I found a simpler solution. Don't use a Tivo or any commercial DVR. We record our shows as AVIs, have a terabyte of storage, and watch our media anywhere in the house. If we run out of space, I either add more storage to the server, or we just burn them off to DVDs.
We have our problems, sure, but pissing each other off by deleting TV shows isn't one of them.
Well, when my girlfriend was observing our own localized outgassing phenomenon she did say something along the lines of "Jesus Christ! You didn't have to destroy the atmosphere!" I took that that to mean that I am Jesus Christ (much to my surprise) and I suppose it's possible that the Moon once did have an atmosphere and that I accidentally blew it away. But it's been a long time and I don't remember for sure.
Bonnet Linux
Hood Linux
Cap Linux
Balmoral Linux
Nightcap Linux
Yamulke Linux
Beaver Linux (Slashdot favorite)
Deerstalker Linux
Porkpie Linux
Tophat Linux
Beret Linux
Bowler Linux
Derby Linux
Headgear Linux
Cummerbund Linux
Beanie Linux
Homburg Linux
Pointy Linux
Slouchhat Linux
Trilby Linux
Bandana Linux
Visor Linux
Skullcap Linux
Space Helmet Linux
Gas Mask Linux
Beehive Linux
Newport Linux
Helmet Linux
Tricorne Linux
Hardhat Linux
... the criminals will have but one choice: to infiltrate the police...
But... that's always been the case. Either they infiltrate the police (difficult but not impossible) or, more commonly, simply buy them off or blackmail them. Either way, cops are supposed to be held to a higher standard but frequently are not.
Widespread surveillance may have a positive effect on petty crime (or it may not, I've yet to be convinced either way, and even if it does... is it worth the economic and social costs?) but it will have little effect on the big boys. We could probably get the same effect on the small-time hoods by just putting more cops on the beat, and it would probably cost less money and have less impact on privacy. I don't know, but the blanket assumption that "cameras=less crime" is as unproven as "fewer guns=less crime". I don't trust anything anyone says on either subject, because everyone seems to have an agenda that precludes honest and rational discourse.
What will probably happen is that the State will find a way to monetize privacy. Don't want a camera in your home? Well then, you'll have to pay a Risk Tax, because, well, everyone knows that people who live unmonitored lives are more likely to commit crimes, and those people should be forced to pay for the social costs of their privacy. Or something like that. I know, go ahead, laugh. Make jokes. But that's the kind of mindset that rules our government(s) these days. I know this is America, but I've long since shed my comfortable belief that bad things can't happen here, because too many of them already have.
Really, it's time to take the rose-colored glasses off and see the people in power for who they truly are. It ain't pretty.
I also find it amusing that people always bring up 1984 in regards to CCTV when the main point of 1984 wasn't the surveillance but the use of propaganda and a false war to keep citizens in tow.
Wish I had a mod point or two. Of course, not all networked surveillance has to do with cameras, as witness the NSA wiretapping fiasco. Advanced communications is a two-edged sword all right.
Perhaps you should try focussing your efforts on fixing the real problem?
In an ideal world, that would be the case. But given the level of power-mongering and outright corruption that exists in just about every major American city government, the best we can do is fight the symptoms.
True, you and I are geeks. But what we're basically talking about here is the attitude people have towards copyrighted materials. Most of those people that you're are referring to go buy boxed software and movies and music because that's all they know how to do: I'm with you so far. Places like China certainly make it easier for Joe User to acquire "pirated" materials compared to the U.S., that's also true. But every time (every damn time) I see one of those people offered something for "free" I've yet to see one of them say, "well now, I don't know if I can accept this... are you sure it's not copyrighted? I believe that I should purchase a legitimate copy." Heck no... they say, "Hey, thanks man!" and ask if there's more where that came from.
I think it's fundamentally more a question of availability than anything else. The media companies have been aware of that fact from day one, which is why they've historically fought every single advance in technology that allowed individuals to store and transmit music and movies. The legal attack on Napster was all about that very issue: that program was making vast quantities of unpurchased music available to everyone and we were grabbing all we could. Napster itself was likely the most popular download of all time.
Unfortunately for them, with faster connections, cheap portable media with evergrowing capacities, and an increasing awareness of P2P, the free candy store is more available than ever before.
You're also forgetting in typically convenient tree-hugger fashion that, even if you personally don't burn a molecule of gasoline or other fossil fuels, you are benefiting from all the people that do so on your behalf. Furthermore, you are consuming those fuels by your very existence. Do you believe that the products that are available on the shelves at the stores I'm sure you patronize are placed there by Elven magic? Are they manufactured and packaged by some similar supernatural means? Nope. It takes power and fuel to make that happen, and you get to enjoy the results, whether you characterize what you buy as a "luxury" or not (and I'll bet if I went down your shopping list I'd find more than a few things you could do without, but don't because you don't have to.) It's all a matter of degree, not kind.
I'll take you more seriously when you take that computer your using and drop it in the dumpster, quit your job and go move to a farm and grow your own food, grown your own cotton and make your own clothes and don't use a lick of any commercial products while you're doing it. It's truly hypocritical of you to accuse others of using products and services that you deem to be too "luxurious", while you're still availing yourself of everything else civilization has to offer.
And most of those "whole lot of people" you refer to aren't living that way by choice, and would, in many cases, gladly give up their existences to come to the States (or some other industrialized nation) and burn some gasoline.
There, you grew up swapping software on floppies, then CDROM's and Internet is just a convenient extra step. Buying boxed software from a store is as strange as buying gold-coated toilet paper.
I have news for you... that's exactly how it is here in the U.S., and the reason I know this is because of the very existence of the BSA and WGA and all the other "antipiracy" crap that we have to suffer. If we were all as thoroughly indoctrinated as you say, there'd be no need for any of it. But we aren't, most people I know see nothing wrong with "borrowing" an Office CD or copying fifty or sixty gigs of MP3s. They just don't, and claiming that the Chinese have a different view of "intellectual property" (gagh! I hate that phrase) than Americans do is wrong.
Way way back in my Apple ][ days, I had copies of just about every piece of software out there. Hell, I personally cracked a lot of it (remember the RWTS, anyone?) Just for the challenge mostly: trying to keep me from copying that disk are we? Ha! Take that. So I guess you could say I grew up swapping software, along with some millions of others.
Nothing really has changed in that regard. It's just that the penalties for being caught are higher, but individuals couldn't care less. Only corporations are concerned, because only they have pockets deep enough to warrant lawsuits. That's always been the case though.
In the US, average income is $36,000 per year. Or $3,000 per month. Vista would have to cost ovder $1,100 to take up as great of a part of our income.
Well, you are forgetting that little extra drain on most people's salaries called "income tax". Nobody that's making 36 grand a year is taking home three thousand a month if they're paying taxes.
The new pricing 'narrows the price gap between original versions of Microsoft's software and pirated copies,' making it that much easier for consumers to 'do the right thing'."
I see. And for some unaccountable reason, this approach only works in China?
Well, they should just ship George W. over there. Maybe he can convince them to (ahem) "stimulate their economy" by spending all their hard-earned money on U.S. made products, just like he wants us to spend all of our savings to buy Chinese-made products.
Yes. In other words, lock your doors. It's as simple as that, and in the case of GMail it really is that simple. Add the goddamn 's'.
There are times I wonder about this generation. We don't really want to accept that we're responsible for much of anything. Suppose the Internet had been around fifty or sixty years ago. Ask your parents: would they expect to be mollycoddled by their ISPs and free services? I know my father wouldn't have... if the Internet been around then odds are nobody would have breached his perimeter security, and if someone did crack it, he wouldn't have blamed anyone else but himself.
I take the same approach, and I try not to depend upon anything on the red side of my router to defend me if I can help it. Sometimes you have to take risks, sure, but for God's sakes people, at least do the basics. It's not that hard to keep yourself from being a soft target. Really, it's not.
Slashdot Mirror
Most men are just interested in scruons anyway.
I found a simpler solution. Don't use a Tivo or any commercial DVR. We record our shows as AVIs, have a terabyte of storage, and watch our media anywhere in the house. If we run out of space, I either add more storage to the server, or we just burn them off to DVDs.
We have our problems, sure, but pissing each other off by deleting TV shows isn't one of them.
... when all of our friends cum on her face our relationship will never be the same :)
You got that right.
I'd like to know how this got modded "funny". +5 Tragic, maybe.
Are you referring to this case?
Well, when my girlfriend was observing our own localized outgassing phenomenon she did say something along the lines of "Jesus Christ! You didn't have to destroy the atmosphere!" I took that that to mean that I am Jesus Christ (much to my surprise) and I suppose it's possible that the Moon once did have an atmosphere and that I accidentally blew it away. But it's been a long time and I don't remember for sure.
Probably means I should lay off the pizza though.
Well, here are some possible alternates:
Bonnet Linux
Hood Linux
Cap Linux
Balmoral Linux
Nightcap Linux
Yamulke Linux
Beaver Linux (Slashdot favorite)
Deerstalker Linux
Porkpie Linux
Tophat Linux
Beret Linux
Bowler Linux
Derby Linux
Headgear Linux
Cummerbund Linux
Beanie Linux
Homburg Linux
Pointy Linux
Slouchhat Linux
Trilby Linux
Bandana Linux
Visor Linux
Skullcap Linux
Space Helmet Linux
Gas Mask Linux
Beehive Linux
Newport Linux
Helmet Linux
Tricorne Linux
Hardhat Linux
... the criminals will have but one choice: to infiltrate the police ...
... that's always been the case. Either they infiltrate the police (difficult but not impossible) or, more commonly, simply buy them off or blackmail them. Either way, cops are supposed to be held to a higher standard but frequently are not.
... is it worth the economic and social costs?) but it will have little effect on the big boys. We could probably get the same effect on the small-time hoods by just putting more cops on the beat, and it would probably cost less money and have less impact on privacy. I don't know, but the blanket assumption that "cameras=less crime" is as unproven as "fewer guns=less crime". I don't trust anything anyone says on either subject, because everyone seems to have an agenda that precludes honest and rational discourse.
But
Widespread surveillance may have a positive effect on petty crime (or it may not, I've yet to be convinced either way, and even if it does
What will probably happen is that the State will find a way to monetize privacy. Don't want a camera in your home? Well then, you'll have to pay a Risk Tax, because, well, everyone knows that people who live unmonitored lives are more likely to commit crimes, and those people should be forced to pay for the social costs of their privacy. Or something like that. I know, go ahead, laugh. Make jokes. But that's the kind of mindset that rules our government(s) these days. I know this is America, but I've long since shed my comfortable belief that bad things can't happen here, because too many of them already have.
Really, it's time to take the rose-colored glasses off and see the people in power for who they truly are. It ain't pretty.
No ... Really Kool-Aid, and a lot of us appear to be drinking it.
I also find it amusing that people always bring up 1984 in regards to CCTV when the main point of 1984 wasn't the surveillance but the use of propaganda and a false war to keep citizens in tow.
Apparently we have that problem as well.
Wish I had a mod point or two. Of course, not all networked surveillance has to do with cameras, as witness the NSA wiretapping fiasco. Advanced communications is a two-edged sword all right.
Perhaps you should try focussing your efforts on fixing the real problem?
In an ideal world, that would be the case. But given the level of power-mongering and outright corruption that exists in just about every major American city government, the best we can do is fight the symptoms.
True, you and I are geeks. But what we're basically talking about here is the attitude people have towards copyrighted materials. Most of those people that you're are referring to go buy boxed software and movies and music because that's all they know how to do: I'm with you so far. Places like China certainly make it easier for Joe User to acquire "pirated" materials compared to the U.S., that's also true. But every time (every damn time) I see one of those people offered something for "free" I've yet to see one of them say, "well now, I don't know if I can accept this ... are you sure it's not copyrighted? I believe that I should purchase a legitimate copy." Heck no ... they say, "Hey, thanks man!" and ask if there's more where that came from.
I think it's fundamentally more a question of availability than anything else. The media companies have been aware of that fact from day one, which is why they've historically fought every single advance in technology that allowed individuals to store and transmit music and movies. The legal attack on Napster was all about that very issue: that program was making vast quantities of unpurchased music available to everyone and we were grabbing all we could. Napster itself was likely the most popular download of all time.
Unfortunately for them, with faster connections, cheap portable media with evergrowing capacities, and an increasing awareness of P2P, the free candy store is more available than ever before.
Broadcasters Want Cash For Media Shared at Home
... sure buddy. I got yer cash right here.
Sure
if that pepperoni pizza I just consumed can cause outgassing events. My girlfriend says so, but I believe she is mistaken.
You're also forgetting in typically convenient tree-hugger fashion that, even if you personally don't burn a molecule of gasoline or other fossil fuels, you are benefiting from all the people that do so on your behalf. Furthermore, you are consuming those fuels by your very existence. Do you believe that the products that are available on the shelves at the stores I'm sure you patronize are placed there by Elven magic? Are they manufactured and packaged by some similar supernatural means? Nope. It takes power and fuel to make that happen, and you get to enjoy the results, whether you characterize what you buy as a "luxury" or not (and I'll bet if I went down your shopping list I'd find more than a few things you could do without, but don't because you don't have to.) It's all a matter of degree, not kind.
I'll take you more seriously when you take that computer your using and drop it in the dumpster, quit your job and go move to a farm and grow your own food, grown your own cotton and make your own clothes and don't use a lick of any commercial products while you're doing it. It's truly hypocritical of you to accuse others of using products and services that you deem to be too "luxurious", while you're still availing yourself of everything else civilization has to offer.
And most of those "whole lot of people" you refer to aren't living that way by choice, and would, in many cases, gladly give up their existences to come to the States (or some other industrialized nation) and burn some gasoline.
There, you grew up swapping software on floppies, then CDROM's and Internet is just a convenient extra step. Buying boxed software from a store is as strange as buying gold-coated toilet paper.
... that's exactly how it is here in the U.S., and the reason I know this is because of the very existence of the BSA and WGA and all the other "antipiracy" crap that we have to suffer. If we were all as thoroughly indoctrinated as you say, there'd be no need for any of it. But we aren't, most people I know see nothing wrong with "borrowing" an Office CD or copying fifty or sixty gigs of MP3s. They just don't, and claiming that the Chinese have a different view of "intellectual property" (gagh! I hate that phrase) than Americans do is wrong.
I have news for you
Way way back in my Apple ][ days, I had copies of just about every piece of software out there. Hell, I personally cracked a lot of it (remember the RWTS, anyone?) Just for the challenge mostly: trying to keep me from copying that disk are we? Ha! Take that. So I guess you could say I grew up swapping software, along with some millions of others.
Nothing really has changed in that regard. It's just that the penalties for being caught are higher, but individuals couldn't care less. Only corporations are concerned, because only they have pockets deep enough to warrant lawsuits. That's always been the case though.
In the US, average income is $36,000 per year. Or $3,000 per month. Vista would have to cost ovder $1,100 to take up as great of a part of our income.
Well, you are forgetting that little extra drain on most people's salaries called "income tax". Nobody that's making 36 grand a year is taking home three thousand a month if they're paying taxes.
The new pricing 'narrows the price gap between original versions of Microsoft's software and pirated copies,' making it that much easier for consumers to 'do the right thing'."
I see. And for some unaccountable reason, this approach only works in China?
Spare me.
I remember that story ... "Jaycee", 1955. Really was a creepy (and, apparently, somewhat prophetic) work by Brown.
Well now, I had heard that he was wholly mammoth.
I might have gotten that wrong though. Too much beer mixed in with my reading materials.
Unless, of course, God put a completely synthetic fertilized ovum in Mary's womb and just used her as a mobile incubator.
It's rare that a one-liner from Slashdot makes me bust out laughing. Good one.
Well, they should just ship George W. over there. Maybe he can convince them to (ahem) "stimulate their economy" by spending all their hard-earned money on U.S. made products, just like he wants us to spend all of our savings to buy Chinese-made products.
I think he frustrates economists too.
Yes. In other words, lock your doors. It's as simple as that, and in the case of GMail it really is that simple. Add the goddamn 's'.
... if the Internet been around then odds are nobody would have breached his perimeter security, and if someone did crack it, he wouldn't have blamed anyone else but himself.
There are times I wonder about this generation. We don't really want to accept that we're responsible for much of anything. Suppose the Internet had been around fifty or sixty years ago. Ask your parents: would they expect to be mollycoddled by their ISPs and free services? I know my father wouldn't have
I take the same approach, and I try not to depend upon anything on the red side of my router to defend me if I can help it. Sometimes you have to take risks, sure, but for God's sakes people, at least do the basics. It's not that hard to keep yourself from being a soft target. Really, it's not.