The nat'l library of Denmark is now copying CDs (pressed, not burned) that they archived in mid/early 80ies. They have an archive of 25'000 CDs - never played, never exposed to light or heat. Just last week an article (danish sorry) about it. Select quotes:
On some there was an oily creamy layer on the bottom side. On others there were lots of needle thin holes in the disk - you could actually see light through. Still others had the different layers separating, with water in between [...]
We've seen the phenomenon in the very first generation of CDs from the early 80ies. In a box of 50 CDs from the same year there were maybe two dissolving, so lifetime must depend on manufacturer and material
Now where did your hear the name Chariglione? Could it have been during the Felten dispute? (He was executive director of the SDMI standards body).
This guy's a member of the industry that has sprung up, complete with lobbyists and all, trying to deliver "secure content" (read: snake oil).
If we look at what he wants it's clear that he has already chosen DRM to be the solution, and now we must find some way to make end users "accept" it. He talks a lot about "mapping traditional usage rights to the digital space" but the fact is that he's trying to replace court rulings on fair use with software. I wonder how well software will replace judges and jurors? (Remember, the preciousss "content" should at all times stay "protected") Someone please mandate "open" standards for playback devices!
He's sweet-talking, and politicians will really want to believe his promises - too bad that he's earning money from seeing DRM as the solution rather than the problem.
If I am ok with the fact that I can play purchased music on three computers and an iPod, rather than on four, or five, or ten, is that equivalent to acquiescing to a police state?
Straw man. I didn't criticize your "acquiescing" - just told you to get out of the way of those who don't. You said that "digital music shouldn't have DRM". Then you go on telling people fighting DRM to be "reasonable" and "compromise". If you agree with them, why are you telling them to stop fighting? As I said: stay on your couch if you like, but don't tell your friends to. If everyone stays on the couch we will get our police state.
If you don't want to use it, rip your own CDs and use whatever filesharing mechanism you want to listen to your music in your house, your car, your basement, your tent, etc. Nobody is stopping you from doing that.
That's wrong. (And how I wish it wasn't). The 5 major labels (90+% market share I guess) release most of their new albums as "copy-protected" CDs. I can probably rip them with the right programs, but doing so might be illegal under the EU copyright directive art. 6 (the "anti-circumvention provision"), which is implemented in danish copyright law para. 75c. In the US the equivalent law is US code title 17, sec 1201. So "nobody stopping me" is quite a matter of interpretation. Are you suggesting that I "fix the problem with the current situation by engaging in illegal activity"?
As for the next few paragraphs in your post, I simply don't see how they're relevant. Feel free to enlighten me.
A "damn The Man" attitude is fine and dandy, but it's ultimately self-defeating if you can't come up with a viable replacement for the current situation.
I can. Viable at least as regards fans and musicians. The trouble is making this viable politically, but I'm working on it.
I doubt anyone will get the RIAA and the government to acknowledge and fix the problem with the current situation by engaging in illegal activity.
You will not get the RIAA to acknowledge the problem in any way whatsoever. Making the government see the light will take some hefty lobbying - I'm working on it.
Here's a crazy notion. Why not actually make this a political issue and vote people into office who will do something about changing some of these absurd laws?
Hey, here's something we can agree on:-) I sense that we'll be working on this for some time. In the meantime, is it ok with you if I expect full fair use for digital downloads even though it's not "reasonable"?
She doesn't give sources or mention observations to back up her numbers. I doubt she counted 300'000 extra cancer cases and did the statistical analysis all by herself, so this is not an eyewitness account. Until she cites evidence - just any kind of evidence - I think the reports that actually do are more credible. Thanks for asking.
what features is Excel's graphs missing, specifically?
Histograms. At least I never figured out how to make them:-( Excel made me misinterpret my results (initially) because they were displayed in some strange bar diagram which was the best possible approximation to a proper histogram. It's probably nice for quarterly reports, but I'd prefer R for scientific work. (I've heard nice things about Origin as well)
There was apparently some extra package one could purchase, but that was not possible. I may have overlooked something, but I searched around quite a bit, and it wasn't first time I used Excel.
I don't see how you can dictate that somone can only view P in the context of I without some technical means of restricting access
Oh, it's easy. You just implement a copyright law that says so.
Now, the question is whether that's the current legal status. I can't speak for USA, but in Denmark unauthorized link-embedding of other peoples images in your own page is probably illegal and at the very least quite questionable.
The other, more important, question, is whether that's the way we want it to be. My opinion is that when you embed an image it becomes a part of the finished work - perhaps not strictly technically, but in effect it does. One can argue that even though I have posted an image on the web I should still have some kind of control over it. As far as stuff posted on the web goes, I'd favor a rather liberal interpretation of the right to quote other people and fair use in general, but to completely do away with copyright for everything on the web seems harmful to me. (As you can see I'm still thinking about these things).
Last, but not least, I'd like to point out that your mindset is very technically oriented which impairs your vision of how law is written and enforced. The Law generally doesn't really care about the exact technical means - it cares about ends and results. (Which makes sense when you think about it.) Carefully crafted legislation judged by sensible courts can often yield much more nuanced and appropriate results than technical solutions. Not always, but sometimes. (For instance, I'd take copyright legislation over DRM any day).
As a techie you probably feel as bad as I do about some of the harmful and misinformed sh*t the overlobbied lawmakers spew out, but we shouldn't let our feeling of superiority carry us away. Having advocated for better copyright I must say that I've come to have a bit of grudging respect for the legal craft. (I usually hate admitting that anyone but physicists are doing something worthwhile;-) So very very please take your technical insights to Congress, but don't dismiss the idea that a few insights might flow the other way as well.
it appears that ROT13 is not a beneficial mutation.
It helps if it happens twice. Perhaps one could think of it as an example of irreducible complexity. I suppose that's why my.sig has been so unsuccesful - it needs intelligent design to evolve, and there's no intelligence here;-)
At this conference I heard a lawyer call it "semi-legal". I suspect it's just cause no one paid him to give a firm opinion.
As far as I'm concerned, I already downloaded Robbie Williams' "Escapology". Picked "256kbit.ogg" - works like a charm. I think Robbie should get more than the microcent or so he got of the 50 cent I paid - but then again I don't really feel sorry. I was in the record store, had the record in my hand - and then I saw the copy protection label. If I can't really own what I buy it's not worth it in any way. Now if only there was some allofmp3-style thing in Denmark - with fair compensation to the artists - I'd be their customer in a heartbeat. As it is, I'm stuck waiting for certain executives to retrieve their heads from certain orifices.
In Denmark we have levies too, but we're not paying for piracy, we're paying for "fair use". (Not that we have much fair use left - Denmark has one of the strictest copyright regimes internationally)
The distinction is important. I resent the thought of paying levies on CD-Rs used to make backups of albums i bought fair and square. OTOH, if I were allowed to swap and burn music all I wanted I'd happily pay up.
Of course the politicians aren't interested in this distinction at all - to them it's more a matter of stopping the artists from whining. Squeaky wheel gets the grease, that's how politics work.
I'm using a nearly new version of K3B and it won't let me burn CDs from Mp3's
Get with the program man! Haven't you seen the press release:
The new kDRM(tm) module is designed as a truly secure and reliable open source system letting you experience protected content on your favourite Linux(tm) Desktop. With its user-friendly QT(tm)-based interface and state-of-the-art encryption, kDRM(tm) allows for unparalleled ease of licensing, playback and transfer of content from several major providers. KDE developer Matthias Ettrich marvels at the accomplishment: "This is truly exciting! Having content providers meet users in a safe and controlled environment has been on our wish list for years, and with kDRM(tm) we will consolidate KDE as the worlds leading Linux desktop."
No, I like KDE. Yes, I hate DRM. It's just that I've seen enough of that DRM-Press-Release stuff to make me puke. I feel better now thank you;-)
I expect this to become law here in Norway very soon too.
I would think that Norway already has implemented the EU database directive (IIRC It's very rare that Norway rejects directives, and this one is oooold)
It is possible that it's more likely that you can distribute Linux than you can actually use it, but both are copyright infringements in the absence of permission (as explicitly set out in the GNU GPL)
No, it's the exact opposite that's set out:
Activities other than copying, distribution and modification are not covered by this License; they are outside its scope. The act of running the Program is not restricted
(Term 0 of the GNU GPL)
My personal sense of respect and fairness tells me that I will not and should not exploit the others guys that have contributed to the free version of dasBlog.
Such a humanely-minded person! He refuses to "exploit" the other contributors. I wonder how it's even possible to do that? After all they willingly gave the code to the world. Quick, we should stop taking gifts from friends and family lest we exploit them!
Perhaps the concept of a gift is the one that's really not registering with him - well, he's paid not to let it. Giving away all you have untill you depend on handouts seems unwise to him (and me) but he'll have to face the basic fact that free software is a most beautiful gift since the worth to the recievers (=the world) can outweigh the cost for the giver immensely.
At the end of WWII research director Vannevar Bush predicted the IT revolution. He was eerily right in many ways, but some things are still to come. For some time I had the following quote hanging on my wall:
In the outside world, all forms of intelligence whether of sound or sight, have been reduced to the form of varying currents in an electric circuit in order that they may be transmitted. Inside the human frame exactly the same sort of process occurs. Must we always transform to mechanical movements in order to proceed from one electrical phenomenon to another?
Slashdot Mirror
to our earlier discussion? Sorry about the off-topic-ness of this post, but I feared you hadn't noticed at all.
The nat'l library of Denmark is now copying CDs (pressed, not burned) that they archived in mid/early 80ies. They have an archive of 25'000 CDs - never played, never exposed to light or heat. Just last week an article (danish sorry) about it. Select quotes:
On some there was an oily creamy layer on the bottom side. On others there were lots of needle thin holes in the disk - you could actually see light through. Still others had the different layers separating, with water in between [...] We've seen the phenomenon in the very first generation of CDs from the early 80ies. In a box of 50 CDs from the same year there were maybe two dissolving, so lifetime must depend on manufacturer and material
Now where did your hear the name Chariglione? Could it have been during the Felten dispute? (He was executive director of the SDMI standards body). This guy's a member of the industry that has sprung up, complete with lobbyists and all, trying to deliver "secure content" (read: snake oil).
If we look at what he wants it's clear that he has already chosen DRM to be the solution, and now we must find some way to make end users "accept" it. He talks a lot about "mapping traditional usage rights to the digital space" but the fact is that he's trying to replace court rulings on fair use with software. I wonder how well software will replace judges and jurors? (Remember, the preciousss "content" should at all times stay "protected") Someone please mandate "open" standards for playback devices!
He's sweet-talking, and politicians will really want to believe his promises - too bad that he's earning money from seeing DRM as the solution rather than the problem.
If I am ok with the fact that I can play purchased music on three computers and an iPod, rather than on four, or five, or ten, is that equivalent to acquiescing to a police state?
:-) I sense that we'll be working on this for some time. In the meantime, is it ok with you if I expect full fair use for digital downloads even though it's not "reasonable"?
Straw man. I didn't criticize your "acquiescing" - just told you to get out of the way of those who don't. You said that "digital music shouldn't have DRM". Then you go on telling people fighting DRM to be "reasonable" and "compromise". If you agree with them, why are you telling them to stop fighting? As I said: stay on your couch if you like, but don't tell your friends to. If everyone stays on the couch we will get our police state.
If you don't want to use it, rip your own CDs and use whatever filesharing mechanism you want to listen to your music in your house, your car, your basement, your tent, etc. Nobody is stopping you from doing that.
That's wrong. (And how I wish it wasn't). The 5 major labels (90+% market share I guess) release most of their new albums as "copy-protected" CDs. I can probably rip them with the right programs, but doing so might be illegal under the EU copyright directive art. 6 (the "anti-circumvention provision"), which is implemented in danish copyright law para. 75c. In the US the equivalent law is US code title 17, sec 1201. So "nobody stopping me" is quite a matter of interpretation. Are you suggesting that I "fix the problem with the current situation by engaging in illegal activity"?
As for the next few paragraphs in your post, I simply don't see how they're relevant. Feel free to enlighten me.
A "damn The Man" attitude is fine and dandy, but it's ultimately self-defeating if you can't come up with a viable replacement for the current situation.
I can. Viable at least as regards fans and musicians. The trouble is making this viable politically, but I'm working on it.
I doubt anyone will get the RIAA and the government to acknowledge and fix the problem with the current situation by engaging in illegal activity.
You will not get the RIAA to acknowledge the problem in any way whatsoever. Making the government see the light will take some hefty lobbying - I'm working on it.
Here's a crazy notion. Why not actually make this a political issue and vote people into office who will do something about changing some of these absurd laws?
Hey, here's something we can agree on
- and I'll stand by it. I apologize for the inconvenience.
n/t
She doesn't give sources or mention observations to back up her numbers. I doubt she counted 300'000 extra cancer cases and did the statistical analysis all by herself, so this is not an eyewitness account. Until she cites evidence - just any kind of evidence - I think the reports that actually do are more credible. Thanks for asking.
what features is Excel's graphs missing, specifically?
:-( Excel made me misinterpret my results (initially) because they were displayed in some strange bar diagram which was the best possible approximation to a proper histogram. It's probably nice for quarterly reports, but I'd prefer R for scientific work. (I've heard nice things about Origin as well)
Histograms. At least I never figured out how to make them
There was apparently some extra package one could purchase, but that was not possible. I may have overlooked something, but I searched around quite a bit, and it wasn't first time I used Excel.
Quoting chapter 6:
Some tell that 400.000 dead, soyuzchernobyl report of 300.000 people that died since 1986 and this is not over, in 30 years people will still die
These numbers are WILDLY inflated! The number of deaths from radiation are probably rather in the dozens. Check here, or here
I don't expect a person to jump out at me and ruin the comfort of anonymity I have while browsing the web.
You surely mean "the false comfort of anonymity I have while browsing the web."
You're being logged. Hate it or love it, but never forget it.
...by renaming themselves "World eBook Library Consortia 2".
:-)
Not to mention that the PG1 fans (I'm one) would google-bomb the crap out of the original WeBLC
I don't see how you can dictate that somone can only view P in the context of I without some technical means of restricting access
;-) So very very please take your technical insights to Congress, but don't dismiss the idea that a few insights might flow the other way as well.
Oh, it's easy. You just implement a copyright law that says so.
Now, the question is whether that's the current legal status. I can't speak for USA, but in Denmark unauthorized link-embedding of other peoples images in your own page is probably illegal and at the very least quite questionable.
The other, more important, question, is whether that's the way we want it to be. My opinion is that when you embed an image it becomes a part of the finished work - perhaps not strictly technically, but in effect it does. One can argue that even though I have posted an image on the web I should still have some kind of control over it. As far as stuff posted on the web goes, I'd favor a rather liberal interpretation of the right to quote other people and fair use in general, but to completely do away with copyright for everything on the web seems harmful to me. (As you can see I'm still thinking about these things).
Last, but not least, I'd like to point out that your mindset is very technically oriented which impairs your vision of how law is written and enforced. The Law generally doesn't really care about the exact technical means - it cares about ends and results. (Which makes sense when you think about it.) Carefully crafted legislation judged by sensible courts can often yield much more nuanced and appropriate results than technical solutions. Not always, but sometimes. (For instance, I'd take copyright legislation over DRM any day).
As a techie you probably feel as bad as I do about some of the harmful and misinformed sh*t the overlobbied lawmakers spew out, but we shouldn't let our feeling of superiority carry us away. Having advocated for better copyright I must say that I've come to have a bit of grudging respect for the legal craft. (I usually hate admitting that anyone but physicists are doing something worthwhile
Ok, end rant. Did I make sense?
it appears that ROT13 is not a beneficial mutation.
.sig has been so unsuccesful - it needs intelligent design to evolve, and there's no intelligence here ;-)
It helps if it happens twice. Perhaps one could think of it as an example of irreducible complexity. I suppose that's why my
At this conference I heard a lawyer call it "semi-legal". I suspect it's just cause no one paid him to give a firm opinion.
.ogg" - works like a charm. I think Robbie should get more than the microcent or so he got of the 50 cent I paid - but then again I don't really feel sorry. I was in the record store, had the record in my hand - and then I saw the copy protection label. If I can't really own what I buy it's not worth it in any way. Now if only there was some allofmp3-style thing in Denmark - with fair compensation to the artists - I'd be their customer in a heartbeat. As it is, I'm stuck waiting for certain executives to retrieve their heads from certain orifices.
As far as I'm concerned, I already downloaded Robbie Williams' "Escapology". Picked "256kbit
In Denmark we have levies too, but we're not paying for piracy, we're paying for "fair use". (Not that we have much fair use left - Denmark has one of the strictest copyright regimes internationally)
The distinction is important. I resent the thought of paying levies on CD-Rs used to make backups of albums i bought fair and square. OTOH, if I were allowed to swap and burn music all I wanted I'd happily pay up.
Of course the politicians aren't interested in this distinction at all - to them it's more a matter of stopping the artists from whining. Squeaky wheel gets the grease, that's how politics work.
Hae, du kan bare kore en google pa DRM og finde lort der stinker meget mere... Som sagt, det er til at braekke sig over :-(
I'm using a nearly new version of K3B and it won't let me burn CDs from Mp3's
;-)
Get with the program man! Haven't you seen the press release:
The new kDRM(tm) module is designed as a truly secure and reliable open source system letting you experience protected content on your favourite Linux(tm) Desktop. With its user-friendly QT(tm)-based interface and state-of-the-art encryption, kDRM(tm) allows for unparalleled ease of licensing, playback and transfer of content from several major providers. KDE developer Matthias Ettrich marvels at the accomplishment: "This is truly exciting! Having content providers meet users in a safe and controlled environment has been on our wish list for years, and with kDRM(tm) we will consolidate KDE as the worlds leading Linux desktop."
No, I like KDE. Yes, I hate DRM. It's just that I've seen enough of that DRM-Press-Release stuff to make me puke. I feel better now thank you
I expect this to become law here in Norway very soon too.
I would think that Norway already has implemented the EU database directive (IIRC It's very rare that Norway rejects directives, and this one is oooold)
No, it's the exact opposite that's set out:
My personal sense of respect and fairness tells me that I will not and should not exploit the others guys that have contributed to the free version of dasBlog.
Such a humanely-minded person! He refuses to "exploit" the other contributors. I wonder how it's even possible to do that? After all they willingly gave the code to the world. Quick, we should stop taking gifts from friends and family lest we exploit them!
Perhaps the concept of a gift is the one that's really not registering with him - well, he's paid not to let it. Giving away all you have untill you depend on handouts seems unwise to him (and me) but he'll have to face the basic fact that free software is a most beautiful gift since the worth to the recievers (=the world) can outweigh the cost for the giver immensely.
Linus has a very nice car, and house 8)
Yeah, and a wife who's a karate champion! Is that really what you want???
[The Internet] was designed to withstand nuclear war
Unfortunately, that's a myth. (And it wouldn't survive an all-out one today)
It's best told here
At the end of WWII research director Vannevar Bush predicted the IT revolution. He was eerily right in many ways, but some things are still to come. For some time I had the following quote hanging on my wall:
In the outside world, all forms of intelligence whether of sound or sight, have been reduced to the form of varying currents in an electric circuit in order that they may be transmitted. Inside the human frame exactly the same sort of process occurs. Must we always transform to mechanical movements in order to proceed from one electrical phenomenon to another?