A few high profile cases is all the RIAA needs, and one of these days they will get it. That will end my sharing.
The only way to stop this, IF YOU BELIEVE THAT THE MUSIC BUSINESS MODEL MUST CHANGE, and IF YOU BELIEVE THAT INNOVATION IS BEING SNUFFED, is to take drastic action now.
If the RIAA is citing 5% percent dip in sales, make it 50%. If you buy 10 CD's a year, buy only 5. If you buy 20 CD's a year buy only 10. Better still, if you can copy a friend's CD do so.
If you take steps now, which I am (I have gone even further and cut my CD buying 85 % to buying only 15 % of what I used to buy) then everyday will have an effect on the RIAA. A year has only 365 days, and if retail stores can move from black to red just because number of shopping days decreases by 1 or 2 - just imagine what will happen if number of shopping days falls by 200. The industry big boys, the fat, and all these extra vultures like Rosen and Sherman will be wiped out.
Can it be done. I belive it will be done. But, I just hope it doesn't take a few high profile cases of RIAA MPAA screwing people, before the non-violent Gandhi method of boycott will gain speed.
If it doesn't, soon, I won't be sharing files - though neither will I buy and CD's.
In fact you can install various GUI systems on one machine if you want, giving users the choice of which one to use.
I think this is the key to the evolution of the desktop. The file formats will change to standard formats and then the proprietary enhancements will be "viewable" with the appropriate GUI. The appplication itself will become synonymous with providing the appropriate GUI to "view" the data with the application's paradigm.
The GUI then will be based on the "programming" that can be done to the "data in the standard formats." The XML-framework is the best candidate for transferring the user from the view of one application to the view provided by another application. Thus, the user will really be navigating from one view to another view (with the ultimate being where 2 applications can provide contradictory views of the same data without being inconsistent) using either a top-down (hierarchical etc) or bottom-up view.
Microsoft has a good shot at getting to this first because the fundamental design of Windows (from GUI standpoint) has all the requisite tools to allow this). Microsoft has moved away from this direction as it evolved to Win XP - but from what I have read about Longhorn, I think they are coming back to right direction.
The conceptual elements of Longhorn, I am sure will be released and tested much before the LongHorn CD comes out - for what is really important is what is the power of GUI in allowing the tranformation of the data to information to knowledge.
By releasing Longhorn - Microsoft will then move over to even dominate the "standard formats", in addition to the GUI paradigms which it would have tested earlier.
In essence, I believe, Microsoft is best placed to capitalize the combination of an XML framework, and a GUI method of describing the transformation, to allow the common man Intuitive Graphics Based XML Programming (IGBXP) - just coooked up this acronym in the last 30 seconds.
The thing that gets me is that the BSA is successful in REGULARLY getting their B*LLS*IT (hint Powell used this term to describe Cheney's and Rumsfeld's Intelligence on Iraq) published in the press. Every 3-4 months there is a release and all this crap is repeated and re-repeated.
As soon as I saw this news release, I wanted to write a nasty post in my blog. But, then I said to myself, these BSA creeps will get this thing published again in a few weeks, and then again. And dejected I didn't even mention in the Blog because I thought to myself what is the point. They will just come out with another one soon, and then another one...
And the fact that they keep getting this B*LLS*IT printed again and again, is what makes it likely that it will finally be picked up by someone in the policy making wing of the Govt. And then someone will tweak a law or introduce the bill.
If we could just hammer down EVERY RELEASE that BSA makes, and I mean every lying press release, we may be able to change the effect they have in formulation of policies...
I think if it is to be looked as a simulation, the underlying computing should be considered quantum computing. It allows the concepts of superposition, interference, and entanglements, which are the core processes of Emerged Intelligence.
By ignoring the quantum possibilites, we are like the Newtonian Physicists trying to explain the Big Bang. Unless we use the quantum and relativistic models to understand the origins or the universe, we shall based on Newtonian paradigms come up with seemingly ridiculous axioms and conclusions, requirements, and a strange conception of the driving force - or the Force in the Distance.
The way to understand data better is to use the appropriate tool. The way to use the appropriate tool is to get the right person to use the tool. The way to understand the right person is to know that he may be wrong. The way to know that the right person may be wrong is to accept contradictions. When you accept contradictions, you are on the borderline of being crazy or a genius - but at least then you have moved closer to quantum computing.
When you have moved to quantum computing, what are the requirements for the simulation.....
Well, time for my 9th cup of coffee this morning...
If the goal is to have it used by small and medium sized businesses, why aren't there versions for Win 2000, or 98 ?? Most of the small businesses due to budget restrictions haven't yet updated to Win XP - esp due to its activation feature.
Has anyone tried to install Chandler on older Win versions?
Even with the privacy issues being resolved, and preventing the list from falling in the hands of spammers, there is a deeper problem of whether people on the ground will embrace it.
I remember similar experiments with networking "BOOKMARKS" or "Favorites" and they never could get big enough for the "critical mass." I am not sure why, but purely using that as an apporpriate analogy, I think this concept needs to be refined further before it can become big. Maybe people hesitate giving data from which things that they never imagined they were disclosing can be inferred or data-mined.
I believe that such experiments are good, but in today's world, where everything that you publish or email can be used against you, it is better for these experiments to remain pilot plants, and limited to small experimental groups. That is till Mr. Ashcroft Patriot Acts I and II and soon III are accepted as valid curbs on liberty.
The notion that Turing proposed about determining Artificial Intelligence, emerging from "computer bits," has to be broadened in context of the "network bits" or "nits." This is because of the human-nature derived unpredictability in the Human-Computer networks.
While the material and natural forces help to differentiate between, say high and low voltage, and define the computer bit, the human-nature forces help differentiate between bestseller and pulp fiction, and thus partially define the "network bit" or "nit." This confoundedness of human or their agent involvement in the very definition of the symbolic meaning, and value, of different "states" (like high and low and lower, or 0 and 1) differentiates the network "nit" from the computer "bit."
When we try to adapt the Turing Test to try to decide if the human-computer network can be said to be "thinking" as well as a human, we must pay special attention to the
nature of the interrogator - in the networks the "interrogator" cannot be defined precisely in space, time, or personalities. Some of the roles are being taken by emarketplaces, brokers, infomediaries, chat rooms, discussion boards, etc. Thus in the network, no single interrogator exists, and thus the uncertainity in the definition of the interrogators, must be factored in the fidelity of the questions transmitted from the questioner and the responses passed on by the interrogator.
number of humans and computers in the closed room - in Turing's Test it was possible to isolate one human and one computer, and try to see if the questioner outside the room could tell the difference between them. But in the "closed room" of the networks like the Internet, millions of computer systems, and millions of humans, are present. For a questioner, or a Internet User, in our case, the queries and the responses between humans and computers are confounded, and the question between trying to differentiate between one human and a computer in a closed room, becomes meaningless.
Thus, we have to modify and adapt the Turing test if we want to apply it to intelligence in networked machine and human - or in the HuCoNOS - Human-Computer Network Operating System More dtails are available here http://www.bubbleui.com/thesis/Invention%20disclos ure%20NCSU%20Sept%2025%202000.doc
I understand that DMCA has put restrictions in the U.S. I am in India planning to start a Internet Access providing business, and one of the strong marketing points that I want to emphasize is file sharing, esp. P2P. I also want to discuss sites like http://www.astalavista.com as I believe that it should be a part of free discussion.
As this is going to be a commercial venture, I am aware that there will be repercusions against me. But, does DMCA apply to countries like India, and if I really and sincerely believe in these services as benefitting consumers, would it be morally wrong to base my marketing campaign on that. I am in New Delhi India.
Slashdot Mirror
A few high profile cases is all the RIAA needs, and one of these days they will get it. That will end my sharing.
The only way to stop this, IF YOU BELIEVE THAT THE MUSIC BUSINESS MODEL MUST CHANGE, and IF YOU BELIEVE THAT INNOVATION IS BEING SNUFFED, is to take drastic action now.
If the RIAA is citing 5% percent dip in sales, make it 50%. If you buy 10 CD's a year, buy only 5. If you buy 20 CD's a year buy only 10. Better still, if you can copy a friend's CD do so.
If you take steps now, which I am (I have gone even further and cut my CD buying 85 % to buying only 15 % of what I used to buy) then everyday will have an effect on the RIAA. A year has only 365 days, and if retail stores can move from black to red just because number of shopping days decreases by 1 or 2 - just imagine what will happen if number of shopping days falls by 200. The industry big boys, the fat, and all these extra vultures like Rosen and Sherman will be wiped out.
Can it be done. I belive it will be done. But, I just hope it doesn't take a few high profile cases of RIAA MPAA screwing people, before the non-violent Gandhi method of boycott will gain speed. If it doesn't, soon, I won't be sharing files - though neither will I buy and CD's.
In fact you can install various GUI systems on one machine if you want, giving users the choice of which one to use.
I think this is the key to the evolution of the desktop. The file formats will change to standard formats and then the proprietary enhancements will be "viewable" with the appropriate GUI. The appplication itself will become synonymous with providing the appropriate GUI to "view" the data with the application's paradigm.
The GUI then will be based on the "programming" that can be done to the "data in the standard formats." The XML-framework is the best candidate for transferring the user from the view of one application to the view provided by another application. Thus, the user will really be navigating from one view to another view (with the ultimate being where 2 applications can provide contradictory views of the same data without being inconsistent) using either a top-down (hierarchical etc) or bottom-up view.
Microsoft has a good shot at getting to this first because the fundamental design of Windows (from GUI standpoint) has all the requisite tools to allow this). Microsoft has moved away from this direction as it evolved to Win XP - but from what I have read about Longhorn, I think they are coming back to right direction.
The conceptual elements of Longhorn, I am sure will be released and tested much before the LongHorn CD comes out - for what is really important is what is the power of GUI in allowing the tranformation of the data to information to knowledge.
By releasing Longhorn - Microsoft will then move over to even dominate the "standard formats", in addition to the GUI paradigms which it would have tested earlier.
In essence, I believe, Microsoft is best placed to capitalize the combination of an XML framework, and a GUI method of describing the transformation, to allow the common man Intuitive Graphics Based XML Programming (IGBXP) - just coooked up this acronym in the last 30 seconds.
The thing that gets me is that the BSA is successful in REGULARLY getting their B*LLS*IT (hint Powell used this term to describe Cheney's and Rumsfeld's Intelligence on Iraq) published in the press. Every 3-4 months there is a release and all this crap is repeated and re-repeated.
As soon as I saw this news release, I wanted to write a nasty post in my blog. But, then I said to myself, these BSA creeps will get this thing published again in a few weeks, and then again. And dejected I didn't even mention in the Blog because I thought to myself what is the point. They will just come out with another one soon, and then another one ...
And the fact that they keep getting this B*LLS*IT printed again and again, is what makes it likely that it will finally be picked up by someone in the policy making wing of the Govt. And then someone will tweak a law or introduce the bill.
If we could just hammer down EVERY RELEASE that BSA makes, and I mean every lying press release, we may be able to change the effect they have in formulation of policies ...
I think if it is to be looked as a simulation, the underlying computing should be considered quantum computing. It allows the concepts of superposition, interference, and entanglements, which are the core processes of Emerged Intelligence. By ignoring the quantum possibilites, we are like the Newtonian Physicists trying to explain the Big Bang. Unless we use the quantum and relativistic models to understand the origins or the universe, we shall based on Newtonian paradigms come up with seemingly ridiculous axioms and conclusions, requirements, and a strange conception of the driving force - or the Force in the Distance. The way to understand data better is to use the appropriate tool. The way to use the appropriate tool is to get the right person to use the tool. The way to understand the right person is to know that he may be wrong. The way to know that the right person may be wrong is to accept contradictions. When you accept contradictions, you are on the borderline of being crazy or a genius - but at least then you have moved closer to quantum computing. When you have moved to quantum computing, what are the requirements for the simulation .....
Well, time for my 9th cup of coffee this morning ...
If the goal is to have it used by small and medium sized businesses, why aren't there versions for Win 2000, or 98 ?? Most of the small businesses due to budget restrictions haven't yet updated to Win XP - esp due to its activation feature.
Has anyone tried to install Chandler on older Win versions?
Even with the privacy issues being resolved, and preventing the list from falling in the hands of spammers, there is a deeper problem of whether people on the ground will embrace it.
I remember similar experiments with networking "BOOKMARKS" or "Favorites" and they never could get big enough for the "critical mass." I am not sure why, but purely using that as an apporpriate analogy, I think this concept needs to be refined further before it can become big. Maybe people hesitate giving data from which things that they never imagined they were disclosing can be inferred or data-mined.
I believe that such experiments are good, but in today's world, where everything that you publish or email can be used against you, it is better for these experiments to remain pilot plants, and limited to small experimental groups. That is till Mr. Ashcroft Patriot Acts I and II and soon III are accepted as valid curbs on liberty.
But, either way, it is a good concept.
The notion that Turing proposed about determining Artificial Intelligence, emerging from "computer bits," has to be broadened in context of the "network bits" or "nits." This is because of the human-nature derived unpredictability in the Human-Computer networks.
While the material and natural forces help to differentiate between, say high and low voltage, and define the computer bit, the human-nature forces help differentiate between bestseller and pulp fiction, and thus partially define the "network bit" or "nit." This confoundedness of human or their agent involvement in the very definition of the symbolic meaning, and value, of different "states" (like high and low and lower, or 0 and 1) differentiates the network "nit" from the computer "bit."
When we try to adapt the Turing Test to try to decide if the human-computer network can be said to be "thinking" as well as a human, we must pay special attention to the
Thus, we have to modify and adapt the Turing test if we want to apply it to intelligence in networked machine and human - or in the HuCoNOS - Human-Computer Network Operating System More dtails are available here http://www.bubbleui.com/thesis/Invention%20disclos ure%20NCSU%20Sept%2025%202000.doc
I understand that DMCA has put restrictions in the U.S. I am in India planning to start a Internet Access providing business, and one of the strong marketing points that I want to emphasize is file sharing, esp. P2P. I also want to discuss sites like http://www.astalavista.com as I believe that it should be a part of free discussion.
As this is going to be a commercial venture, I am aware that there will be repercusions against me. But, does DMCA apply to countries like India, and if I really and sincerely believe in these services as benefitting consumers, would it be morally wrong to base my marketing campaign on that. I am in New Delhi India.