And use what other service instead? Oh, that's right, there aren't any legal music download services that work on Linux.
I think that it is much better to crack iTunes's file format so I can play the songs I legally purchased than to download songs completely illegally over a P2P network.
If Apple doesn't want people to hack iTunes, they need to provide a way of playing the files on operating systems other than Windows and Mac OS.
Most people who are using these hacks aren't using them to illegally copy music, but are using them to play the songs they purchased on unsupported hardware. As far as I'm concerned, this constitutes fair use.
I'm really worried. I think I might be one of the people the RIAA sued.
I just got this e-mail a few minutes ago with a subject saying that the RIAA is watching me and that I need to buy something called "KaZaA Gold" to get them off my back.
There have been ways to circumvent pop-up and pop-under blockers for ages now. One sneaky method is to open the ad in an Internet Explorer "dialog" that floats on top of the web page instead of in a separate window. This technique baffles many blockers, including the one included in the Google toolbar.
There are many widely publicized methods on webmaster message boards. Some involve opening up a fake pop-up window first, and then rapidly opening a second, actual ad window. This fools some blockers, such as the Norton one.
Another tactic that is becoming more and more popular is using layer ads, which float over the browser window. Since this is not a new window, the blocker doesn't stop it. This is much like the spam game, where the spammers are constantly coming up with new methods of foiling filters, and the filter authors are trying to stop these new spam methods.
Sorry, didn't test it in Firefox. I was basing it on Konquerer, and things that look right in Konquerer usually look right in Firefox and things that don't look right in Konquerer tend not to work too well in Mozilla either.
Next time I'll be sure to check better.:-)
The layout is ugly, it doesn't work right in browsers other than IE, and is tied in with that stupid Download.com.
Any day now they'll be wanting you to install some stupid (IE only) browser plugin to download anything just like they did with GameSpot (anybody remember that pre-CNET?) and with half of the listings on Download.com.
Actually, this won't stop Gator or most of the things that users consider "spyware".
As long as the user decides to "opt-in" to being tracked (in other words, the user clicks Agree to some license) there is nothing that this law can do.
The only thing this would really stop is trojans that collect information without the user's "knowledge". While most users don't know that Gator and the like are installed, they have technically opted in by clicking agree on the license screen.
IANAL, but I don't think it can be illegal because you never have to agree to the iTunes Music Store's TOS unless you actually sign up for an account. If you don't sign up for an account, you can still download iTunes which is all you would need to do in order to reverse engineer the protocol.
As such, provided this doesn't break any laws, the most Apple can/should be able to do is ask them to take it down.
That isn't true, many ads are based off on the CPM model (cost per thousand), which means they get x dollars for every thousand times a banner is displayed. I can't speak for this site in particular, but CPM is actually much more common than CPC (cost per click) advertising.
I imagine that this wouldn't be an issue using wget, since the image is never loaded, though.
Are you sure that the address for this article wasn't supposed to be http://www.microsoft.com/cgi/mi2g/frameset.php?pag eid=http%3A//www.mi2g.net/cgi/mi2g/press/190204_2. php?
At the very least, Microsoft must have paid them to skew the results in their favor. MyDoom, anyone?
I think that the reason HP didn't go through with the deal with Napster is that they aren't dumb. Anybody with half a brain can see that Napster is doomed to failure.
No company that has no source of generating any profit is going to exist. The only reason Apple can afford to do iTunes is because they are using it to sell iPods, which do make them money. Napster has no such device, and as such have no hope of staying in business for long. Roxio may have thought that they would sell CD burning software as a reuslt of Napster, but I imagine most people already have burning software that they are happy with.
No, it doesn't discuss relevancy much. I wasn't about to look through millions of search listings to confirm that every one was related.
However, I did look through the entire listing for my site and every listing on both Yahoo and Google really was related in some way (contained a blurb about one of my applications, something about my site, etc.)
I have written up an in-depth comparison of Google and Yahoo that compares the number of results that each provides as well as user experience.
The link to it is: http://www.scifience.net/.
I would have posted it directly here, except there are screenshots and other such things that can't be posted as a Slashdot comment.
Did somebody just say 100 mbps Internet? Who cares how much it costs, what the impact on the environment is, and how many lives must be sacrificed to bring this to us. I mean we're talking about 100 mbps Internet for everbody here! 100 mbps!
No, it isn't a typo. They are talking about the size of the silicon wafer, not the processor itself.
If you had RTFA, you would have known that the whole point of this is that is more cost effective to use bigger silicon wafers since more processors can then be made out of a single wafer.
An Apple computer can't execute Windows code unless you are using VirtualPC, which is essentially Windows anyway.
On a Mac, it would not be as simple as just clicking on the file, and on many (most?) Macs, there is no VirtualPC, so while the.zip file could be opened, the malicious contents would do nothing.
Slashdot Mirror
Now the files will move so fast the RIAA won't have time to see them! It's funny, laugh!
I think that it is much better to crack iTunes's file format so I can play the songs I legally purchased than to download songs completely illegally over a P2P network.
Most people who are using these hacks aren't using them to illegally copy music, but are using them to play the songs they purchased on unsupported hardware. As far as I'm concerned, this constitutes fair use.
No you don't. Your processor will shatter, your motherboard will crack in two, and your hard drives will explode from the noise.
Now I can anonymously hack into the government while sitting right in front of a government building!
I just got this e-mail a few minutes ago with a subject saying that the RIAA is watching me and that I need to buy something called "KaZaA Gold" to get them off my back.
What should I do??? I'm really nervous!
There are many widely publicized methods on webmaster message boards. Some involve opening up a fake pop-up window first, and then rapidly opening a second, actual ad window. This fools some blockers, such as the Norton one.
Another tactic that is becoming more and more popular is using layer ads, which float over the browser window. Since this is not a new window, the blocker doesn't stop it. This is much like the spam game, where the spammers are constantly coming up with new methods of foiling filters, and the filter authors are trying to stop these new spam methods.
Do people really register all these domain names just to spam Slashdot posts? Seems like a waste of a lot of perfectly good money if you ask me.
But the bulletholes always fade away before I can finish... :-(
Sorry, didn't test it in Firefox. I was basing it on Konquerer, and things that look right in Konquerer usually look right in Firefox and things that don't look right in Konquerer tend not to work too well in Mozilla either. Next time I'll be sure to check better. :-)
The layout is ugly, it doesn't work right in browsers other than IE, and is tied in with that stupid Download.com. Any day now they'll be wanting you to install some stupid (IE only) browser plugin to download anything just like they did with GameSpot (anybody remember that pre-CNET?) and with half of the listings on Download.com.
Actually, this won't stop Gator or most of the things that users consider "spyware". As long as the user decides to "opt-in" to being tracked (in other words, the user clicks Agree to some license) there is nothing that this law can do. The only thing this would really stop is trojans that collect information without the user's "knowledge". While most users don't know that Gator and the like are installed, they have technically opted in by clicking agree on the license screen.
Now all we need are the HD porn channels to go with it! Buy it once, watch it again (and again) later!
As such, provided this doesn't break any laws, the most Apple can/should be able to do is ask them to take it down.
That isn't true, many ads are based off on the CPM model (cost per thousand), which means they get x dollars for every thousand times a banner is displayed. I can't speak for this site in particular, but CPM is actually much more common than CPC (cost per click) advertising.
I imagine that this wouldn't be an issue using wget, since the image is never loaded, though.
Are you sure that the address for this article wasn't supposed to be http://www.microsoft.com/cgi/mi2g/frameset.php?pag eid=http%3A//www.mi2g.net/cgi/mi2g/press/190204_2. php?
At the very least, Microsoft must have paid them to skew the results in their favor. MyDoom, anyone?
No company that has no source of generating any profit is going to exist. The only reason Apple can afford to do iTunes is because they are using it to sell iPods, which do make them money. Napster has no such device, and as such have no hope of staying in business for long. Roxio may have thought that they would sell CD burning software as a reuslt of Napster, but I imagine most people already have burning software that they are happy with.
I give Napster another 6 to 12 months, at best.
No, it doesn't discuss relevancy much. I wasn't about to look through millions of search listings to confirm that every one was related. However, I did look through the entire listing for my site and every listing on both Yahoo and Google really was related in some way (contained a blurb about one of my applications, something about my site, etc.)
I have written up an in-depth comparison of Google and Yahoo that compares the number of results that each provides as well as user experience. The link to it is: http://www.scifience.net/. I would have posted it directly here, except there are screenshots and other such things that can't be posted as a Slashdot comment.
Did somebody just say 100 mbps Internet? Who cares how much it costs, what the impact on the environment is, and how many lives must be sacrificed to bring this to us. I mean we're talking about 100 mbps Internet for everbody here! 100 mbps!
It's funny, laugh!
Are you implying that 14 year olds are dumb? I'm 14, and take that comment quite personally. ;)
No, that would constitute reproducing the content of the site, which is also covered in the license.
No, it isn't a typo. They are talking about the size of the silicon wafer, not the processor itself. If you had RTFA, you would have known that the whole point of this is that is more cost effective to use bigger silicon wafers since more processors can then be made out of a single wafer.
An Apple computer can't execute Windows code unless you are using VirtualPC, which is essentially Windows anyway. On a Mac, it would not be as simple as just clicking on the file, and on many (most?) Macs, there is no VirtualPC, so while the .zip file could be opened, the malicious contents would do nothing.
According to this post on MacNN, this was also on the front page of the Daily Telegraph in London, which adds a little more credibility to the story.