I've refrained from using terms such as bit-torrent because their reputation can be determined by others; not me.
The people hopping mad at me about these posts sure seem to be the ones who think they should fully control what they can do with a product once they have access to it.
That control is between them and the product's creator. If they don't like the rules they should not buy the product. What's so tough to understand about that?
You can hear the song fine on the normal radio or XM radio or even yahoo music-- free. If you want the high quality/fidelity version you have to pay for it.
Matches are free.
Matches are not free. Although they be at no cost to you, they are in fact a marketing device designed to get you to buy flammable products such as cigs, firewood, etc. Their real cost comes out of the marketing budget of the company selling the flamable items. When you buy the flamable items a fraction of the gross goes to pay for the matches.
Further, if you go into the convenience store and grab ALL the matches for yourself you will likely get a foot in your behind. They are for eveyrone, not just you.
Water is free.
No, only rain is free. Normal water you have to pay for. It has costs associated with it such as laying the pipes that carry it or the cute plastic bottles holding it at the convenience store.
Who am I and where do I work? I am a consumer in the real world. And I vote with my dollar.
Perhaps they should get a job that attempts to better society.
And who decides what is a valid attempt to better society-- why isn't the job I choose satisfactory? In America I DECIDE FOR MYSELF and my paying customers affirm or deny my choice- not people who want to steal my works.
The Open Source community has helped to drive the cost of computers down by providing lower cost computers. This then allows greater access for people to reach the internet and perhaps improve themselves by learning more.
What? At no time have I or anyone I know purchased a computer (at CompUSA or Best Buy or anywhere) that had a little tag stating "you save 10% because we use open source!" Further, Ma and Pa Kettle isn't going to the computer show to purchase hardware and then downloading a free OS. In the real world this doesn't happen.
Society needs alot LESS "artists" and alot more Teachers, Engineers, IT folks, Programmers and Scientists.
Who again is deciding what society needs?
In the United States mostly it is the consumer. And those caught with their hand in the P2P cookie jar may well get slapped with lawsuits as have been showing up in the news recently.
There are ways to distribute data over the internet securely to devices that also lock down the data.
You are correct people want to distribute the way they used to--- and with the internet they can give away the product to the planet and totally subvert the owner's ability to be paid what he should.
That's the problem--- it's rarely for one's own personal use. If even one disgruntled socialist uploads the digital product to a P2P server the horse is out of the barn.
Until honest people police the nairdowells there will be DRM.
Therefore there will always be DRM to thwart pirates.
That's fine, then there is no need on any P2P box for any non-Linus Torvalds created files.
1. Not everyone feels the way Linus does.
2. It's a big croc to try to make others feel guilty for wanting to feed their kids by charging whatever the market will bear for their products.
Here's a headline you will never see:
P2P server brought to it's knees due to vast demand for open source..
Just once I'd like to see someone in the digital-media-has-no-value-and-should-be-free crowd invest two full years of his life pouring everything he has into creating something digital.
Then I'd like to see him upload it to a p2p server, turn his empty pockets inside out, shut his pie hole, and walk away.
Did his two years have any value?
I would like a clarification- are people unhappy at the recent attempts at DRM implementation or the entire idea of DRM?
If digital media has little or no vaue, why do so many people want it?
When you go to the restaurant should you pay more for the big steak than the little one?---YES.
It is not fair that massive users of bandwidth can push off their usage costs on the rest of us.
Pro-socialist views don't fly with capitalists.
Digital Property (and bandwidth) HAS monetary value determined by the MARKETPLACE, so stealing it is non-viable in the long term and those forced to pay for this theft have every right to react to protect their property.
Most big ISPs (comcast, verizon, etc.) charge a typical flat rate for monthly service. So Bobby checking his email pays the same as Grandma downloading those high-quality Frank Sinatra mpegs.
But maybe there's another way to do this- monthly fees based upon data transfer. I pay it now as the host, but maybe the consumer should pay some metered/scaled/tiered rate?
It's easy enough to compute transfer rates per account (they do this now in a limited way so they can send warnings to people consuming too much bandwidth) and the ISPs would relaize more revenue (so their stock holders would like it).
Finally, the companies could make many confusing, multi-tierd plans and market the bejesus out of them like the cell phone companies do. Whoa.. think I just hit the ugly part...
In a directly related story, scientists have found THE missing link between sharks and humans in a sub-species. They are calling it entrepreneurius-maximus.
Put the files on a bit torrent box and poof-- it won't matter who copies it where. The magical, rose-colored, I-don't-care-who-really-owns-it glasses make all problems go away.:-)
Slashdot Mirror
I've refrained from using terms such as bit-torrent because their reputation can be determined by others; not me.
The people hopping mad at me about these posts sure seem to be the ones who think they should fully control what they can do with a product once they have access to it.
That control is between them and the product's creator. If they don't like the rules they should not buy the product. What's so tough to understand about that?
I'm not going to buy a song I've never heard.
You can hear the song fine on the normal radio or XM radio or even yahoo music-- free. If you want the high quality/fidelity version you have to pay for it.
Matches are free.
Matches are not free. Although they be at no cost to you, they are in fact a marketing device designed to get you to buy flammable products such as cigs, firewood, etc. Their real cost comes out of the marketing budget of the company selling the flamable items. When you buy the flamable items a fraction of the gross goes to pay for the matches.
Further, if you go into the convenience store and grab ALL the matches for yourself you will likely get a foot in your behind. They are for eveyrone, not just you.
Water is free.
No, only rain is free. Normal water you have to pay for. It has costs associated with it such as laying the pipes that carry it or the cute plastic bottles holding it at the convenience store.
Who am I and where do I work? I am a consumer in the real world. And I vote with my dollar.
Perhaps they should get a job that attempts to better society.
And who decides what is a valid attempt to better society-- why isn't the job I choose satisfactory? In America I DECIDE FOR MYSELF and my paying customers affirm or deny my choice- not people who want to steal my works.
The Open Source community has helped to drive the cost of computers down by providing lower cost computers. This then allows greater access for people to reach the internet and perhaps improve themselves by learning more.
What? At no time have I or anyone I know purchased a computer (at CompUSA or Best Buy or anywhere) that had a little tag stating "you save 10% because we use open source!" Further, Ma and Pa Kettle isn't going to the computer show to purchase hardware and then downloading a free OS. In the real world this doesn't happen.
Society needs alot LESS "artists" and alot more Teachers, Engineers, IT folks, Programmers and Scientists.
Who again is deciding what society needs?
In the United States mostly it is the consumer. And those caught with their hand in the P2P cookie jar may well get slapped with lawsuits as have been showing up in the news recently.
There are ways to distribute data over the internet securely to devices that also lock down the data.
You are correct people want to distribute the way they used to--- and with the internet they can give away the product to the planet and totally subvert the owner's ability to be paid what he should.
Let the market decide.
That's the problem--- it's rarely for one's own personal use. If even one disgruntled socialist uploads the digital product to a P2P server the horse is out of the barn.
Until honest people police the nairdowells there will be DRM.
Therefore there will always be DRM to thwart pirates.
That's fine, then go download dead european composers music to your heart's content.
But if it's hacked software or copyrighted music stay the heck away from it.
That's exactly the problem-- there is no way to both let one use it anyway he wants AND have any kind of controls for the product's creator.
If one doesn't like the way a given DRM is implemented then he should not buy the product.
However, not liking a DRM implementation is NOT a valid reason for going all out to enable lots of people to steal the content.
This all goes back to whether or not digital data has value similar to other physical products like cars, boats, or steak dinners. Of course it does.
If digital data (in any form) had no value, why would so many people be willing to steal it?
That's fine, then there is no need on any P2P box for any non-Linus Torvalds created files.
1. Not everyone feels the way Linus does.
2. It's a big croc to try to make others feel guilty for wanting to feed their kids by charging whatever the market will bear for their products.
Here's a headline you will never see:
P2P server brought to it's knees due to vast demand for open source..
The "I" in API stands for interface, that is the contract between author and consumer in how to properly make calls.
It is not intended to provide all innter details.
So this analogy does not hold.
Just once I'd like to see someone in the digital-media-has-no-value-and-should-be-free crowd invest two full years of his life pouring everything he has into creating something digital.
Then I'd like to see him upload it to a p2p server, turn his empty pockets inside out, shut his pie hole, and walk away.
Did his two years have any value?
I would like a clarification- are people unhappy at the recent attempts at DRM implementation or the entire idea of DRM?
If digital media has little or no vaue, why do so many people want it?
If you want it, pay for it.
When you go to the restaurant should you pay more for the big steak than the little one?---YES.
It is not fair that massive users of bandwidth can push off their usage costs on the rest of us.
Pro-socialist views don't fly with capitalists.
Digital Property (and bandwidth) HAS monetary value determined by the MARKETPLACE, so stealing it is non-viable in the long term and those forced to pay for this theft have every right to react to protect their property.
signed by a creator of digital property.
Most big ISPs (comcast, verizon, etc.) charge a typical flat rate for monthly service. So Bobby checking his email pays the same as Grandma downloading those high-quality Frank Sinatra mpegs.
But maybe there's another way to do this- monthly fees based upon data transfer. I pay it now as the host, but maybe the consumer should pay some metered/scaled/tiered rate?
It's easy enough to compute transfer rates per account (they do this now in a limited way so they can send warnings to people consuming too much bandwidth) and the ISPs would relaize more revenue (so their stock holders would like it).
Finally, the companies could make many confusing, multi-tierd plans and market the bejesus out of them like the cell phone companies do. Whoa.. think I just hit the ugly part...
Put these competitions in casinos.
Each player ponies up $20 to play in, say, an 8 person game.
House gets 20%, winner gets 60%, 2nd place gets 20%
If there were only a way to wager in team games such as Warcraft III DOTA or Star Wars Empire At War, etc. things could have that little extra edge.
The title of the article and initial response to it are the actual problem- not the wiretapps.
From the article: increased by 44% to 1,710..
However the title fails to consider there are 300 MILLION people in America and that there were only 1,710 wiretapps.
This equates to 0.00057%
Orwellian my big fat behind. Some people just want to scare all people.
In a directly related story, scientists have found THE missing link between sharks and humans in a sub-species. They are calling it entrepreneurius-maximus.
Offer not valid in NY, Conn., CA, MA, etc.
At this time technology isn't the problem. Question is, what will happen first?
- Errant political leaders misuse technology?
- Politically disgruntled scientist develops AI to run Terminators?
Put the files on a bit torrent box and poof-- it won't matter who copies it where. The magical, rose-colored, I-don't-care-who-really-owns-it glasses make all problems go away.
For the longest time I believed that Anonymous Coward was a real user. And THAT guy used to get under my skin on a regular basis.
Then one day I posted anonmously- for the first time.
DOH!
Point taken.
Posting this article on this site is like tossing Nemo into a shark tank.
Let us count the intellectually absent posts.. damn, where did I put that Long Integer?
Worse, ISPs might base their lists on commercial considerations.
Wasn't there some denial of access going on recently by smaller ISPs who didn't want their users to have telephone access over the internet?
Now suppose you are an aspiring software developer who comes up with a killer app you start beta testing from home.
Now suppose your own ISP separately begins developing a similar idea and while doing competition / market research sees your beta out there..
Access denied? (for "security" reasons of course (lol))
Ensuring certain security settings is one thing. Detecting software running and denying access is an entirely different can of worms.
Separately, there certainly have to be national security issues worth considering.. by the appropriate people of course.
We have created a great country but balancing freedom and security is an ongoing challenge.
If a well known web site claims to link to an IP address to collect your sensitive information that's a pretty big red flag.
If a Who-Is lookup of the owner of that IP address reads: China that's another pretty big flag.
Of course if the email is from Prince Uba-bott-toomu-slam-botta and he needs your help in liberating the jewel of Thesia you're good to go.
Now you are getting a flavor for how much of the user-base of this site feels deep down.
Hopefully, like me, you'll enjoy the stories you like and let the icky parts run off your back like dirty rain water off a duck.
How can Dice.com, Monster.com, and CareerBuilder.com survive in a destroyed industry ?
Millions and millions of high-tech workers aren't feeling so destroyed these days- including ME.
http://msdn.microsoft.com/ --- way cool software development info. free - as in beer (whatever that means
The Tango car, follow the links in the story, is the more interesting one.
It's all electric, charges fast, goes 0-60 in four seconds and has a top speed of 150 MPH.
Great little commuter car.