In regards to selection, I think the best way to do it is p2p, not downloading from a central served owned by a record company or consortium thereof. The RIAA could keep track of how much is being downloaded and who owns the copyrights and then send each user a bill for using their p2p network, based on their downloads. They would then spread the money around to the record companies.
It would have to be pretty low-- like.25$ a song-- or perhaps even a flat charge of 25$/month for a gigabyte of downloading, with additional charges for going over the limit. If I could have access to high-speed downloads for that price, I'd pay up. If, say, 100,000 people sign up, that's a revenue stream of, hum, 25 million dollars a month for very low cost-- just enabling p2p file-sharing. If it works, you can count on way more users than a mere 100k...
I always thought the short stories in 'Burning Chrome' contained some of his strongest work. Suprised noone has brought it up yet. I found 'dogfight' to be rather poignant, and 'red star, winter orbit' too. I agree that the later work is not as good, but I recommend reading 'Burning Chrome'. The stories take place in all kinds of weird settings-- only one of them is a traditional 'cyberpunk'-style story-- and they are crisp, short, and well-written.
I think that the increasing complexity and 'function-holism' of software actually is detrimental to efficient computing. Just finding a simple virus scanning program is near-impossible these days. Every piece of software wants to embed itself into the registry (assuming a win setup for average-joe users) and the quick launch bar, to remain in memory, hog ressources, and generally be a nuissance. All I want is to click a button, scan for malicious code and remove it, and close the program when I'm done. That's why I think F-Prot is actually a superior product than some huge, bloated Norton-style suite.
I just want straight-forward programs that don't fsck with me. I *still* use command-line archiving tools (pkzip, etc) over the proper Win versions because I find the latter too greedy and invasive. I use them for the same reasons I use Google as a search engine: clean, efficient, and not evil. But every new version of any given program is compelled to add new 'features' to justify its existence.
I can't pretend to speak for the average officer user. I have mid-range knowledge of computers and run Win at home by choice (availibity of music-production software was a major consideration). But for what it's worth I think that contemporary software design is getting top-heavy. I prefer clean and simple minimalist design-- the Google or F-Prot aesthetic.
Judging from the tone and language used in the Security Focus write-up, it's difficult to ignore what is blatant sarcasm throughout the post:
"(not the hard-working artists who p2p technology rapes, and the RIAA protects). "
"1) If you participate in illegal file-sharing networks, your computer now belongs to the RIAA."
"4) Don't fuck with the RIAA again, scriptkids."
"We hope that you're as amused with our maturity as we are.;PpPppPpPpPPPpP"
It seems that Gobbles is simply making a joke at our expense here-- using fears of the RIAA for a good laugh. I mean, come on: 'RIAA headquarters'? This is the type of humour you'd expect... Anyone else reminded of the Panther Moderns from Neuromancer?
iopha
Until this news is confirmed by a reputable and ubbiased third-party, I'd recommend some scepticism towards the Raelian claims. They are known for pulling attention-getting media stunts in order to further their cause up here in Québec. The cult itself puts forward some rather boring claims (that aliens visited the earth to sow the seeds of life, will return, bla bla bla). Both the rael.org and clonaid.com sites are down (though google archives are still available, here and here) and, even if this were for real, someone is propping them up and using the cult as a cover-- I can't confirm this, but the rumours here are of a wealthy billionaire whose child died of sudden infant death syndrome. More info on Rael can be found here. It's Christian web site-- another cult, IMHO-- but the information is pretty legit. They are notorious in Quebec for being sexual libertines, which makes me wonder why they feel the need to clone, since they have so much sex anyway.
Because you are AC, I first assumed you were trolling and would not actually care to hear the reference at all-- and even if I did provide one, you'd attack the methodology and claim it was incorrect. In any event, here is the study in question:
Protection or Peril? An Analysis of Firearm-Related Deaths in the Home, Arthur L. Kellermann, MD, MPH and Donald T. Reay, MD, The New England Journal of Medicine, Vol. 314, No. 24, June 12, 1986, pp. 1557-1560.
"For every case in which an individual used a firearm kept in the home in a self-defense homicide, there were 1.3 unintentional deaths, 4.6 criminal homicides, and 37 suicides involving firearms."
It's weird to hear all these self-defence scenarios being thrown around-- the classic "a stranger has broken into my house" hypothesis as a justification for keeping weapons within arm's reach. Fact is, statistically, you're far more likely to injure yourself or a loved one than an anonymous burglar or rapist.
Look, I can't comment on the socio-economic climate of the U.S.-- I'm not a citizen of that country-- but I sincerely cannot believe that the chances of being broken into and getting killed in the proces, merely because one didn't have a handgun around, is very very high. This mean the potential criminal (by extension black and scary, right?) would kill as soon as rob you-- hey, first degree murder and grand theft, same difference, right?
Unless you have an epidemic of demented psychos high on crack running around with arsenals, I don't see why civilians should have handguns. Now, I have a rifle and a shotgun at home right now-- both for hunting, and they are (1) impossible to conceal (2) cumbersome (3) unloaded and (4) will probably never be used in self-defence. I have a dog, an efficient police service, and a decent (but broke...) government which takes care of the poor so they don't go all batshit crazy.
So, yeah, as far as handguns are concerned, IMHO you have to be pretty paranoid and insecure to need one lying around in order to feel safe. You are far more likely to hurt someone you know if you ever use it at all. Is America really that dangerous that everyone needs a gun to protect themselves from everyone else?
I recommend y'all go watch Bowling for Columbine, anyways.
Reading yours and other posts, I get the impression everyone is casting Tintin in the early or mid teens. I'm pretty sure he was in his twenties-- he didn't age from book to book, and he's off on his own all the time, working as a reporter, firing weapons, getting into fights (and winning against people twice his size). He's young, but *not* a teenager. I don't think. I've never seen the the animated cartoons, but I have all the original French books. It's weird, actually, since I am trying to figure out which characters are which after translations..
Bill Watterson will *never*, *ever*, permit Calvin and Hobbes to be licensed. He has said this explicitly in interviews and in the introduction to the Calvin & Hobbes tenth anniversary book. He maintains that 'spin-off' products (cartoons, calendars, mugs, etc) are only cash cows which add nothing to the original vision of the comic strip. They ruin the integrity of the strip and reduce the characters to 'advertising hucksters' (actual quote) whose insights on life can no longer be taken seriously.
Bill Watterson said NO to literally MILLIONS of dollars because he believed the integrity of his strip was worth more.
That, my friends, is something you don't see anymore; I respect him greatly for his decision, which has gone unheralded and ignored and even mocked by some.
I read all them in French, growing up in Québec as a kid. There alreayd have been a few live-action movies of Tintin for European audiences, and yes, they were awful.;) They weren't based on any of the books, though. If I recall correctly, there was 'Tintin et les Oranges Bleus' and also 'Tintin et le Mystère de la Toison D'or', both filmed in the early 1960s. I can't seem to find any information on the web, but I know they exist.
There also was an animated cartoon called 'Tintin et le Lac au Requins', which I've never seen, but I have the comic version of. I wonder if they will come up with some new storyline of adapt from one of the books. The later ones hold up quite well, notably the sardonic political commentary of 'Tintin et Les Picaros' where Tintin assists a coup d'état in a fictional Latin American country or 'Vol 747 Pour Sydney,' which has a wonderfully X-Filesque dénouement.
I just hope to God they don't adapt 'Tintin Au Congo' or any of the really, really early ones, since they *are* terribly racist and rely on all kinds of stereotypes (and they just aren't good stories generally). Who would play Tintin anyway? Keanu Reeves? Heath Ledger? Ugh. On second thought, leave my childhood alone, Spielberg. Go pilfer something else.
I'd be worried not only about hacker attacks on my house but possible invasions of privacy. Given the increasing power and scope of law-enforcement data mining, wiring your home in such a fashion would make the most intimate details of your life available to any packet sniffer.
And hey, that's just the FBI. I'm sure there would be no commercial applications of such domestic data mining, of course not. Eesh. Count me out of this latest modern convenience.
Umm, would that be the same American ingenuity that eschewed strong copyright laws for the first, oh, 200 years of its existence? That used protectionist trade barriers to develop its own industries and then denies them to third world countries now that they're strong enough to crush upstarts?
Beyond that, if I buy a product, I think I have a right to modify it if I choose to do so. I own the bloody thing. Imagine the uproar is Ford decided you couldn't change the mags on their cars anymore.
Slashdot Mirror
In regards to selection, I think the best way to do it is p2p, not downloading from a central served owned by a record company or consortium thereof. The RIAA could keep track of how much is being downloaded and who owns the copyrights and then send each user a bill for using their p2p network, based on their downloads. They would then spread the money around to the record companies.
.25$ a song-- or perhaps even a flat charge of 25$/month for a gigabyte of downloading, with additional charges for going over the limit. If I could have access to high-speed downloads for that price, I'd pay up. If, say, 100,000 people sign up, that's a revenue stream of, hum, 25 million dollars a month for very low cost-- just enabling p2p file-sharing. If it works, you can count on way more users than a mere 100k...
It would have to be pretty low-- like
iopha
I always thought the short stories in 'Burning Chrome' contained some of his strongest work. Suprised noone has brought it up yet. I found 'dogfight' to be rather poignant, and 'red star, winter orbit' too. I agree that the later work is not as good, but I recommend reading 'Burning Chrome'. The stories take place in all kinds of weird settings-- only one of them is a traditional 'cyberpunk'-style story-- and they are crisp, short, and well-written.
iopha
I think that the increasing complexity and 'function-holism' of software actually is detrimental to efficient computing. Just finding a simple virus scanning program is near-impossible these days. Every piece of software wants to embed itself into the registry (assuming a win setup for average-joe users) and the quick launch bar, to remain in memory, hog ressources, and generally be a nuissance. All I want is to click a button, scan for malicious code and remove it, and close the program when I'm done. That's why I think F-Prot is actually a superior product than some huge, bloated Norton-style suite.
I just want straight-forward programs that don't fsck with me. I *still* use command-line archiving tools (pkzip, etc) over the proper Win versions because I find the latter too greedy and invasive. I use them for the same reasons I use Google as a search engine: clean, efficient, and not evil. But every new version of any given program is compelled to add new 'features' to justify its existence.
I can't pretend to speak for the average officer user. I have mid-range knowledge of computers and run Win at home by choice (availibity of music-production software was a major consideration). But for what it's worth I think that contemporary software design is getting top-heavy. I prefer clean and simple minimalist design-- the Google or F-Prot aesthetic.
iopha
Judging from the tone and language used in the Security Focus write-up, it's difficult to ignore what is blatant sarcasm throughout the post: "(not the hard-working artists who p2p technology rapes, and the RIAA protects). " "1) If you participate in illegal file-sharing networks, your computer now belongs to the RIAA." "4) Don't fuck with the RIAA again, scriptkids." "We hope that you're as amused with our maturity as we are. ;PpPppPpPpPPPpP"
It seems that Gobbles is simply making a joke at our expense here-- using fears of the RIAA for a good laugh. I mean, come on: 'RIAA headquarters'? This is the type of humour you'd expect... Anyone else reminded of the Panther Moderns from Neuromancer?
iopha
Until this news is confirmed by a reputable and ubbiased third-party, I'd recommend some scepticism towards the Raelian claims. They are known for pulling attention-getting media stunts in order to further their cause up here in Québec. The cult itself puts forward some rather boring claims (that aliens visited the earth to sow the seeds of life, will return, bla bla bla). Both the rael.org and clonaid.com sites are down (though google archives are still available, here and here) and, even if this were for real, someone is propping them up and using the cult as a cover-- I can't confirm this, but the rumours here are of a wealthy billionaire whose child died of sudden infant death syndrome. More info on Rael can be found here. It's Christian web site-- another cult, IMHO-- but the information is pretty legit. They are notorious in Quebec for being sexual libertines, which makes me wonder why they feel the need to clone, since they have so much sex anyway.
iopha
Yes, but how much does it cost for someone to actually read my proposal and take it seriously? iopha
Because you are AC, I first assumed you were trolling and would not actually care to hear the reference at all-- and even if I did provide one, you'd attack the methodology and claim it was incorrect. In any event, here is the study in question:
Protection or Peril? An Analysis of Firearm-Related Deaths in the Home, Arthur L. Kellermann, MD, MPH and Donald T. Reay, MD, The New England Journal of Medicine, Vol. 314, No. 24, June 12, 1986, pp. 1557-1560.
"For every case in which an individual used a firearm kept in the home in a self-defense homicide, there were 1.3 unintentional deaths, 4.6 criminal homicides, and 37 suicides involving firearms."
Link here.
iopha
It's weird to hear all these self-defence scenarios being thrown around-- the classic "a stranger has broken into my house" hypothesis as a justification for keeping weapons within arm's reach. Fact is, statistically, you're far more likely to injure yourself or a loved one than an anonymous burglar or rapist.
Look, I can't comment on the socio-economic climate of the U.S.-- I'm not a citizen of that country-- but I sincerely cannot believe that the chances of being broken into and getting killed in the proces, merely because one didn't have a handgun around, is very very high. This mean the potential criminal (by extension black and scary, right?) would kill as soon as rob you-- hey, first degree murder and grand theft, same difference, right?
Unless you have an epidemic of demented psychos high on crack running around with arsenals, I don't see why civilians should have handguns. Now, I have a rifle and a shotgun at home right now-- both for hunting, and they are (1) impossible to conceal (2) cumbersome (3) unloaded and (4) will probably never be used in self-defence. I have a dog, an efficient police service, and a decent (but broke...) government which takes care of the poor so they don't go all batshit crazy.
So, yeah, as far as handguns are concerned, IMHO you have to be pretty paranoid and insecure to need one lying around in order to feel safe. You are far more likely to hurt someone you know if you ever use it at all. Is America really that dangerous that everyone needs a gun to protect themselves from everyone else?
I recommend y'all go watch Bowling for Columbine, anyways.
Reading yours and other posts, I get the impression everyone is casting Tintin in the early or mid teens. I'm pretty sure he was in his twenties-- he didn't age from book to book, and he's off on his own all the time, working as a reporter, firing weapons, getting into fights (and winning against people twice his size). He's young, but *not* a teenager. I don't think. I've never seen the the animated cartoons, but I have all the original French books. It's weird, actually, since I am trying to figure out which characters are which after translations..
iopha
Bill Watterson will *never*, *ever*, permit Calvin and Hobbes to be licensed. He has said this explicitly in interviews and in the introduction to the Calvin & Hobbes tenth anniversary book. He maintains that 'spin-off' products (cartoons, calendars, mugs, etc) are only cash cows which add nothing to the original vision of the comic strip. They ruin the integrity of the strip and reduce the characters to 'advertising hucksters' (actual quote) whose insights on life can no longer be taken seriously.
Bill Watterson said NO to literally MILLIONS of dollars because he believed the integrity of his strip was worth more.
That, my friends, is something you don't see anymore; I respect him greatly for his decision, which has gone unheralded and ignored and even mocked by some.
iopha
I read all them in French, growing up in Québec as a kid. There alreayd have been a few live-action movies of Tintin for European audiences, and yes, they were awful. ;) They weren't based on any of the books, though. If I recall correctly, there was 'Tintin et les Oranges Bleus' and also 'Tintin et le Mystère de la Toison D'or', both filmed in the early 1960s. I can't seem to find any information on the web, but I know they exist.
There also was an animated cartoon called 'Tintin et le Lac au Requins', which I've never seen, but I have the comic version of. I wonder if they will come up with some new storyline of adapt from one of the books. The later ones hold up quite well, notably the sardonic political commentary of 'Tintin et Les Picaros' where Tintin assists a coup d'état in a fictional Latin American country or 'Vol 747 Pour Sydney,' which has a wonderfully X-Filesque dénouement.
I just hope to God they don't adapt 'Tintin Au Congo' or any of the really, really early ones, since they *are* terribly racist and rely on all kinds of stereotypes (and they just aren't good stories generally). Who would play Tintin anyway? Keanu Reeves? Heath Ledger? Ugh. On second thought, leave my childhood alone, Spielberg. Go pilfer something else.
iopha
Yeah, so what's the problem?
eschew \es-CHOO\, transitive verb: To shun; to avoid (as something wrong or distasteful).
And what difference does it make if it's Canadian or not?
iopha
I'd be worried not only about hacker attacks on my house but possible invasions of privacy. Given the increasing power and scope of law-enforcement data mining, wiring your home in such a fashion would make the most intimate details of your life available to any packet sniffer.
And hey, that's just the FBI. I'm sure there would be no commercial applications of such domestic data mining, of course not. Eesh. Count me out of this latest modern convenience.
iopha
Umm, would that be the same American ingenuity that eschewed strong copyright laws for the first, oh, 200 years of its existence? That used protectionist trade barriers to develop its own industries and then denies them to third world countries now that they're strong enough to crush upstarts?
Beyond that, if I buy a product, I think I have a right to modify it if I choose to do so. I own the bloody thing. Imagine the uproar is Ford decided you couldn't change the mags on their cars anymore.
iopha