about THIS decade.
It can be argued that music is continually evolving and I agree with that except that the previous few decades have shown far more music innovation that has arguably happened for thousands of years. The presentation of recorded music, ways of recording it, and whole new instruments fueled a lot of original material - stuff you could honestly say didn't sound like anything before it. Maybe I'm old, but I'm not hearing what THIS generation's music is doing to be different.
Just because it's on the Internet doesn't mean the music itself has changed much. For instance, there were similarities in New Wave to the preceeding Disco era, but there were extremely distinctive differences (mostly in instrumentation). I'm not sure mating a grunge band with a DJ is all that innovative, but for the sake of argument, I'll bite on that one.
But again, that was soooo... Last decade.
I think the main reason why music sales have declined is indeed an innovation problem - but it may not be the record company's fault (for once).
In every decade you had technical innovation - whether it was 4 track recording in the 60's, the emergence of prog rock and sophisticated recording techniques in the 70's, synthesizers in the 80's, or rap/rock fusion in the 90's.
Question: What has the 2000's offered that previous decades have not? Answer: Not too much. For the first time, there's no real innovation in the sound itself - there's simply nothing that hasn't already been done, no tech that a generation can call their own.
If the music seems lame, it's because it is - it's all been done before.
Remember what happened to the moon back in 1999? That's what all that ground storage of nuclear materials will get ya - and THAT was in space!
I don't suppose Command Koenig or anyone else survived that disaster...
I think Microsoft would almost have to make a system-wide policy. Something exclusive like, 'Only run these applications'. Something like... Uh... The Mac. ;)
I don't fully agree with you. There are students who have gotten this crapware on their computers and cannot get rid of it.
I used to believe, like you, that programs like Gator, Comet Cursor, Kazaa, and Date Manager were mostly responsible, but with all the bugs in IE (not all of which are patched), I'm finding this stuff installed without a host app.
Look at something like VX/2. Here's a piece of work that appears on a system unbidden and apparently can't be uninstalled without a LOT of work. So it's not a virus because it spys on you? Seems to qualify as a virus to me.
I agree that the anti-virus people have been hit upside the head with this but they need to see this as an OPPORTUNITY and STEP UP. Hell, half the discovery work is fully available to them from the Adaware/Spybot people.
I've been going through this with Sophos (our school's anti-virus vendor) recently. The following is the beginning of an exchange between me and them. Frankly, I think that the anti-virus vendors also need to get their act together and stop all this fence sitting bullshit.
.DLL files. Some of these cannot be cleaned by the traditional methods (AdAware/Spybot). For instance one of these 'VX2' has been found on a few computers here. It cannot be deleted, or when it is, it mysteriously comes back.
I don't care if a user 'willingly' installs this crapware - these are the SCHOOL'S computers, not theirs. Our policy is to not allow these programs on our network - PERIOD. I feel that Sophos is not doing their job in helping me control some of this uninstallable crapware like CWS.
Here's the exchange:
**
To whom it may concern...
As the sole administrator of of our small school network I am responsible for the integrity of our machines - software and hardware. Like everyone, we are struggling with spyware and related issues. Recently, we've been finding spyware that is installing itself without permission and attaching itself to
Question: What is the difference between a malicious spyware application and a trojan virus? What is Sophos planning to do about this type of vicious software? In short, when can I expect Sophos to start eliminating this sort of virus?
Thanks,
Chuck Hunnefield
Technology Coordinator
***
Chuck,
Adware and spyware are usually considered one issue by many people. In reality, the adware and spyware lables applies to those applications that you've put on your machine intentionally. Many people are unaware of these things since they very rarely read EULAs and have no idea what's really being placed on their machines. Spyware, however, can sometimes cross into the malware catagory if it's functionality prevents a very obvious security vulnerability or if the application behaves in a way that is different to how the user was told it would behave. Malware is the umbrella term for applications that have made their way onto your machine without your consent and usually without your knowledge. Most trojans that we detect can easily be labled "malware" and vice versa.
If you have samples of files that you believe fall under this malware heading, by all means submit it to supportus@sophos.com and our virus lab analysts will look at the sample, evaluate it's functions and determine how to classify the files. If it is found to be malicious, then we'll certainly add detection for it in our engine and/or release an IDE for it.
If it is not malicious and is not something that'd be considered viral, then we will not currently have detection for it.
So to briefly answer your final question, Sophos has always and will continue to detect malicious files that reside on your machines.
Regards
Michael ***
Sophos Technical Support
***
Michael,
First of all, thank you for your quick response. I'm afraid I have to disagree with you about the labels 'adware' and 'spyware' being intentionally installed. Increasingly we are seeing these 'applications' (and I use this term loosely) getting installed through holes in I.E. or the OS. A perfect example would be this 'VX2' application. I feel fairly certain that nothing my users did invited this software onto their computer.
I fully understand how difficult your situation is concerning applications willingly installed by users. Applications like Comet Cursor, Gator/Claria, Weatherbug, and Date Manager are WELL known to me. And it may well be that software like VX2 is also installed through these means; but regardless of how it got there, it's unwelcome there now. Should ANY software be allowed to install itself and/or not allow user removal? I think this is covered under the new anti-spyware law recently passed by the U.S. Congress. If an app like VX2 downloads other applications unbidden and worms it's way through
" Too bad it'll be several months till I'll be able to play it.. damn PS2 only releases!"
I'm certain you'll be able to play it on the PC in all it's low res texture 'glory' sometime next year.
I don't mind it if these guys to console-only releases, but it REALLY pisses me off when my nice, 10-times-faster-than-the-PS/2 computer's capability is wasted.
"Right now, it's hard to prove that (for instance) riot police really beat the crap out of innocent people at a demonstration...."
Actually given the 'crap' that some of these helpful citizen demonstrators do to the police and bystanders alike; it's a wonder they aren't beaten more often.
Not that I condone that sort of thing but remember: The camera will likely be pointed in BOTH directions eventually...
"When idiots like these guys at MIT go about making devices built on the misconception that fair use is a cast in stone notion..."
Forgetting for a moment that this is not a fair use issue, please keep in mind that it is the **AA's of the world enforcing their copyrights. It is the **AA's who have extended (seemingly indefinately) copyright law, stifling innovation and expression.
And please, don't speak of the 'spirit' of a law. **AA lawyers know no bounds. Laws need definition because there will always be those on both sides who will challenge them. It's like saying, 'Did G.W. Bush LIE about weapons of mass destruction or was he MISLEAD?' Guess it depends on your belief system, doesn't it?
Do you honestly believe that the original founders or lawmakers intended the 'spirit' of indefinate copyright extensions? Even then they understood what such practices would mean - an unbreakable hegemony of information brokers.
...If you get the 'collectors edition'. That's also the only one they are releasing on DVD.
:)
I pre-ordered mine at EB yesterday. $79 for a game? Yeah, I'm their bitch...
Here's the link:
http://www.ebgames.com/ebx/product/243836.asp
...at all DVD production lines.
It's the only way to be sure...
Hey, it could lead to DANCING!
Look, games like Halo 2 are only 10% useful in single player (especially when it's in FRENCH!) You know and I know that 99% of XBOX owners out there will buy the game, regardless of whether it's modded or not. This is especially true when you realize that you can't play the game online without a legal copy anyway...
I guess when you can't fight on the side of truth then you can always try and rewrite it after the fact.
See Darl? This is why the old guard from Caldera warned you not to go after the 'open source crowd'. Your page of lies will be dissected by hundreds of others on Groklaw. The best thing is, this time instead of shooting off your mouth, your words will be in some web cache.
Choose your topics wisely Darl. You will be watched...
"What the music industry chooses to promote is irrelevant to the issue of whether downloading music is ethical or not."
No, it's wholly relevant Mr. Anonymous. The fact is that the airwaves and vast majority of music outlets are controlled by an industry that doesn't give a damn what it puts out until THEY get hurt.
I'm not talking about legal statutes here either. Yes, of course downloading copyrighted material is illegal, but HOW illegal is it exactly? More than doing 56 MPH in a 55 MPH zone? More than promotion of unhealthy lifestyles to children? More than murder?
No one weeps for the industry because EVERYONE knows how corrupt it is. Wrong perhaps, then then so is issuing subpoenas to 75 year old grandmothers for music piracy. Suppose there will be any recompense for those lives they hurt in their witch hunt?
"...all people have to do is STOP STEALING MUSIC. it's not that hard, and there's plenty of alternatives now. no excuses left to download music illegally."
A large quantity of incompatible DRM technologies that don't work well together is hardly an 'alternative'. Buying music encoded at 128 Mbits instead of something less lossy is again, not optimal.
The RIAA/MPAA will need to embrace the promise of PtoP or continue to suffer it's wrath. And before you get on the high horse of morality, let's examine the types of 'music' being sold to kids both visually (MTV - when they show 'music'), and audibly; then note it's impact.
When the recording industry glorifies and promotes criminal activity, sex and violence, why shouldn't the kids follow that simple example? They can be gang-bangers and that's 'ok', but heaven help them if they download a song? Something's very wrong here...
I actually scanned down the responses to this one to see if anyone had yet made a 'raman' joke. Well done and funny!
Probably in continuing patent litigation... :/
Look, what REALLY made Stern popular was the curious balance he had between being married and constantly tempted; between the FCC and finding funny and unique ways to get around the rules. What has happened now is that all of what made him a unique curiousity is going away. His indulgence is going to ruin him and cause him to lose an audience.
His marriage is done, and for most of his listeners, sex isn't much of a mystery anymore. This was one item that a lot of both women and men admired him for - the fact that he didn't give in to temptation. That was the beginning of the end IMHO.
This gig on Sirius will probably start out dirty and 'controversial', and may even gain a few million listeners, but in the end it won't matter. It won't be censored - it won't be 'edgy' because without his fight against the station or the FCC, the REAL story behind Stern's success fades.
But go ahead, buy some Sirius stock...