While this would prove where the film was SENT, it wouldn't prove that the reviewer pirated it. I'm sure it passes through other hands on the way to the reviewer.
They COULD use it as a black list though. "We sent you a movie, and someone close to you pirated it. While this isn't enough to sue you, we aren't going to risk sending you anymore movies. Sucks for your reviewing career"
BitTorrent is not truely P2P, to the extent Kazaa and gnutella are. It's more like a Napster situation.
While that is true, I don't count the torrent servers in the equation. The torrent file and the bandwidth generated for the routing are insignificant compared to the actual transmission of the content itself. You could say that IRC is either client server, or peer to peer, but when it comes to file transfers, the IRC server just facilitates the meeting of people. The file transfer is done peer to peer. The reason this is relevant is that we were speaking of a client server model for music distribution, which is a HUGE load of files for a client server model to take on.
But remember how Napster was destroyed by lawsuits? BitTorrent is actually more vulnerable in some ways
In some ways, like, the bittorrent hosts don't have as much lawyer-power, but it other ways, it is more immune, because there isn't just ONE bittorrent repository, but thousands, and there was only ONE napster. As you noted, it just takes someone with a web page.
Anyway, the claim that "P2P is inefficient" comes from the truely P2P applications, which use no fixed server at all. The downloads are just as fast as any other straightforward file transfer, but the searching is hundreds of times worse than provided by Napster or a google-like torrent searcher. It's common to see idle Gnutella hosts eating up 90K connections just for all the incoming searches, even when no actual files are being transfered. (There has been research to alleviate this, but results have been mixed). I've never read numbers on what the search/transfer ratio Kazaa gets for bandwidth, hopefully it's better than Gnutella!
I can confirm this, once when I was still figuring things out and Gnutella had JUST been released barely, I set it to allow 32 incoming connections. Needless to say, my ISP (university) didn't like the fact that they almost lost a router. And it didn't help that I was just learning how to setup linux and I had the DHCP server listening on the internal AND external interfaces. Oops!
My point is that a peer to peer model based more like BitTorrent or IRC or Napster is WAY more efficient than a client server model. And in this context, that is, a LEGAL context for the music industry, they could easily benefit from this. MD5 checksums to the main server, the actual content downloaded from the peers. Simple.
P2P is probably the least efficient way to deliver music. KaZaA creates incredible amounts of white noise as P2P servers ping each other. The economies of P2P are all about externalizing costs...not efficiency. It is about driving an extra mile to avoid paying for a product. Rather than an investor having to pay for a $100,000 box to delivering music and having to pay royalties to musicians, you have a 10,000 $1,000 boxes sitting around buring up electricity downloading pirated music.
This is COMPLETELY inaccurate. First of all, you are trying to DISTRIBUTE something to people, they are going to need to play it on something. So it's a $100,000 box AND all the players that will use it, which includes computers, DVD players, and portable devices.
And who says P2P is inefficient? Bit Torrent seems DAMN efficient to me. The more people downloading, the faster it goes. Compare this to a client-server model, where you have a huge amount of bandwidth available to the server, but it is prone to a cyclical-usage pattern. Busy during prime time, and very low usage at night.
As for the ISP, P2P externalizes its expenses to the community. A P2P is both a publisher and an end user. Essentially, the person using P2P is trying to get the service of both a web host and an isp in the same subscription fee.
Bullshit. That is an artificial construct. You need an upstream and a downstream to do anything useful on the internet. TCP/IP requires it, UDP doesn't.
ISP's aren't exactly suffering from this. Why do you think it's called ADSL? A stands for Asynchronous. That's why people have a much higher downstream than upstream. It's PRIMARY use is as a consumer, but you can't guarentee that, nor should you. If they have a problem with this, they can cut the upstream down further. I only have 128kbit upstream on my cable modem anyway, and a 3.0MBit downstream. Very lopsided.
I find that over time, my ability to type "the" has diminished. I think one of my hands has started typing too quickly for the other. I find myself typing "teh" more and more often.
Grandma: "What is this fine in the mail? What is a firewall? Why am I being fined? Is is the gremlins in my computer again?"
Not to mention underfunded organizations like Libraries and schools that may not be completely up to speed. This is a stupid idea. I put this up on the shelf with that idea to destroy people's computers for "piracy".
I find it amazing that people are so amazed that no one patches their computers. Think of your grandparents. What do they know about firewalls and TCP/IP and man-in-the-middle attacks? My mother has a VAGUE understanding of updating software and that it's important, but she doesn't know why. If you don't know why you are doing something, it's hard to continue doing it; and they are bound to miss something important along the way.
Someone had a good idea on another thread. ISP's should be the firewall for the little guy, and if you are in the know, you just opt-out. I work for SBC tech support. They decided to block port 135 due to all the MSBlast+derivatives activity. I think it's only temporary, but it is a good solution. No one really has any reason to be using port 135 over the net anyway. Locally, yes, internet no. You should be using a VPN if it is that important to you.
I'm 6'3, drive a Nissan Sentra, AND my drivers side door is broken so I have to climb in through the passenger side. I am still comfortable. Yeah, so there is no room for someone to sit behind me, but who cares about them anyway? Gas, grass, ass, or severe discomfort; nobody rides for free. Getting in and out of the car is a pain in the ass, but it keeps me flexible.
Who said they had a job where their SO didn't have to work? I thought we were talking about the grunts, the ones who had NO CONTROL over what idiocy the SCO management was engaging in currently. Some idiot said they should be held responsible for continuing to work there. Figure out who you are talking about, then bitch about it.
Boy, do you have a lot to learn about earning a child's respect. I hope you don't have any kids yet, both for their sake and society's. The behaviour you describe just reinforces a child's natural inclination to believe that they are the center of the universe, and all should revolve around them. That's a great way to raise spoiled brats, if not outright sociopaths.
And letting your kid starve is neglect. Now who's the shitty parent?
Like there is any room for morals in this economy. Every company does stupid things, EVERY COMPANY. Every company has some policy that it's workers don't agree with, that doesn't mean they are responsible.
You are painting with a pretty broad brush there. Just because I think all companies are corrupt, I still need a job. Don't be such a moron.
because there is no way my 1 ton Nissan does as much damage to the road as a 3 ton Hummer. They better get taxed more. Yeah, I know it says europe, not the US, and most of europe drives smaller cars. I'm just saying WHEN the stupid politicians in the US get ahold of this, they do it fairly. I don't know why they don't just apply it to gasoline. Bigger cars that do more road damage use more gasoline. It's that simple. You reward the smaller more efficient cars, especially the hybrids. But the US wouldn't be interested in that....
Bad idea. What if you get a new CD Player? Does that mean you have to buy your whole music collection over at $.50? If it doesn't, then that means there is some way to transfer the ID to another device. Enter device ID piracy. Modded CD-player.
Personally I loathe protected devices like that. Macrovision, CSS, software hacks. All of it shit. My girlfriend actually bought Max Payne, but because of the copy protection, it REFUSED to work on either her DVD Drive or burner. Worked find on my computer. She is scarred. She refuses to buy another PC game because of the experience.
Also, why should I have to pay to play it on other devices? I have a walkman, a CD head unit, a stereo, several computers, and a DVD player. That's some pricey, and not to mention MADDENINGLY complex amount of units to keep track of.
Now you see the problem the RIAA has in "embracing" the digital world. They are stuck believing they have to protect everything, when in reality that protection does absolutely nothing. They really have their work cut out for them. But they can rot. I don't feel sorry for them one bit.
I'd like to see them try. I do tech support for one of the larger DSL co's in the US, and I couldn't imagine the outcry if they started instituting that. The only damage having a NAT does to the ISP is for the people who don't know what they are doing who call up for help to setup the NAT/router. We only support the NAT's and routers that we sell, if they call up about a linksys or a netgear, we send them to those manufacturers.
I remember the noise about this, but I haven't seen any ISP's take notice or do anything about it. They won't. Because as long as the customer sets it up correctly, it doesn't affect the service at ALL, the ISP has done NOTHING to give the customer more value, so they shouldn't be able to charge for it.
I would imagine the same rules taht apply to ISP's would apply to the router owner. That is, ISP's can be held blameless for the actions of their users IF they keep proper logs and audits. If you don't know who is doing what behind your router, you can PROBABLY be held responsible for it.
Ah yes, but is it release-worthy for SMP Alpha architecture? 2.4 didn't work for me until around 2.4.20. Earlier actually, but I had a hell of a time finding the SMP patch.
Slashdot Mirror
While this would prove where the film was SENT, it wouldn't prove that the reviewer pirated it. I'm sure it passes through other hands on the way to the reviewer.
They COULD use it as a black list though. "We sent you a movie, and someone close to you pirated it. While this isn't enough to sue you, we aren't going to risk sending you anymore movies. Sucks for your reviewing career"
In some ways, like, the bittorrent hosts don't have as much lawyer-power, but it other ways, it is more immune, because there isn't just ONE bittorrent repository, but thousands, and there was only ONE napster. As you noted, it just takes someone with a web page.
I can confirm this, once when I was still figuring things out and Gnutella had JUST been released barely, I set it to allow 32 incoming connections. Needless to say, my ISP (university) didn't like the fact that they almost lost a router. And it didn't help that I was just learning how to setup linux and I had the DHCP server listening on the internal AND external interfaces. Oops!
My point is that a peer to peer model based more like BitTorrent or IRC or Napster is WAY more efficient than a client server model. And in this context, that is, a LEGAL context for the music industry, they could easily benefit from this. MD5 checksums to the main server, the actual content downloaded from the peers. Simple.
Doh! Yeah, I fudged it. But my definition was accurate.
And who says P2P is inefficient? Bit Torrent seems DAMN efficient to me. The more people downloading, the faster it goes. Compare this to a client-server model, where you have a huge amount of bandwidth available to the server, but it is prone to a cyclical-usage pattern. Busy during prime time, and very low usage at night.
Bullshit. That is an artificial construct. You need an upstream and a downstream to do anything useful on the internet. TCP/IP requires it, UDP doesn't.
ISP's aren't exactly suffering from this. Why do you think it's called ADSL? A stands for Asynchronous. That's why people have a much higher downstream than upstream. It's PRIMARY use is as a consumer, but you can't guarentee that, nor should you. If they have a problem with this, they can cut the upstream down further. I only have 128kbit upstream on my cable modem anyway, and a 3.0MBit downstream. Very lopsided.
I find that over time, my ability to type "the" has diminished. I think one of my hands has started typing too quickly for the other. I find myself typing "teh" more and more often.
what the difference between replicate and duplicate is?
"Uh-oh. Here comes clippy"
"Hey clippy, what's up?"
"Me you bitches! I'm high on crack! Wanna freebasssseeee?"
"No clippy, drugs are baaaaaad"
"Sorry, can't help you man"
"Pusiiiiiies!"
(crackpipe sounds)
"Woah, holy shit!"
cue microsoft windows startup theme music
Rocket Propelled Grenade, don't you watch CNN? :)
#5 on the doom weapon list.
And for buying a game for 18+ years of age and giving it to 14 & 15 year olds.
Grandma: "What is this fine in the mail? What is a firewall? Why am I being fined? Is is the gremlins in my computer again?"
Not to mention underfunded organizations like Libraries and schools that may not be completely up to speed. This is a stupid idea. I put this up on the shelf with that idea to destroy people's computers for "piracy".
I find it amazing that people are so amazed that no one patches their computers. Think of your grandparents. What do they know about firewalls and TCP/IP and man-in-the-middle attacks? My mother has a VAGUE understanding of updating software and that it's important, but she doesn't know why. If you don't know why you are doing something, it's hard to continue doing it; and they are bound to miss something important along the way.
Someone had a good idea on another thread. ISP's should be the firewall for the little guy, and if you are in the know, you just opt-out. I work for SBC tech support. They decided to block port 135 due to all the MSBlast+derivatives activity. I think it's only temporary, but it is a good solution. No one really has any reason to be using port 135 over the net anyway. Locally, yes, internet no. You should be using a VPN if it is that important to you.
see above
I'm 6'3, drive a Nissan Sentra, AND my drivers side door is broken so I have to climb in through the passenger side. I am still comfortable. Yeah, so there is no room for someone to sit behind me, but who cares about them anyway? Gas, grass, ass, or severe discomfort; nobody rides for free. Getting in and out of the car is a pain in the ass, but it keeps me flexible.
IT ACTUALLY COMPILED ON ALPHA.
Sorry. I WANTED to test it, but it doesn't work, and I don't know enough to fix it. Something about previous declarations of define's.
Who said they had a job where their SO didn't have to work? I thought we were talking about the grunts, the ones who had NO CONTROL over what idiocy the SCO management was engaging in currently. Some idiot said they should be held responsible for continuing to work there. Figure out who you are talking about, then bitch about it.
maybe I should re-phrase that to anonymous whistle-blowing :)
And letting your kid starve is neglect. Now who's the shitty parent?
Nobody said it had to be in the open. There is such a thing as corporate espionage and sabotage.
Lovely sentiment, brings a tear to my eye. </bullshit> Why can't you try changing things from the inside instead?
Like there is any room for morals in this economy. Every company does stupid things, EVERY COMPANY. Every company has some policy that it's workers don't agree with, that doesn't mean they are responsible.
You are painting with a pretty broad brush there. Just because I think all companies are corrupt, I still need a job. Don't be such a moron.
because there is no way my 1 ton Nissan does as much damage to the road as a 3 ton Hummer. They better get taxed more. Yeah, I know it says europe, not the US, and most of europe drives smaller cars. I'm just saying WHEN the stupid politicians in the US get ahold of this, they do it fairly. I don't know why they don't just apply it to gasoline. Bigger cars that do more road damage use more gasoline. It's that simple. You reward the smaller more efficient cars, especially the hybrids. But the US wouldn't be interested in that....
Bad idea. What if you get a new CD Player? Does that mean you have to buy your whole music collection over at $.50? If it doesn't, then that means there is some way to transfer the ID to another device. Enter device ID piracy. Modded CD-player.
Personally I loathe protected devices like that. Macrovision, CSS, software hacks. All of it shit. My girlfriend actually bought Max Payne, but because of the copy protection, it REFUSED to work on either her DVD Drive or burner. Worked find on my computer. She is scarred. She refuses to buy another PC game because of the experience.
Also, why should I have to pay to play it on other devices? I have a walkman, a CD head unit, a stereo, several computers, and a DVD player. That's some pricey, and not to mention MADDENINGLY complex amount of units to keep track of.
Now you see the problem the RIAA has in "embracing" the digital world. They are stuck believing they have to protect everything, when in reality that protection does absolutely nothing. They really have their work cut out for them. But they can rot. I don't feel sorry for them one bit.
I'd like to see them try. I do tech support for one of the larger DSL co's in the US, and I couldn't imagine the outcry if they started instituting that. The only damage having a NAT does to the ISP is for the people who don't know what they are doing who call up for help to setup the NAT/router. We only support the NAT's and routers that we sell, if they call up about a linksys or a netgear, we send them to those manufacturers.
I remember the noise about this, but I haven't seen any ISP's take notice or do anything about it. They won't. Because as long as the customer sets it up correctly, it doesn't affect the service at ALL, the ISP has done NOTHING to give the customer more value, so they shouldn't be able to charge for it.
I would imagine the same rules taht apply to ISP's would apply to the router owner. That is, ISP's can be held blameless for the actions of their users IF they keep proper logs and audits. If you don't know who is doing what behind your router, you can PROBABLY be held responsible for it.
Kernel 2.4.20 fails to compile on my alpha using Gcc 3.3, 2.95 works though. I'm sure it's fine for x86, but I find the ports lacking in refinement.
Ah yes, but is it release-worthy for SMP Alpha architecture? 2.4 didn't work for me until around 2.4.20. Earlier actually, but I had a hell of a time finding the SMP patch.