>Nobody is trying to take away your intellectual >property rights, okay?* They're trying to >protect their own intellectual property rights.
Forgive me from channeling Bill Clinton for a moment, but it depends on what the meaning of "rights" is.
I'd say there are two distinct categories of rights in any IP transaction, and even if you're a consumer of IP only, you get some rights.
The seller can expect certain rights (the right to charge what he thinks the market will bear, the right to limit distribution, and the right to a monopoly for a certain time length). The buyer can also expect certain rights (the rights to time/space shift, the right to transfer the license to someone else, the right to choose their preferred means of using the content). It's a balance, and more and more, the balance has become swayed both by legal constraints and technical ones (who often rely on legal constraints to reinforce their technical flimsiness)
Remember: "Your right to swing your fist ends where my face begins." (I think this was attributed to some Supreme Court justice, but I may be wrong) We need an analogue of this for the information age-- "your right to copy-control ends where my right to the legitimate use of products I've purchased begins"
>Intellectual property is a very mature and very >useful idea.
So is nuclear fission. Just because it's useful and mature doesn't mean it doesn't need constraints to ensure it's not abused/misused to the detriment of the whole society.
The problem almost becomes one of too much exposure. If I place a classified ad for a spare computer in the Tucson Citizen, do I want to be called by someone in Vladivostok who has decided that $4 is an acceptable shipping charge?
Around here, they're very big on local sites... several TV stations and newspapers sponsor them. I just don't see the great demand outside the small area that the media outlets represent. What I'd be more impressed with would be just a simple BBS, perhaps with a GUI client and/or as an access point for cheap, branded Internet service. Because of the cost of access (long-distance), you wouldn't be inviting the world to post their two cents on your discussions about the dogcatcher race, and you'd have people keeping your logo on their screen longer.
What's the need behind these custom 'sandbox' environments? Why can't we use, for example, an 80x86- or 680x0-based architecture as the model for our virtual machine, and the VM software could just be a hacked copy of Bochs or UAE or whatever running a custom OS/BIOS combination?) This would have several advantadges:
1. Limits and optimization of the VM platform are well-known. People know how to make a good optomizing compiler for 80386-- do they know for CLR architecture?
2. Many development tools exist, and/or could be modified to suit the needs of the architecture relatively quickly. Language choice is helped.
3. There is actual hardware somewhere that could be used to run the VM-compiled software natively, or at least with faster native-code based execution (like DOSEMU or Plex86)
Is this path ignored because it makes vendor lock-in more difficult in terms of development tools and VM sources?
:VCRs record (I think) in analog on a magnetic : tape. Thus, repeated duplication always results : in inferior quality. Furthermore, repeated : viewing also results in inferior quality.
I love the simplistic reasoning-- if there are 100% perfect copies, people will want them. Otherwise, they won't.
People will often gladly accept a quality degradation (MP3, anyone) for convinence. Furthermore, there's nothing to stop a user from attempting to *restore* analog media, which could, in fact, result in a product SUPERIOR to the original (for example, by removing static on the original broadcast as seen in locale X)
I tend to think this is a very knee-jerk reaction occuring-- "there's a means of copying, so it MUST be precluded".
Rather than seeing an opportunity to cripple the consumer, why don't they see dollar signs? I'm sure there are a fair number of shows where people would gladly drop a fiver to get a perfect recording on tape or disc. If you can do that, people probably won't feel the need to make unauthorized copies. This seems verified by the posts in TV-related newsgroups (ie alt.fan.disney.gargoyles) of people asking for copies of episodes, and/or begging for the original supplier to offer the shows on disc.
Give up a little of the 'secret' in the 'secret ballot', and you might get somewhere.
Develop a two-part ballot. When you mark the ballot, it marks both parts automatically. You sign one part. Deposit each part in a seperate box.
When you do the first tallies, you use the unsigned ballots. If there are issues of potential fraud, you cross-reference the signed ballots with the people who requested ballots (here, you have to sign for one). If all else fails, or you see some particularly bizarre results (say, 90% of the ballots in a precinct show under/over-votes, or votes that vary wildly from national/regional/historical norms, you can even ask individual voters if the ballots recorded as theirs are correct.
Also helps with Chicago voting.
Wouldn't a voting machine be a custom design, due to the relatively unique requirements and low demand for product?
If so, why couldn't the buyer demand whatever he wanted of the supplier-- including, gasp, fully-documented, auditable code and schematics included in the bundle price?
Brilliant. Why not hang a neon sign out in front saying "Welcome crackers!" Diversity is a strength.
Say I have various accounts at 40 different firms. Say one is compromised. If I do things right (vary passwords, don't store appealing information like account numbers where it's not absolutely necessary), at least some of the other 39 are safe.
On the other hand, say LA or Passport is cracked. Suddenly, my electronic doppelganger is running up charges at CheapBytes and eBay and, worse yet, ruining my rep on/.!
Why not a use random username/password generator, store the results as a file on your local machine, and encrypt it. I can even see storing that as a good use for one of those "USB-connected flash on a keychain" toys.
Forgotten Principle One: What's funny the first time isn't the 60th. If commercials cycled very rapidly (say, every week they'd use new ones), people wouldn't have time to grow fed up.
Forgotten Principle Two: Production values. I've seen about fifteen different commercials from local businesses, all of who used the same music which I presume was a stock recording. Another commercial announced a "Spend $800, get a free TV" promotion where they used, I assume, stock footage of a wall of televisions. Footage so old most had knobs. A third advertisement series features the owner singing badly about his products. None show the firms in any way other than "Can't they afford decent advertising?"
Forgotten Principle Three: Respect the audience. I don't want to be yelled at. I don't want to be lied to (unless you're going to do a Joe Isuzu thing and go all the way). I don't want to be treated like a complete and utter imbicile.
Forgotten Principle Four: Divide and Conquer. If you use a uniform theme across dozens of commercials, the person who doesn't like the theme will not want to watch any of them.
Forgotten Principle Five: Sell one thing at a time. If you're selling food, don't give me the whole litany about your cross-promotion regarding some new cartoon movie. I really dislike the ads (I think it's for the Cheese Board mostly) where they splice in a specific store's promotion. Hey, buddy-- you make money if I buy cheese, no matter where I buy it. Lay off with the deal-making.
Most of us have something to hide. The real issue is "why are people trying to hide things?" The rationale runs the gamut from the downright illegal ("That's not a dirty bomb... it's an old MicroVAX taken apart!") to the simply embarrassing ("You can't prove that the AC posting on/. at 20.30 on a Friday night when he should have a date is me!") to attempts at planning ("No, honey. I didn't buy you your birthday present yet.") Why should cases 2 and 3 have to lose their legitimate use of privacy, to chase the low probability of catching case 1?
Slashdot Mirror
>Nobody is trying to take away your intellectual >property rights, okay?* They're trying to >protect their own intellectual property rights.
Forgive me from channeling Bill Clinton for a moment, but it depends on what the meaning of "rights" is.
I'd say there are two distinct categories of rights in any IP transaction, and even if you're a consumer of IP only, you get some rights.
The seller can expect certain rights (the right to charge what he thinks the market will bear, the right to limit distribution, and the right to a monopoly for a certain time length). The buyer can also expect certain rights (the rights to time/space shift, the right to transfer the license to someone else, the right to choose their preferred means of using the content). It's a balance, and more and more, the balance has become swayed both by legal constraints and technical ones (who often rely on legal constraints to reinforce their technical flimsiness)
Remember: "Your right to swing your fist ends where my face begins." (I think this was attributed to some Supreme Court justice, but I may be wrong) We need an analogue of this for the information age-- "your right to copy-control ends where my right to the legitimate use of products I've purchased begins"
>Intellectual property is a very mature and very >useful idea.
So is nuclear fission. Just because it's useful and mature doesn't mean it doesn't need constraints to ensure it's not abused/misused to the detriment of the whole society.
The problem almost becomes one of too much exposure. If I place a classified ad for a spare computer in the Tucson Citizen, do I want to be called by someone in Vladivostok who has decided that $4 is an acceptable shipping charge?
Around here, they're very big on local sites... several TV stations and newspapers sponsor them. I just don't see the great demand outside the small area that the media outlets represent. What I'd be more impressed with would be just a simple BBS, perhaps with a GUI client and/or as an access point for cheap, branded Internet service. Because of the cost of access (long-distance), you wouldn't be inviting the world to post their two cents on your discussions about the dogcatcher race, and you'd have people keeping your logo on their screen longer.
What's the need behind these custom 'sandbox' environments? Why can't we use, for example, an 80x86- or 680x0-based architecture as the model for our virtual machine, and the VM software could just be a hacked copy of Bochs or UAE or whatever running a custom OS/BIOS combination?) This would have several advantadges:
1. Limits and optimization of the VM platform are well-known. People know how to make a good optomizing compiler for 80386-- do they know for CLR architecture?
2. Many development tools exist, and/or could be modified to suit the needs of the architecture relatively quickly. Language choice is helped.
3. There is actual hardware somewhere that could be used to run the VM-compiled software natively, or at least with faster native-code based execution (like DOSEMU or Plex86)
Is this path ignored because it makes vendor lock-in more difficult in terms of development tools and VM sources?
:VCRs record (I think) in analog on a magnetic
: tape. Thus, repeated duplication always results
: in inferior quality. Furthermore, repeated
: viewing also results in inferior quality.
I love the simplistic reasoning-- if there are 100% perfect copies, people will want them. Otherwise, they won't.
People will often gladly accept a quality degradation (MP3, anyone) for convinence. Furthermore, there's nothing to stop a user from attempting to *restore* analog media, which could, in fact, result in a product SUPERIOR to the original (for example, by removing static on the original broadcast as seen in locale X)
I tend to think this is a very knee-jerk reaction occuring-- "there's a means of copying, so it MUST be precluded".
Rather than seeing an opportunity to cripple the consumer, why don't they see dollar signs? I'm sure there are a fair number of shows where people would gladly drop a fiver to get a perfect recording on tape or disc. If you can do that, people probably won't feel the need to make unauthorized copies. This seems verified by the posts in TV-related newsgroups (ie alt.fan.disney.gargoyles) of people asking for copies of episodes, and/or begging for the original supplier to offer the shows on disc.
Give up a little of the 'secret' in the 'secret ballot', and you might get somewhere. Develop a two-part ballot. When you mark the ballot, it marks both parts automatically. You sign one part. Deposit each part in a seperate box. When you do the first tallies, you use the unsigned ballots. If there are issues of potential fraud, you cross-reference the signed ballots with the people who requested ballots (here, you have to sign for one). If all else fails, or you see some particularly bizarre results (say, 90% of the ballots in a precinct show under/over-votes, or votes that vary wildly from national/regional/historical norms, you can even ask individual voters if the ballots recorded as theirs are correct. Also helps with Chicago voting.
Wouldn't a voting machine be a custom design, due to the relatively unique requirements and low demand for product? If so, why couldn't the buyer demand whatever he wanted of the supplier-- including, gasp, fully-documented, auditable code and schematics included in the bundle price?
Brilliant. Why not hang a neon sign out in front saying "Welcome crackers!" Diversity is a strength.
/.!
Say I have various accounts at 40 different firms. Say one is compromised. If I do things right (vary passwords, don't store appealing information like account numbers where it's not absolutely necessary), at least some of the other 39 are safe.
On the other hand, say LA or Passport is cracked. Suddenly, my electronic doppelganger is running up charges at CheapBytes and eBay and, worse yet, ruining my rep on
Why not a use random username/password generator, store the results as a file on your local machine, and encrypt it. I can even see storing that as a good use for one of those "USB-connected flash on a keychain" toys.
Forgotten Principle One: What's funny the first time isn't the 60th. If commercials cycled very rapidly (say, every week they'd use new ones), people wouldn't have time to grow fed up.
Forgotten Principle Two: Production values. I've seen about fifteen different commercials from local businesses, all of who used the same music which I presume was a stock recording. Another commercial announced a "Spend $800, get a free TV" promotion where they used, I assume, stock footage of a wall of televisions. Footage so old most had knobs. A third advertisement series features the owner singing badly about his products. None show the firms in any way other than "Can't they afford decent advertising?"
Forgotten Principle Three: Respect the audience. I don't want to be yelled at. I don't want to be lied to (unless you're going to do a Joe Isuzu thing and go all the way). I don't want to be treated like a complete and utter imbicile.
Forgotten Principle Four: Divide and Conquer. If you use a uniform theme across dozens of commercials, the person who doesn't like the theme will not want to watch any of them.
Forgotten Principle Five: Sell one thing at a time. If you're selling food, don't give me the whole litany about your cross-promotion regarding some new cartoon movie. I really dislike the ads (I think it's for the Cheese Board mostly) where they splice in a specific store's promotion. Hey, buddy-- you make money if I buy cheese, no matter where I buy it. Lay off with the deal-making.
Most of us have something to hide. The real issue is "why are people trying to hide things?" The rationale runs the gamut from the downright illegal ("That's not a dirty bomb... it's an old MicroVAX taken apart!") to the simply embarrassing ("You can't prove that the AC posting on /. at 20.30 on a Friday night when he should have a date is me!") to attempts at planning ("No, honey. I didn't buy you your birthday present yet.") Why should cases 2 and 3 have to lose their legitimate use of privacy, to chase the low probability of catching case 1?