Just a feeling, an opinion, a guess, but doesn't it feel like Microsoft's hand might be behind this? Like the indirect way Microsoft's hand was behind SCO's long-running attack on Linux? Like the way Microsoft's hand was behind the attempted destruction of a single Open Document Format that they didn't already own completely? Like Microsoft would never attempt something so underhanded as this? Like Microsoft and Union Pension funds would never mix?
I have the Right (as in God-given, inalienable, fundamental, and/or natural -- take your pick) to repeat any speech that enters my realm of experience from any source.
Go out and repeat the already plagiarized I Have A Dream speech, and the King estate will sue you for copyright infringement. All this despite the fact that it was read for free at a highly attended public gathering.
Copyright violation is not theft. Period, and end of story. There is no semantical issue here, its simply not true.
Of course it's not. Theft is shoplifting the CD out of the store and getting a slap on the wrist for doing so. Copyright violation is a $220,000.00 fine from an ignorant, plus having to listen to the RIAA crow about their ONLY court win so far.
I had to put an end to comments on this article somehow, before it rehashes absolutely every argument that has appeared in every other article about filesharing and the RIAA.
The biggest lie out there is that file sharing equates to lost sales on a 1:1 basis. In fact, the record industry is hard pressed to make the case that file sharing results in ANY lost sales. They don't have some line of reformed file sharers testifying that, "I didn't buy that single/record/cd because I downloaded it on KaZaA instead." But with NO EVIDENCE to back them up, they continue to insist that:
Every illegal download is a lost sale.
Their entitled to THOUSANDS OF TIMES THEIR ACTUAL LOSSES from every infringer they haul into court.
You can absolutely identify the infringing user and computer from nothing more than an IP address and a timestamp.
There is no other explanation for the overall decline in CD sales.
Microsoft, if you really want to help your customers, pull Vista completely, and don't release it, or any successor, OS until you've stripped out all the consumer VERY UNFRIENDLY DRM. We hate you for it, and I don't notice movie studios making up for that hate.
if it's this easy, wouldn't an international super power war pretty much immediately mean the downing of every satellite in orbit?
It may not be this easy. This particular satellite was in a decaying orbit that placed it as low as it can go before re-entry. Most other satellites in stable orbits are rather higher up. Some can dodge, or employ other counter-measures. I wouldn't yet say that this make every satellite vulnerable to this particular system yet.
All you need is a Windows machine with a fast processor, an HD-DVD drive, a Blu-Ray burner, 30GB of free disk space, at least, though 40GB or more is recommended and an internet connection to download the software!
I think it would be cheaper to just re-buy all your discs in BluRay, especially considering the cost of BR recordable discs.
Or if there is no BR equivalent, get a fire-sale HD-DVD player just for those obsolete discs.
If you can provide more performance than a dual-core, at less than the cost of a quad-core, then you've found yourself a sweet spot to sell systems into. Few people will ever need true quad-core performance, so let's hope AMD has a real winner here.
To be allowed to sue for patent infringement, you should be required to be using the patent yourself, or have valid licensees of it from the time it was granted, if not filed. If you're not using it, you have no rights to stop anyone else from using it.
When they lose their dream job because their MySpace/Facebook/YouTube drunken frat party photos surface during their job interview, they may feel differently about privacy. Especially if they are absolutely certain that they limited those photos to only their closest circle of friends, and deleted the account entirely before applying for that job at Google.
What a lot of people may not be realizing as they buy newer WAP and WAP2 protected 802.11g and n gear is that if they leave the ability to connected legacy 802.11b devices, they've left open the WEP vulnerability. Everything has to be upgraded, and that can get too expensive to do at once.
The very worst sin of all here is the extending of already existing copyrights. This does nothing to encourage of that work, which was already created under the old copyright terms. This simply says, "Give more money to the company who now owns the copyright, because they'll use some of it to contribute to my next reelection campaign."
More than anything else to stand up against is: NO EXTENSIONS OF EXISTING COPYRIGHT TERMS!
I think that copyrights ought to operate under a use it or lose it system, where if the item (game, music, movie, literature or software) is not being actively promoted or sold, that the copyrights lapse into the public domain after 25 years.
WRONG! As I just explained to the same idea above, you put it on a server where people can still purchase it for download. Maybe nobody does, but this costs you nothing, yet keeps your copyright intact forever because it's still available for sale. And it's promoted by the fact that you can find it through a search engine. This is not the solution.
The problems of copyright can be more effectively be resolved by reducing the copyright terms of works that are out-of-print and are no longer actively being sold. 90 percent of copyrighted works are out-of-print and collecting dust. If the copyright holders can't be bothered to release them, these works should revert to public domain. This would resolve the orphaned culture problem without discouraging independent art and music.
This is a Bad Idea because it's essentially useless. While this once might have made sense, in these days of digital publication and distribution, all you would need to do to hold on to it forever is leave it for sale on a server somewhere. It's available. You can pay for it. Even though nobody does, the cost of keeping it available for sale like this is nil, meaning once again nothing ever goes out of copyright.
Slashdot Mirror
So now we know why there is such a shortage of quad-core AMD Opterons otherwise.
You could (re)use a CD-RW.
Hymm should just host their updates on WikiLeaks. Since Wikileaks.org is now shut-down, Apple will never be able to find out about it.
Apple should cease and desist pretending to be anything other than a company who cares about their corporate profits, and nothing else!
Just a feeling, an opinion, a guess, but doesn't it feel like Microsoft's hand might be behind this? Like the indirect way Microsoft's hand was behind SCO's long-running attack on Linux? Like the way Microsoft's hand was behind the attempted destruction of a single Open Document Format that they didn't already own completely? Like Microsoft would never attempt something so underhanded as this? Like Microsoft and Union Pension funds would never mix?
The RIAA ought to be in a similar situation, and need to explain their own outrageous and fraudulent actions.
Go out and repeat the already plagiarized I Have A Dream speech, and the King estate will sue you for copyright infringement. All this despite the fact that it was read for free at a highly attended public gathering.
Of course it's not. Theft is shoplifting the CD out of the store and getting a slap on the wrist for doing so. Copyright violation is a $220,000.00 fine from an ignorant, plus having to listen to the RIAA crow about their ONLY court win so far.
I had to put an end to comments on this article somehow, before it rehashes absolutely every argument that has appeared in every other article about filesharing and the RIAA.
Every illegal download is a lost sale.
Their entitled to THOUSANDS OF TIMES THEIR ACTUAL LOSSES from every infringer they haul into court.
You can absolutely identify the infringing user and computer from nothing more than an IP address and a timestamp.
There is no other explanation for the overall decline in CD sales.
We're only doing this for the artists.
Microsoft, if you really want to help your customers, pull Vista completely, and don't release it, or any successor, OS until you've stripped out all the consumer VERY UNFRIENDLY DRM. We hate you for it, and I don't notice movie studios making up for that hate.
It may not be this easy. This particular satellite was in a decaying orbit that placed it as low as it can go before re-entry. Most other satellites in stable orbits are rather higher up. Some can dodge, or employ other counter-measures. I wouldn't yet say that this make every satellite vulnerable to this particular system yet.
I think it would be cheaper to just re-buy all your discs in BluRay, especially considering the cost of BR recordable discs.
Or if there is no BR equivalent, get a fire-sale HD-DVD player just for those obsolete discs.
Why isn't there a place to sell everything eBay refuses to sell? Someone ought to be able to make a fair living with such a site.
If you can provide more performance than a dual-core, at less than the cost of a quad-core, then you've found yourself a sweet spot to sell systems into. Few people will ever need true quad-core performance, so let's hope AMD has a real winner here.
One other thought, Marshall Texas needs to be completely wiped off the map.
To be allowed to sue for patent infringement, you should be required to be using the patent yourself, or have valid licensees of it from the time it was granted, if not filed. If you're not using it, you have no rights to stop anyone else from using it.
When they lose their dream job because their MySpace/Facebook/YouTube drunken frat party photos surface during their job interview, they may feel differently about privacy. Especially if they are absolutely certain that they limited those photos to only their closest circle of friends, and deleted the account entirely before applying for that job at Google.
What a lot of people may not be realizing as they buy newer WAP and WAP2 protected 802.11g and n gear is that if they leave the ability to connected legacy 802.11b devices, they've left open the WEP vulnerability. Everything has to be upgraded, and that can get too expensive to do at once.
If you can find them, and count them, why can't you kill them off as well?
Obviously there's a sucker born ever minute. And some of them have $100M to flush away.
More than anything else to stand up against is: NO EXTENSIONS OF EXISTING COPYRIGHT TERMS!
WRONG! As I just explained to the same idea above, you put it on a server where people can still purchase it for download. Maybe nobody does, but this costs you nothing, yet keeps your copyright intact forever because it's still available for sale. And it's promoted by the fact that you can find it through a search engine. This is not the solution.
This is a Bad Idea because it's essentially useless. While this once might have made sense, in these days of digital publication and distribution, all you would need to do to hold on to it forever is leave it for sale on a server somewhere. It's available. You can pay for it. Even though nobody does, the cost of keeping it available for sale like this is nil, meaning once again nothing ever goes out of copyright.
Too bad it won't persuade them to throw out the paid-off bums who passed it in the first place, and elect some more common sense replacements.