Obviously the RIAA doesn't want to sue "dead grandmothers" or "12 year old girls" but they have to file anonymous John Doe suits against IP addresses. The ISPs later maps the IPs back to account holders.
The RIAA can't know who they are suing before they get started, now can they?
"I'd say the EFF didn't expect our elected representatives to make punishment for file sharing harsher than many rape, fraud, manslaughter etc. sentences."
That's not what's happening -- people who get caught are mostly choosing to settle for a few thousand dollars, for sharing a few thousand files. Measured against files that cost a dollar apiece, it's tough to call that penaly "harsher than rape."
Don't blame the tools, blame the people who misuse them, right?
EFF used to suggest that downloaders get sued -- but as soon as those people get in trouble, it's all about "how dare these big mean companies sue music lovers".
Back during the hype over Danger Mouse's Grey Album, I noted this from the Creative Commons:
"We work to offer creators a best-of-both-worlds way to protect their works while encouraging certain uses of them -- to declare 'some rights reserved.'"
Among the rights an artist may choose to reserve when configuring their
Creative Commons license is "No Derivative Works," explained in cartoon
here.
Indeed, the Creative Commons' leading example musician is Roger McGuinn who:
"chose the Creative Commons license that maximizes a combination of free
distribution with artistic control and integrity." -- note that Roger
McGuinn chose "No Derivative Works."
However, Larry Lessig would take that right away, from a post to his blog:
"Should the law give DJ Danger Mouse the right to remix without permission?
I think so, though I understand how others find the matter a bit more grey."
"Should the law give DJ Danger Mouse a compulsory right to remix? That is,
the right, conditioned upon his paying a small fee per sale? Again, I think
so, and again, you might find this a bit less grey."
So, what exactly does Creative Commons mean by "some rights reserved" --
would it perhaps be more accurate if they said: "some rights reserved until
we can change the laws to take those rights away"?
"Unfortunately the phrase the FSF has come up with to meet this exact situation is "libre", which has the same problems as "GNU" and then some, i.e., no one knows what it means until you explain it to them, and no one can pronounce it."
My guess is that if you mention "free software" to 10 people who don't know already what it is, all 10 will think "free as in beer."
The term "free software" is inclined to give people the wrong idea.
But if you were to call it "software libre," some people would think "free as in speech" and others wouldn't understand, and would ask about it.
Wouldn't that be much better than giving the wrong impression?
With the neverending confusion between "free as in speech" and "free as in beer", I'm kind of surprised that the FSF, etc., hasn't tried to come up with a more descriptive phrase.
What phrase (ie, not "free software") might more accurately connote "free as in speech" without implying "free as in beer"?
"virus-like computer programs that replicate, mutate randomly... these digital life forms also once avoided scientists attempts at "killing" them" AND "You can download the project yourself"
Sounds like something my sister would download...;O
Yes, I write and sell Andromeda myself. In fact, here's me (and here's the link to Andromeda again).
I'd say that the large majority of people who purchase Andromeda are well aware of "free (as in beer)" alternatives -- we all use Google, right?;)
They still choose Andromeda because they just like it better, because it's so easy to set up and maintain, and for good support and documentation, and so on.
fwiw, Andromeda has also been around since about 1999.
Personally, I'm more into "on-demand" playback rather than "broadcast" -- that's why I built Andromeda -- it turns your folders and files of MP3s (OGGs too) into a complete browsable/streaming site (needs PHP or ASP)...
Re:Wait a sec, this story isn't about "dark matter
on
Dark Matter Discovered
·
· Score: 4, Informative
If most leading cosmologists aren't sure that the missing dark matter is baryonic (regular stuff), what makes you so sure?
Dark matter might yet prove to be baryonic, but since about 70% of the universe is the even weirder dark energy, why is it so impossible to believe that 25% could be a new type of matter that interacts gravitationally, but not in other expected ways?
Wait a sec, this story isn't about "dark matter"
on
Dark Matter Discovered
·
· Score: 4, Insightful
It seems to me this story isn't actually about "dark matter" -- it's about locating some missing baryonic matter (ie, regular stuff).
In other words, if regular stuff is about 5% of the energy density of the universe, with dark matter at about 20%, and dark energy at about 75% -- the stuff in this story comes into that 5%, ie, regular stuff and not dark matter.
"You are misreading that document...snip... if you think we would advocate secret surveillance of private data, you don't know the EFF very well."
Well, quoting from your/EFF's document, it says: "Figuring out what is popular can be accomplished through a mix of anonymously monitoring what people are sharing"
That sounds like monitoring to me.
To follow one typical line, how can you "anonymously monitor what people are sharing" but also detect attempts to "game" the system?
btw, I'm not sure if you've seen my suggestion: DRUMS, imho, it's the most loical next step forward.
I would guess that many bank Web sites include some sort of bill-paying option, though I would also guess that there would be an additional service fee.
(unless, of course, you have loads of cash -- fees are often waived for people who don't need fees to be waived)
"This custom version of Firefox will have the Speakeasy logo and feature a Speakeasy toolbar filled with links recommended by Speakeasy. No money was exchanged between the Mozilla Foundation and Speakeasy, as Firefox is open source and is freely available for use by anyone."
I know I'm old-fashioned, but I think coders should be paid for their work.
Re:Here's how 24kbit/s MP3 sounds (Lessig audioboo
on
Low-bandwidth Net Radio
·
· Score: 2, Informative
"I've never heard true mono. Is it better than that fake mono I've heard people rave about?"
Some people wind up saving mono files that duplicate the audio on both right and left channels, rather than save it with a single mono channel.
You wind up with a file that's twice as big, with no benefit.
Here's how 24kbit/s MP3 sounds (Lessig audiobook)
on
Low-bandwidth Net Radio
·
· Score: 3, Interesting
When I put the Lessig audiobook together, I finally settled on 24kbit/s MP3s (in true mono).
Listen to Ch.1 by Doug Kaye and/or Ch.13 by George Sessum, as those files were
properly recorded (some of the others were first-time recordings, and they
didn't get their levels right).
Slashdot Mirror
The RIAA can't know who they are suing before they get started, now can they?
That's not what's happening -- people who get caught are mostly choosing to settle for a few thousand dollars, for sharing a few thousand files. Measured against files that cost a dollar apiece, it's tough to call that penaly "harsher than rape."
Don't blame the tools, blame the people who misuse them, right?
EFF used to suggest that downloaders get sued -- but as soon as those people get in trouble, it's all about "how dare these big mean companies sue music lovers".
Slippery, sloppy logic.
"We work to offer creators a best-of-both-worlds way to protect their works while encouraging certain uses of them -- to declare 'some rights reserved.'"
Among the rights an artist may choose to reserve when configuring their Creative Commons license is "No Derivative Works," explained in cartoon here.
Indeed, the Creative Commons' leading example musician is Roger McGuinn who: "chose the Creative Commons license that maximizes a combination of free distribution with artistic control and integrity." -- note that Roger McGuinn chose "No Derivative Works."
However, Larry Lessig would take that right away, from a post to his blog:
"Should the law give DJ Danger Mouse the right to remix without permission? I think so, though I understand how others find the matter a bit more grey."
"Should the law give DJ Danger Mouse a compulsory right to remix? That is, the right, conditioned upon his paying a small fee per sale? Again, I think so, and again, you might find this a bit less grey."
So, what exactly does Creative Commons mean by "some rights reserved" -- would it perhaps be more accurate if they said: "some rights reserved until we can change the laws to take those rights away"?
hmm, it seems maybe they should have written about MySQL Connections... ;)
Gack! My apologies -- aren't frame-dragging and gravity waves manifestations of the same phenomenon?
It would be another confirmation of Einstein's theory. Some more background here.
And here's some about a recent satellite also hoping to establish the existence of gravity waves.
My guess is that if you mention "free software" to 10 people who don't know already what it is, all 10 will think "free as in beer."
The term "free software" is inclined to give people the wrong idea.
But if you were to call it "software libre," some people would think "free as in speech" and others wouldn't understand, and would ask about it.
Wouldn't that be much better than giving the wrong impression?
What phrase (ie, not "free software") might more accurately connote "free as in speech" without implying "free as in beer"?
Any suggestions?
Public domain information is already free (free as in speech), but that doesn't mean that somebody can't also charge for it.
It's no different than the GPL -- also free as in speech, but not necessarily free as in beer.
And it should be noted that this issue seems more about trademark and contract law, and less about copyright...
Sounds like something my sister would download... ;O
Plus, isn't it still basically just a longer password? A rose by any other name...
I'd say that the large majority of people who purchase Andromeda are well aware of "free (as in beer)" alternatives -- we all use Google, right? ;)
They still choose Andromeda because they just like it better, because it's so easy to set up and maintain, and for good support and documentation, and so on.
fwiw, Andromeda has also been around since about 1999.
I leave the screen down, and use other PCs to remote control it (you can use XP's Remote Desktop, VNC, PC Anywhere, etc.).
That way, when I click play in the remote window, it plays out the stereo.
I use it with Andromeda (PHP/ASP software I coded) as well as Internet radio and Rhapsody (the music service).
Personally, I'm more into "on-demand" playback rather than "broadcast" -- that's why I built Andromeda -- it turns your folders and files of MP3s (OGGs too) into a complete browsable/streaming site (needs PHP or ASP)...
Dark matter might yet prove to be baryonic, but since about 70% of the universe is the even weirder dark energy, why is it so impossible to believe that 25% could be a new type of matter that interacts gravitationally, but not in other expected ways?
In other words, if regular stuff is about 5% of the energy density of the universe, with dark matter at about 20%, and dark energy at about 75% -- the stuff in this story comes into that 5%, ie, regular stuff and not dark matter.
Well, quoting from your/EFF's document, it says: "Figuring out what is popular can be accomplished through a mix of anonymously monitoring what people are sharing"
That sounds like monitoring to me.
To follow one typical line, how can you "anonymously monitor what people are sharing" but also detect attempts to "game" the system?
btw, I'm not sure if you've seen my suggestion: DRUMS, imho, it's the most loical next step forward.
Oddly enough, EFF wants a govenment/entertainment industry agency to monitor network traffic when it comes to compensating authors for filesharing.
I would guess that many bank Web sites include some sort of bill-paying option, though I would also guess that there would be an additional service fee.
(unless, of course, you have loads of cash -- fees are often waived for people who don't need fees to be waived)
Does that include:
"This custom version of Firefox will have the Speakeasy logo and feature a Speakeasy toolbar filled with links recommended by Speakeasy. No money was exchanged between the Mozilla Foundation and Speakeasy, as Firefox is open source and is freely available for use by anyone."
I know I'm old-fashioned, but I think coders should be paid for their work.
Some people wind up saving mono files that duplicate the audio on both right and left channels, rather than save it with a single mono channel.
You wind up with a file that's twice as big, with no benefit.
Listen to Ch.1 by Doug Kaye and/or Ch.13 by George Sessum, as those files were properly recorded (some of the others were first-time recordings, and they didn't get their levels right).
and, fwiw, Google should lose that "I'm feeling lucky" button.