This is a power thing. Only the RIAA will determine what music gets to be popular and what does not. Not the listeners.
I don't know about that... if the RIAA can scare people away from sharing major-label music on P2P networks, the main source of free music on the Internet will be independent musicians. If you buy the argument that free downloads promote CD sales, this might hurt the RIAA in the long run (although I don't think it'll be *that* big).
It's also important to notice that a lot of big-name bands - not just the little ones - are offering full-length, high-quality "previews" of songs - bands like Linkin Park, Jimmy Eat World, and The Dropkick Murphys. In the end, I think the main result of the RIAA trying to kill P2P is that people won't be able to get free music. P2P is certainly a nice way to "sample" music, but there are other ways to expose yourself to new music - anyone use MP3.com, Ampcast, IUMA, or Internet Radio? I don't think P2P is that big of a threat for record companies, and I don't like the way the RIAA is messing up people's finances for sharing MP3's - but at the same time, the bottom line is that people are stealing the information that the RIAA people's paychecks are based off of. What else would you expect them to do?
Today AIX is an unauthorized derivative of the UNIX System V operating system source code and its users are, as of this date, using AIX without a valid basis to do so.
Does this mean that SCO now has a legal basis for suing Joe User for downloading a Red Hat ISO? Maybe I'm missing something here, but if not, this could be bad...
I guess that's possible - but it would only be a matter of time before someone decides to check what kind of data is coming in and out of their computer, and when word of what was happening got out, there would be a massive backlash against Windows. Look at what happened with a (relatively) small thing like product activation... if Microsoft does do something like this, I think MS will be a lot subtler about it. And you are, of course, making the assumption that MS bought RAV with the intention of integrating antivirus into Windows, not selling the progam separately or just killing it off. That assumption makes sense, but nothing's been confirmed so far.
I've had a Dreamcast since the end of 1999, and it's doing just fine... just be nice to it, don't block the cooling vents, and it should last you quite a while. Come to think of it, I've got an NES that's still alive and kicking... the only things that went were some controllers. So if you're going to buy any extra hardware, you may want to grab some controllers and memory cards. If you're not gentle with systems, though, it might be worth investing in a backup... I have a friend whose Dreamcast died a while ago, but he bought it used and he might not have been too careful with it after he got it. But yeah, I'm with you... homebrew software is really cool, and I'm looking forward to getting my hands on a copy of Feet of Fury!
I remember Sonic Adventure 2 for Dreamcast doing the same thing... there were costumes and menu themes that you could unlock by downloading files from the game's website, but each file was only 1k and so they must've been just "unlock this" messages. I think there were some new go-kart courses that you could download, too, but those weren't actually included with the game... you really did download those. Granted, there's a lot more space on the Xbox's hard drive than there is on a Dreamcast VMU... Sega at least had an excuse to offer files like that.
I'm assuming that settlement was out of court... that idea scares me, because that means that the person doesn't even have to technically be breaking any law - the RIAA just has to scare them into stopping what they're doing. $12000 is nothing to the RIAA - it's just something to scare people away from creating similar networks, even if that's completely within the person's legal rights. Most college students don't have the time or money for a lawsuit, and so like big corporations with imposing, expensive lawyers can have their way with them.
Don't forget Plug In Mini Packager (PIMP), which was later renamed to NSIS. I have a lot of respect for the culture that Nullsoft's maintained and the software that it's written in spite of the AOL ownership. So long, Justin, and thanks for all the Winamp.
That is creepy... but maybe Nullsoft just took it off to keep their site from getting/.ed. Then again, there's not even a broken link or anything on the site... it's just gone. And like people have been saying, that's what happened with Gnutella. (It also happened with a program called AIMazing, by the way - it took the ads out of AOL Instant Messenger, and one day the program was magically vanished from the Nullsoft site without a trace.) I've got to hand it to the Nullsoft guys - they've got guts writing software like that under AOL Time Warner. I guess we'll have to check back tomorrow to find out for sure what happened - even if someone can mirror Waste, I don't think that a program that you have to get from some obscure mirror somewhere and that won't be updated by the authors will never be widely accepted. Sad...
By itself, this.EXE file doesn't do the customer or end-user much good. It must be deployed to end-user machines in combination with runtime files (or libraries) that know how to interpret and execute the code in the EXE.
That's true of Visual Basic, too - there's a DLL that needs to be distributed with your programs to get them to work. And I think there's a clause in the VB EULA similar to that in FoxPro (yes, I was a nerd and actually read the thing). Theoretically, that means that you couldn't distribute VB programs to be run on WINE, either. Not that you'd really want to, but still...
I did some research on McCarthy a while ago... the atmosphere today isn't nearly as bad as it was in his day. If it was, you'd probably be put on trial before the House Un-American Activities Committee (HUAC) - which was exempt from the requirement of due process - just for talking negatively about monitoring technologies, and your employer would likely fire you. I guess it's true that heightened fear of terrorism since September 11th has made US citizens a little more agreeable to legislation like the Patriot Act... it may not be the greatest situation, but can you blame us?
Adware? I have Quicktime, and I don't remember getting any adware with it... but maybe I missed something. But yeah, an open source alternative would be really nice... go Theora! (I'm assuming that someone will work out a way to stream it after it comes out, the way Icecast does for Ogg.)
I don't think it would be a matter of Apple wanting an agreeable contract. Nobody needs Apple's permission to do Quicktime streams - you just buy Quicktime server software, plug it in, and go. It sounds (although I'm really not up on how these contracts work) like NPR wanted some sort of reimbursement from Apple for them to provide Quicktime streams. I see no reason (or legal method) for Apple to prevent NPR from using its software - I just think they decided that having NPR broadcast in their format wasn't worth the money. Just a theory - I have no real hard evidence on that - but I think it makes sense.
I can't say I like the idea of having music served up and tailored to my personal tastes... I'd rather go and try new things. Although I'm sure Audioscrobbler helps you do this to some extent, the best way to broaden your musical horizons will always be to talk to other people - even if they don't really share your tastes. On a side note, I love the statistics page - I'm suprised that so many people listen to Radiohead, and it's cool to see that the most popular song ("Karma Police") also happens to be my favorite. If I got Audoscrobbler, it would be just to contribute to those lists.
In the beta it was... they had central servers you could connect to, and you had the option of not sharing files, but by default you were providing bandwidth for everyone else. Where it's a pay service, and the list of allowed files is centralized anyway, I really don't see the point in that. The only benefit I can think of is that as Napster's user base grows, so will its capacity for users. But maybe Roxio's changed that.
Slashdot Mirror
This is a power thing. Only the RIAA will determine what music gets to be popular and what does not. Not the listeners.
I don't know about that... if the RIAA can scare people away from sharing major-label music on P2P networks, the main source of free music on the Internet will be independent musicians. If you buy the argument that free downloads promote CD sales, this might hurt the RIAA in the long run (although I don't think it'll be *that* big).
It's also important to notice that a lot of big-name bands - not just the little ones - are offering full-length, high-quality "previews" of songs - bands like Linkin Park, Jimmy Eat World, and The Dropkick Murphys. In the end, I think the main result of the RIAA trying to kill P2P is that people won't be able to get free music. P2P is certainly a nice way to "sample" music, but there are other ways to expose yourself to new music - anyone use MP3.com, Ampcast, IUMA, or Internet Radio? I don't think P2P is that big of a threat for record companies, and I don't like the way the RIAA is messing up people's finances for sharing MP3's - but at the same time, the bottom line is that people are stealing the information that the RIAA people's paychecks are based off of. What else would you expect them to do?
Today AIX is an unauthorized derivative of the UNIX System V operating system source code and its users are, as of this date, using AIX without a valid basis to do so.
Does this mean that SCO now has a legal basis for suing Joe User for downloading a Red Hat ISO? Maybe I'm missing something here, but if not, this could be bad...
I guess that's possible - but it would only be a matter of time before someone decides to check what kind of data is coming in and out of their computer, and when word of what was happening got out, there would be a massive backlash against Windows. Look at what happened with a (relatively) small thing like product activation... if Microsoft does do something like this, I think MS will be a lot subtler about it. And you are, of course, making the assumption that MS bought RAV with the intention of integrating antivirus into Windows, not selling the progam separately or just killing it off. That assumption makes sense, but nothing's been confirmed so far.
I've had a Dreamcast since the end of 1999, and it's doing just fine... just be nice to it, don't block the cooling vents, and it should last you quite a while. Come to think of it, I've got an NES that's still alive and kicking... the only things that went were some controllers. So if you're going to buy any extra hardware, you may want to grab some controllers and memory cards. If you're not gentle with systems, though, it might be worth investing in a backup... I have a friend whose Dreamcast died a while ago, but he bought it used and he might not have been too careful with it after he got it. But yeah, I'm with you... homebrew software is really cool, and I'm looking forward to getting my hands on a copy of Feet of Fury!
I remember Sonic Adventure 2 for Dreamcast doing the same thing... there were costumes and menu themes that you could unlock by downloading files from the game's website, but each file was only 1k and so they must've been just "unlock this" messages. I think there were some new go-kart courses that you could download, too, but those weren't actually included with the game... you really did download those. Granted, there's a lot more space on the Xbox's hard drive than there is on a Dreamcast VMU... Sega at least had an excuse to offer files like that.
I'm assuming that settlement was out of court... that idea scares me, because that means that the person doesn't even have to technically be breaking any law - the RIAA just has to scare them into stopping what they're doing. $12000 is nothing to the RIAA - it's just something to scare people away from creating similar networks, even if that's completely within the person's legal rights. Most college students don't have the time or money for a lawsuit, and so like big corporations with imposing, expensive lawyers can have their way with them.
Don't forget Plug In Mini Packager (PIMP), which was later renamed to NSIS. I have a lot of respect for the culture that Nullsoft's maintained and the software that it's written in spite of the AOL ownership. So long, Justin, and thanks for all the Winamp.
That is creepy... but maybe Nullsoft just took it off to keep their site from getting /.ed. Then again, there's not even a broken link or anything on the site... it's just gone. And like people have been saying, that's what happened with Gnutella. (It also happened with a program called AIMazing, by the way - it took the ads out of AOL Instant Messenger, and one day the program was magically vanished from the Nullsoft site without a trace.) I've got to hand it to the Nullsoft guys - they've got guts writing software like that under AOL Time Warner. I guess we'll have to check back tomorrow to find out for sure what happened - even if someone can mirror Waste, I don't think that a program that you have to get from some obscure mirror somewhere and that won't be updated by the authors will never be widely accepted. Sad...
By itself, this .EXE file doesn't do the customer or end-user much good. It must be deployed to end-user machines in combination with runtime files (or libraries) that know how to interpret and execute the code in the EXE.
That's true of Visual Basic, too - there's a DLL that needs to be distributed with your programs to get them to work. And I think there's a clause in the VB EULA similar to that in FoxPro (yes, I was a nerd and actually read the thing). Theoretically, that means that you couldn't distribute VB programs to be run on WINE, either. Not that you'd really want to, but still...
I did some research on McCarthy a while ago... the atmosphere today isn't nearly as bad as it was in his day. If it was, you'd probably be put on trial before the House Un-American Activities Committee (HUAC) - which was exempt from the requirement of due process - just for talking negatively about monitoring technologies, and your employer would likely fire you. I guess it's true that heightened fear of terrorism since September 11th has made US citizens a little more agreeable to legislation like the Patriot Act... it may not be the greatest situation, but can you blame us?
Adware? I have Quicktime, and I don't remember getting any adware with it... but maybe I missed something. But yeah, an open source alternative would be really nice... go Theora! (I'm assuming that someone will work out a way to stream it after it comes out, the way Icecast does for Ogg.)
I don't think it would be a matter of Apple wanting an agreeable contract. Nobody needs Apple's permission to do Quicktime streams - you just buy Quicktime server software, plug it in, and go. It sounds (although I'm really not up on how these contracts work) like NPR wanted some sort of reimbursement from Apple for them to provide Quicktime streams. I see no reason (or legal method) for Apple to prevent NPR from using its software - I just think they decided that having NPR broadcast in their format wasn't worth the money. Just a theory - I have no real hard evidence on that - but I think it makes sense.
I can't say I like the idea of having music served up and tailored to my personal tastes... I'd rather go and try new things. Although I'm sure Audioscrobbler helps you do this to some extent, the best way to broaden your musical horizons will always be to talk to other people - even if they don't really share your tastes. On a side note, I love the statistics page - I'm suprised that so many people listen to Radiohead, and it's cool to see that the most popular song ("Karma Police") also happens to be my favorite. If I got Audoscrobbler, it would be just to contribute to those lists.
In the beta it was... they had central servers you could connect to, and you had the option of not sharing files, but by default you were providing bandwidth for everyone else. Where it's a pay service, and the list of allowed files is centralized anyway, I really don't see the point in that. The only benefit I can think of is that as Napster's user base grows, so will its capacity for users. But maybe Roxio's changed that.