This is about the second dumbest thing I have ever heard of! There are so many easier ways to solve this problem then the complexities of integrating two computers to the same hard drive! If you are so damn stupid that this is the only way you can think of to completely protect the integrity of your web site (and it better not do anything but display content as there will not be any way for your customers to made database updates) why not just burn the entire file set to a CD and run it from there? That is certainly read-only! When ever you need updates, just burn another. LOTS cheaper!
First, I have always felt that the BSA's piracy claims were such CRAP. Where do their 'estimates' come from? They run a number of 'surveys' that are full of loaded questions and they include media counts from pirate shops that have been raided, making the assumption that since the illegal copies exist, someone will use it.
Second, another often over-looked issue with software piracy which affects the survey results is (and this is NOT an excuse, just a statement of reality) that may of the individuals that use software illegally, would NOT use it any other way. They just could not justify the purchase. They either use it so ill often that it is not worth owning or it is just too expensive and they the could never afford to buy it.
If the BSA thinks piracy is bad (and it is) and they know a driving force in piracy is the high cost of software, why are they not pushing their members to reduce the cost of software so that it is more affordable? That would increase sales and make up for the (suspect) claimed losses from piracy.
One of the reasons is, by having vastly inflated piracy numbers that they use to bully the government into making tougher laws and businesses with which to threaten with big lawsuits, they can continue to justify the high cost of software.
It is the old catch-22, it cost so much cause of all of the stealing, they are stealing it cause it cost so much!
It can happen, just ask my wife, but I do not understand how modifying a DVD player (that I purchased) to play a DVD (that I purchased) is in violation of anything.
I completely understand that my copying a DVD and giving it to a friend (or god forbid, selling it) is wrong and a crime but we are not talking about that here. If the DMCA were not so broad and publisher friendly, this scenario would be considered far-use, right? So where is the problem, besides movie and record company greed?
We did not start that war. We were assisting in the protection of sovereign territories against an aggressor. Not to restate the obvious but Germany started the war. It is the aggressor that is in the mode to acquire. Defenders attempt to repel or recover lost territory. In all of the smaller, modern wars, we have come to the aid of the defenders (Korea, Vietnam, Kuwaiti). Not wanting to get into politics too much or saying it was right or wrong, just discussing the core and nature of war.
True. The point of war though, is not normally to annihilate your enemy, regardless of what the pundits say. It is to grab land, hold it and make it too expensive for the other guy to get it back.
Regardless of whether you are the aggressor or defender, you try to make continuing just too expensive for the other guy. That is what happened in WW2. Had Germany stopped after Poland, the rest of the world would have left them alone because Europe thought the cost to get involved was (to them) too high. Once Germany got greedy and tried to go for the whole shebang, the cost to not get involved became too high. Once the US entered the war and Russia got over the blitz the Allies were able to out spend Germany in both production and man power and Germany could not keep up.
That is the same thing that later during the Cold War, brought down USSR. The US just flat out spent them and they collapsed. In this example it was money not lives but the principle is the same.
Actual, the goal of most wars is to acquire additional territory and hold onto it. Few wars are fought for strictly ideological reasons. They may be stated as such to help build popular support but the real meat and potatoes is territory. Getting it and keeping it. As someone (I can not remember) once said, they an't making no more land!
Here it comes again, another 'knows just enough to be dangerous' technologist 'want a be' suddenly 'discovering' the next big crisis and is sounding the alarm to save the rest of us. Give me a break. Anyone that has been in the computer business for any length of time (I have for 20 years) has had to live though evolving storage formats. At a minimum, every time there is a platform shift, storage media or format has changed and we adapt. We convert what is important and discard what is not. To spout figures like "printed content represents only 0.003% of the world's total information" is TV journalism at its worst. The bulk of the world's information is total crap and what is worth saving is saved. It is backed up, converted, moved with the advances in technology. What percentage of information that was generated 1000 years ago still exists today? Answer, a fraction! Hopefully most of the important stuff but also a few recipes and bills of lading. That is the way it goes. If your information is too important to store on a hard drive with a one year warranty (and who's isn't) then go to RAID storage. There you go, problem solved, until the next shift in storage devices comes along and then you migrate.
Don't get your panties in a wad just yet...
on
W3C Ponders RAND Again
·
· Score: 5, Insightful
Unless I misunderstood, they are not saying that they would consider charging for IP. It appears to me that they were discussing how to handle standards proposals that included licensable, royalty work. That the normal(?) process is to break a specification into non-royalty works and royalty works in such a way that the non-royalty works would not depend on the royalty works and that the royalty works would be farmed out to another organization.
"When non-royalty-free IPR is discovered in a W3C Working Group, a Patent Advisory Group (PAG) might have a number of possible outcomes. The proposal suggests that the Working Group's specification could be split in two. "Core" work to be licensed royalty-free would be produced as a W3C Recommendation. "Extensions" that may require royalties could be done at W3C or by another standards organization."
The question appeared to be if that should continue. Of if W3C could work on the royalty works as well or if they could not go through the trouble of splitting the proposal and work on the entire thing.
"One person suggested Extensions work be dropped. Some said work at the other standards organization needs to be a cooperative effort with W3C. One person suggested a hybrid all produced at W3C. One asked if the Core/Extensions split makes Extensions work less important than Core. The consensus seemed to be that specs built on top of Core work are valuable and that standardizing them is important."
Sorry to disagree with you but it that past spending on bombs and bullets that enable you to be speaking and writing in English today instead of German or Russian or Chinese. Granted the military and military spending has not always served the 'higher' purpose, that of allowing a 'mostly' free country to stay that way but the country is still only run by humans. As such mistakes will always be made but I would much rather those mistakes be made in a democratic county then any other. At least we have the opportunity to keep an eye on things. How much disagreement does China tolerate with its citizens? How about North Korea? I will gladly support the government continuing to spend the small percentage of tax dollars (in comparison to the total budget) on military related tasks and supplies. On average, it is that spending that allows me to own my car, house, toys, etc. and what allows us to disagree on things like this without worrying about jack-booted storm troopers kicking in our doors and dragging us out into the night to be never heard from again!
The main difference here is that I get strong perceived value for putting up with the credit card companies. And if one pisses me off enough I can change to a competitor and loose nothing in the process. In fact I do it all the time as rates change. I have 5 or 6 Visa cards, the one with the lowest rate gets my money, cause that is what I value in a credit card company (beyond the other features that they all share in common). What does Microsoft offer me besides a monopoly on PCs? Just as I have a list of expectations for a credit card company, I have a list for software companies. The difference is, I can easily change my credit card. To change from Microsoft is an expense that for the most part, does not outweigh the grief they cause you as an individual. So you put up with them. All the while they continue to crush true innovation, drive up software prices and do what ever they wish with your personal information. They have the money, time and monopoly to plug away at any problem until either they get it right 'enough', manage to force you into it (Passport) or you just give up and acquiesce to it.
Slashdot Mirror
This is about the second dumbest thing I have ever heard of! There are so many easier ways to solve this problem then the complexities of integrating two computers to the same hard drive! If you are so damn stupid that this is the only way you can think of to completely protect the integrity of your web site (and it better not do anything but display content as there will not be any way for your customers to made database updates) why not just burn the entire file set to a CD and run it from there? That is certainly read-only! When ever you need updates, just burn another. LOTS cheaper!
First, I have always felt that the BSA's piracy claims were such CRAP. Where do their 'estimates' come from? They run a number of 'surveys' that are full of loaded questions and they include media counts from pirate shops that have been raided, making the assumption that since the illegal copies exist, someone will use it.
Second, another often over-looked issue with software piracy which affects the survey results is (and this is NOT an excuse, just a statement of reality) that may of the individuals that use software illegally, would NOT use it any other way. They just could not justify the purchase. They either use it so ill often that it is not worth owning or it is just too expensive and they the could never afford to buy it.
If the BSA thinks piracy is bad (and it is) and they know a driving force in piracy is the high cost of software, why are they not pushing their members to reduce the cost of software so that it is more affordable? That would increase sales and make up for the (suspect) claimed losses from piracy.
One of the reasons is, by having vastly inflated piracy numbers that they use to bully the government into making tougher laws and businesses with which to threaten with big lawsuits, they can continue to justify the high cost of software.
It is the old catch-22, it cost so much cause of all of the stealing, they are stealing it cause it cost so much!
It can happen, just ask my wife, but I do not understand how modifying a DVD player (that I purchased) to play a DVD (that I purchased) is in violation of anything. I completely understand that my copying a DVD and giving it to a friend (or god forbid, selling it) is wrong and a crime but we are not talking about that here. If the DMCA were not so broad and publisher friendly, this scenario would be considered far-use, right? So where is the problem, besides movie and record company greed?
We did not start that war. We were assisting in the protection of sovereign territories against an aggressor. Not to restate the obvious but Germany started the war. It is the aggressor that is in the mode to acquire. Defenders attempt to repel or recover lost territory. In all of the smaller, modern wars, we have come to the aid of the defenders (Korea, Vietnam, Kuwaiti). Not wanting to get into politics too much or saying it was right or wrong, just discussing the core and nature of war.
True. The point of war though, is not normally to annihilate your enemy, regardless of what the pundits say. It is to grab land, hold it and make it too expensive for the other guy to get it back.
Regardless of whether you are the aggressor or defender, you try to make continuing just too expensive for the other guy. That is what happened in WW2. Had Germany stopped after Poland, the rest of the world would have left them alone because Europe thought the cost to get involved was (to them) too high. Once Germany got greedy and tried to go for the whole shebang, the cost to not get involved became too high. Once the US entered the war and Russia got over the blitz the Allies were able to out spend Germany in both production and man power and Germany could not keep up.
That is the same thing that later during the Cold War, brought down USSR. The US just flat out spent them and they collapsed. In this example it was money not lives but the principle is the same.
Actual, the goal of most wars is to acquire additional territory and hold onto it. Few wars are fought for strictly ideological reasons. They may be stated as such to help build popular support but the real meat and potatoes is territory. Getting it and keeping it. As someone (I can not remember) once said, they an't making no more land!
Here it comes again, another 'knows just enough to be dangerous' technologist 'want a be' suddenly 'discovering' the next big crisis and is sounding the alarm to save the rest of us. Give me a break. Anyone that has been in the computer business for any length of time (I have for 20 years) has had to live though evolving storage formats. At a minimum, every time there is a platform shift, storage media or format has changed and we adapt. We convert what is important and discard what is not. To spout figures like "printed content represents only 0.003% of the world's total information" is TV journalism at its worst. The bulk of the world's information is total crap and what is worth saving is saved. It is backed up, converted, moved with the advances in technology. What percentage of information that was generated 1000 years ago still exists today? Answer, a fraction! Hopefully most of the important stuff but also a few recipes and bills of lading. That is the way it goes. If your information is too important to store on a hard drive with a one year warranty (and who's isn't) then go to RAID storage. There you go, problem solved, until the next shift in storage devices comes along and then you migrate.
Unless I misunderstood, they are not saying that they would consider charging for IP. It appears to me that they were discussing how to handle standards proposals that included licensable, royalty work. That the normal(?) process is to break a specification into non-royalty works and royalty works in such a way that the non-royalty works would not depend on the royalty works and that the royalty works would be farmed out to another organization.
"When non-royalty-free IPR is discovered in a W3C Working Group, a Patent Advisory Group (PAG) might have a number of possible outcomes. The proposal suggests that the Working Group's specification could be split in two. "Core" work to be licensed royalty-free would be produced as a W3C Recommendation. "Extensions" that may require royalties could be done at W3C or by another standards organization."
The question appeared to be if that should continue. Of if W3C could work on the royalty works as well or if they could not go through the trouble of splitting the proposal and work on the entire thing.
"One person suggested Extensions work be dropped. Some said work at the other standards organization needs to be a cooperative effort with W3C. One person suggested a hybrid all produced at W3C. One asked if the Core/Extensions split makes Extensions work less important than Core. The consensus seemed to be that specs built on top of Core work are valuable and that standardizing them is important."
Sorry to disagree with you but it that past spending on bombs and bullets that enable you to be speaking and writing in English today instead of German or Russian or Chinese. Granted the military and military spending has not always served the 'higher' purpose, that of allowing a 'mostly' free country to stay that way but the country is still only run by humans. As such mistakes will always be made but I would much rather those mistakes be made in a democratic county then any other. At least we have the opportunity to keep an eye on things. How much disagreement does China tolerate with its citizens? How about North Korea? I will gladly support the government continuing to spend the small percentage of tax dollars (in comparison to the total budget) on military related tasks and supplies. On average, it is that spending that allows me to own my car, house, toys, etc. and what allows us to disagree on things like this without worrying about jack-booted storm troopers kicking in our doors and dragging us out into the night to be never heard from again!
The main difference here is that I get strong perceived value for putting up with the credit card companies. And if one pisses me off enough I can change to a competitor and loose nothing in the process. In fact I do it all the time as rates change. I have 5 or 6 Visa cards, the one with the lowest rate gets my money, cause that is what I value in a credit card company (beyond the other features that they all share in common). What does Microsoft offer me besides a monopoly on PCs? Just as I have a list of expectations for a credit card company, I have a list for software companies. The difference is, I can easily change my credit card. To change from Microsoft is an expense that for the most part, does not outweigh the grief they cause you as an individual. So you put up with them. All the while they continue to crush true innovation, drive up software prices and do what ever they wish with your personal information. They have the money, time and monopoly to plug away at any problem until either they get it right 'enough', manage to force you into it (Passport) or you just give up and acquiesce to it.