It is extremely unlikely that the candidates, or at least Bush, really wrote those statements. I find it highly unlikely that the Governer knows what peer-to-peer file sharing means. Furthermore, both major US candidates propose that the artists should be compensated, but neither states how. Bush makes a blanket statement -- it is unfair to artists, and we need to compensate all of them. Meanwhile, Gore states that new solutions will develop naturally, as they did in radio. Both of them conveniently ignore the RIAA, MPAA, and other huge lobbying organizations. All in all, a very uninformitive answer to a pertinant question for geeks.
I am very excited about this. Want to know why? Because not too long ago, I read this article in Salon.com. It stated:
Is the SDMI boycott backfiring?
Programmers don't want to help the recording industry test its new security "solution." But the technology insiders behind the system say hackers could kill it once and for all by participating.
The SDMI coalition is falling apart. The electronics companies hate the tactics the record companies are employing, and are on the verge of splitting off of the group. The final release specs for SDMI were the last draw - if someone cracked this system, it could mean the end of the coalition.
Of course we will break the code - any new code is inevitably broken, especially one tied to hardware like SDMI. Many have talked about the prospects for breaking the code, and most agree - it will be possible in most forms, due to fundamental flaws in the architecture.
Don't worry about breaking any potential codes - it will happen regardless. Look at the massive support for Napster and you can see why SDMI won't work. On the other hand, look at the RIAA's coalition now: fractured, broken. Will they EVER be able to repair it? I hope not.
Or for science and tech w/out an open-source slant, check out MindWire.org.
Yeah, I know it's a blatant and shameless plug. But hey, it's non profit *.org, so that's okay, right?:-)
1) you're talking about grammar. That is not spelling. I didn't say I have good grammar.:-)
Actually I do, but on Slashdot I choose not to use it. But the problem is, with a 120 char sig it's hard to fit everything. every character counts...
I've already seen this thing out in stores. At Fry's the Logitech mouse is about $59, IIRC. The SensAble system is something that we have seen at the university level for years. Perhaps it's about time that these things get on the desktop, but I really don't see a practical use for them until they get it to the point of Earth: Final Conflict, where you can have your entire interface be a touch system floating in the air. Okay, so I'm a bit optomistic...
It's sad that the only real use for this that I can think of is fabric purchasing (a miniscule market), or pr0n (a huge market). But for the latter, we need a much larger surface...
Valenti was allowed to move around and articluate because he had his own personal lapel mic. He kinda dominated the place by intruding on other people's space and staying away from his podium
Lessig, in contrast, had a (poor quality) wired mic, hence he couldn't move around. Luckily, he made up for it 100 fold by actually making good points and having good debate.
Lessig, Stanford law professor and Berkman fellow, will argue that copyright should not be expanded, and that consumer freedoms must be allowed in the arena of fair use, etc.
Valenti will talk about how good the DMCA, et. al. is and why we need it.
The webcast will be archived on the Berkman site so that you can watch it later. So far, the discussion has been very interesting. Valenti is being an idiot as usual, but that is to be expected.
My computer is currently not powerful enough to do real time voice and video processing, determine from my tone and facial movements what I want the computer to do, or providing intelligent assistance, or doing even rudimentary AI tasks. All home computers do is flashy graphics - I want the power to HELP me in something IMPORTANT. I want the ability to havea thousands of nano-sized devices implanted in my skin to store critical information. I want my own Personal Area Network (PAN) that is completely secure and stores a record of all my experiences, emotions, health readings, and physical stimulus. I want a complete, real-time searchable, intelligent database system that monitors what I do and prompts me with intelligent and relevent information to help me with the task at hand.
Do we have the processing power to do this? Yes. Could I fit in my pocket? No. That is why this is important - every step towards nano-scale technology is a leap forward towards a future of prevelant, pervasive technology that is much more flexible than what is currently available.
Yeah, that's a good point. My bad. I just kinda think that lower level languages will fundamentally change in the way that they deal with and store information. In addition, the limited memory of single nanosites (to use a Stephenson word) means that distributed computing would reach a new level of imporance, and tieing-together systems like Jini will need to be reworked.
I was sure that Eric et. al. of the Foresight Institute had already designed and built molecular switches. In addition, the recent experimentation on buckyballs may herald the way toward better switching and gears.
I have this theory that with nano, EE/CS will become in less demand, and mechanical engineers will be forced to reexamine rod logic if they want the good jobs. However, we're really moving at a snail's pace here, and haven't had any real developments in a while.
nano-saxaphones for Pres. Clinton!;-)
The place is open to the public, and it is entirely within their rights to do what they want with their resources. Denying them any control over their own resources would seem to me to be a real breach of rights.
I think that filtering in general is a slippery slope to censorship and loss of liberties. that is why I am against a filtering system. Certainly, I agree, as I've stated in other posts, that this is not a big deal - It's a laundromat, for godsakes - however precedents are often set and followed by starting with something innocent and then taking it to the extreme. That is what worries me - how far will we go? Will everything be censored? Will all business access to the internet be filtered? Will we only be able to see what "they" want us to see? Will everything be product placements and advertising and other forms of highest-bidder speech?
That is what I worry about, not the fact that a laundromat is blocking internet access.
You're ignoring the whole question of what speech is objectionable in the first place. Let's say I'm Joe Local Launderer and I go to the closest Clean-N-Fluff(tm) to get my stuff laundered. Meanwhile, I decide I want to buy a t-shirt. I log-on to Copyleft and click on the "DeCSS" t-shirt. Now wait, this has illegal source code on it! Pirating movies! Hacking! This site should be blocked!!!!
That is a very common-sense idea. After all, it IS a LAUNDROMAT. Maybe set up 5 filtered, 5 not, or perhaps your login to the proxy (or smart card, whatever), auto-checks if you're an adult or child, and turns on/off filtering accordingly. Anyone under 18, after all, has no rights.
Oh great, now you're gonna invade my privacy, is that it? Logging access to all sites? Seeing if I'm looking for Penis Mightiers or Breast Cancer info?
Nah, many find the extremist views of Slashdot and the foul language (not to mention penis birds and naked/petrified people) to be very objectionable. This just brings back the original question, how do you figure out what is a bad site?
The debate always comes down to this: After we finish ranting and raving about the evils of censorware, we find an area where the censorware might actually be needed, if not for general happiness, then for legal reasons.
You have been given an impossible task. There is absolutely no chance in hell that you will be able to block even.001% of the pr0n/objectionable sites out there. Commercial software filters can cover a lot more sights, but not with much better accuracy. Instead, look at your target audience. You are serving people who have little if any experience with the net. Therefore, a nice portal site will lead them in the right direction without you worrying about "objectionable" material.
You definetally need to make your users sign agreements for internet use. You need to make sure your company isn't held liable for any problems they have or cause. Another clause must deal with objectionable material. Perhaps simply having an agreement that they will immediately close any material that the management deems inappropriate to the customer base. Maintain no liability, but keep the option open to kick people off the system if you get enough complaints. Train your staff to simply scan the monitors and make sure nothing explicit is available.
The problem with censorware has always been choosing what is objectionable to whom. I am a strong advocate of free speech, but when people are using a pay service in public, the proprietor of the service has a right to enforce certain rules. Allowing the on-site staff to survey online use to make sure nothing "inappropriate" to the customer base is probably the best solution - this way people on the scene can address whether content affects them and their neighbors, instead of relying on a person or company far removed.
This is an absolutely awesome MP3 system for the car. It is custom built to fit neatly into a standard stereo port, plug in to your speakers, draw power, etc. Very nice job, even includes a cool little remote and some neat software for display on the little LCD.
I wonder what the use of the software is without the player. I mean, are you really gonna spend the thousands to make your own, or what? Of course, I'm always all for GPLing everything in sight, but is this really that important? There is no indication that I know of that the company is open to outside modifications of their code.
What's great about nano-assemblers (read more at foresight.org) is the fact that, once you make a few, they are self-replicating. As long as you keep them under control, you can use a single replicator to create thousands, use those thousands to make an object, and then have them self-destruct when finished, all for the same price as building a single one. Oh, and, of course, keep them in a box in hibernation state until you need to feed them the next blueprints. As they use basic molecular building blocks, you can just dump some grass in the box and that will be enough to rearrange the atoms into a nice, steaming hot steak or something.
Slashdot Mirror
It is extremely unlikely that the candidates, or at least Bush, really wrote those statements. I find it highly unlikely that the Governer knows what peer-to-peer file sharing means. Furthermore, both major US candidates propose that the artists should be compensated, but neither states how. Bush makes a blanket statement -- it is unfair to artists, and we need to compensate all of them. Meanwhile, Gore states that new solutions will develop naturally, as they did in radio. Both of them conveniently ignore the RIAA, MPAA, and other huge lobbying organizations. All in all, a very uninformitive answer to a pertinant question for geeks.
Of course we will break the code - any new code is inevitably broken, especially one tied to hardware like SDMI. Many have talked about the prospects for breaking the code, and most agree - it will be possible in most forms, due to fundamental flaws in the architecture.
Don't worry about breaking any potential codes - it will happen regardless. Look at the massive support for Napster and you can see why SDMI won't work. On the other hand, look at the RIAA's coalition now: fractured, broken. Will they EVER be able to repair it? I hope not.
Perhaps your sneeze covered the "preview" button?
LOL. Luckily, /. updates your sigs in real time, so now the thread is irrelevant. How's that for confusing?
Or for science and tech w/out an open-source slant, check out MindWire.org. Yeah, I know it's a blatant and shameless plug. But hey, it's non profit *.org, so that's okay, right? :-)
1) you're talking about grammar. That is not spelling. I didn't say I have good grammar. :-)
Actually I do, but on Slashdot I choose not to use it. But the problem is, with a 120 char sig it's hard to fit everything. every character counts...
It's sad that the only real use for this that I can think of is fabric purchasing (a miniscule market), or pr0n (a huge market). But for the latter, we need a much larger surface...
Uh...Valenti is the head of the MPAA and all, I think he should be the one with the advantage.
Lessig, in contrast, had a (poor quality) wired mic, hence he couldn't move around. Luckily, he made up for it 100 fold by actually making good points and having good debate.
Funny you should say that...Valenti just offered to hug Lessig in the webcast.
Valenti will talk about how good the DMCA, et. al. is and why we need it.
The webcast will be archived on the Berkman site so that you can watch it later. So far, the discussion has been very interesting. Valenti is being an idiot as usual, but that is to be expected.
One word: Capitalism.
My computer is currently not powerful enough to do real time voice and video processing, determine from my tone and facial movements what I want the computer to do, or providing intelligent assistance, or doing even rudimentary AI tasks. All home computers do is flashy graphics - I want the power to HELP me in something IMPORTANT. I want the ability to havea thousands of nano-sized devices implanted in my skin to store critical information. I want my own Personal Area Network (PAN) that is completely secure and stores a record of all my experiences, emotions, health readings, and physical stimulus. I want a complete, real-time searchable, intelligent database system that monitors what I do and prompts me with intelligent and relevent information to help me with the task at hand.
Do we have the processing power to do this? Yes. Could I fit in my pocket? No. That is why this is important - every step towards nano-scale technology is a leap forward towards a future of prevelant, pervasive technology that is much more flexible than what is currently available.
THAT is why this interests me.
Yeah, that's a good point. My bad. I just kinda think that lower level languages will fundamentally change in the way that they deal with and store information. In addition, the limited memory of single nanosites (to use a Stephenson word) means that distributed computing would reach a new level of imporance, and tieing-together systems like Jini will need to be reworked.
In addition, I/O will be a bitch.
I have this theory that with nano, EE/CS will become in less demand, and mechanical engineers will be forced to reexamine rod logic if they want the good jobs. However, we're really moving at a snail's pace here, and haven't had any real developments in a while. nano-saxaphones for Pres. Clinton! ;-)
I think that filtering in general is a slippery slope to censorship and loss of liberties. that is why I am against a filtering system. Certainly, I agree, as I've stated in other posts, that this is not a big deal - It's a laundromat, for godsakes - however precedents are often set and followed by starting with something innocent and then taking it to the extreme. That is what worries me - how far will we go? Will everything be censored? Will all business access to the internet be filtered? Will we only be able to see what "they" want us to see? Will everything be product placements and advertising and other forms of highest-bidder speech?
That is what I worry about, not the fact that a laundromat is blocking internet access.
You're ignoring the whole question of what speech is objectionable in the first place. Let's say I'm Joe Local Launderer and I go to the closest Clean-N-Fluff(tm) to get my stuff laundered. Meanwhile, I decide I want to buy a t-shirt. I log-on to Copyleft and click on the "DeCSS" t-shirt. Now wait, this has illegal source code on it! Pirating movies! Hacking! This site should be blocked!!!!
Who makes those decisions, eh?
That is a very common-sense idea. After all, it IS a LAUNDROMAT. Maybe set up 5 filtered, 5 not, or perhaps your login to the proxy (or smart card, whatever), auto-checks if you're an adult or child, and turns on/off filtering accordingly. Anyone under 18, after all, has no rights.
Oh great, now you're gonna invade my privacy, is that it? Logging access to all sites? Seeing if I'm looking for Penis Mightiers or Breast Cancer info?
Nah, many find the extremist views of Slashdot and the foul language (not to mention penis birds and naked/petrified people) to be very objectionable. This just brings back the original question, how do you figure out what is a bad site?
Great job, you used the words "cunt" and "cumshot" in a sentence. Now he has to block Slashdot...
You have been given an impossible task. There is absolutely no chance in hell that you will be able to block even .001% of the pr0n/objectionable sites out there. Commercial software filters can cover a lot more sights, but not with much better accuracy. Instead, look at your target audience. You are serving people who have little if any experience with the net. Therefore, a nice portal site will lead them in the right direction without you worrying about "objectionable" material.
You definetally need to make your users sign agreements for internet use. You need to make sure your company isn't held liable for any problems they have or cause. Another clause must deal with objectionable material. Perhaps simply having an agreement that they will immediately close any material that the management deems inappropriate to the customer base. Maintain no liability, but keep the option open to kick people off the system if you get enough complaints. Train your staff to simply scan the monitors and make sure nothing explicit is available.
The problem with censorware has always been choosing what is objectionable to whom. I am a strong advocate of free speech, but when people are using a pay service in public, the proprietor of the service has a right to enforce certain rules. Allowing the on-site staff to survey online use to make sure nothing "inappropriate" to the customer base is probably the best solution - this way people on the scene can address whether content affects them and their neighbors, instead of relying on a person or company far removed.
Umm...if you know that you are violating trade secret laws by accepting information, you are just as liable as the person who broke the NDA.
This is an absolutely awesome MP3 system for the car. It is custom built to fit neatly into a standard stereo port, plug in to your speakers, draw power, etc. Very nice job, even includes a cool little remote and some neat software for display on the little LCD.
I wonder what the use of the software is without the player. I mean, are you really gonna spend the thousands to make your own, or what? Of course, I'm always all for GPLing everything in sight, but is this really that important? There is no indication that I know of that the company is open to outside modifications of their code.
Why would you use it to make a fan?
What's great about nano-assemblers (read more at foresight.org) is the fact that, once you make a few, they are self-replicating. As long as you keep them under control, you can use a single replicator to create thousands, use those thousands to make an object, and then have them self-destruct when finished, all for the same price as building a single one. Oh, and, of course, keep them in a box in hibernation state until you need to feed them the next blueprints. As they use basic molecular building blocks, you can just dump some grass in the box and that will be enough to rearrange the atoms into a nice, steaming hot steak or something.