This machine looks quite a bit better than the one in the article. However, since you seem to be somewhat of an officionado of it, any idea on how one would wire it into standard auto power/sound? Or, how one would input to such a machien?
I mean, come on, there have to be tons of computer geeks like me out there that look at public libraries, kinkos, office max, internet cafes, etc; and think that a keystroke logger could be infinitely damaging.
Considering any schmuck could pick up a completely software undetectable and almost completely visually/physically undetectable hardware keystroke logger for under $100, this doesn't surprise me. Does anyone think the employee at kinkos getting paid $6/hr cares enough to learn about keystroke logging or check it out?
Again this brings me back to the opinion that allowing any idiot to do whatever they please on a computer is a rediculous idea. I know this is beating a dead horse, but, do we let people drive a car or fly a plane without a license? Before you jump on my case I'm not saying people should need licenses to use computers, or that computers can physically kill a boatload of people like a car or plane could. What I am saying is that banks might require some for education or training, or even just provide literature, something, ANYTHING to let people know that it's probably not the best idea to do your internet banking from KINKOS!.
I'd also like to point out that gotomypc.com sucks, if I see one more ad for them, I'm going to gototheirpc and smash the living crap out of it
Just to point something out, I go to Penn State and work for them as one of the webmonkeys during the school year. The RIAA couldn't sue Penn State University, or claim, or really do anything, as Penn State University doesn't exist. The correct and legal name is "The Pennsylvania State University", which after now working for them has been burned into the insides of my eyelids.
Constantly rated the worst road system in the states, but a HUGE workforce, why? Pennsylvania does things horribly inefficiently keeping lots of "public works" jobs. For example, in PA, if there's a pothole, it gets filled with loose gravel, then once the loose gravel eventually gets displaced, it's patched pseudo-properly. Then, once the patch fails and a larger pothole emerges, a new section of road is put down. In Maryland, which borders PA and has some of the best roads in the Nation, if a pothole emerges, it is either patched properly, or a new section of road is put down, CORRECTLY, THE FIRST TIME. PA also does stupid things like not using salt on the roads (they use cinders, and claim it's better for the environment, but then they also allow untreated sludge to be dumped 6' deep on fields, sludge with mercury, lead, biohazardous stuff, YAY PA), and they also have WAY to many police.
I'm just pointing out that if you put enough idiots in office, you can continue to create and fill useless jobs
If you download an album, no one, not even the RIAA or the artist, is out a cent. Reason, there's no loss of tangible items, they still have the original CD, they can still sell the CD to someone else, the CD has the same "opportunity value".
If you burn someone's house down, numerous items with actual value will be lost, and while the insurance company could very well buy them a new house, now the insurance company is out actual money. Face it downloading even an entire album does nothing but possibly diminish the sales of that album. However, often those who download most (college students, geeks), do not have the capital to purchase said album, so would not purchase it anyway and therefore no one has lost anything. However those same "poor college students" tend to support live events more often (there are extra benefits to live concerts, such as the presence of your friends and possibility of cute girls, especially at emo shows, especially at emo shows, i say god damn) than the rest of society. And yes, artists do make a larger percentage off of live performances than they do album sales. So his analogy is correct.
To prove the point; This is why bands used to hand out promotional copies of CDs, so one guy hears it, tells 5 friends, who tell 5 friends, and now there's 26 more people at a show.
However, I would bet that most of the same people wouldn't walk into a store and steal the DVD off of the shelf, or steal much of anything else from a physical store for that matter.
Much to the contrary. I'm not going to bother with the typical, and correct, "copying is not stealing" argument. However, my issue is not just with the (il)legal actions taken by the *aa against file sharers, but with their existence in general. The general tone of the comments on the board correctly indicate that the *AA's are immoral monopolistic organizations which really do hurt starving and independent arguments
It is because of this, that I would very much like to see their downfall, for the sake of this, and current generations. If actual theft of the information didn't carry such harsh legal penalties, I would be inclined to strip the shelves of the local FYE and Suncoast respectively. Keep in mind, I'm speaking in hypotheticals, I have not/would not partake in the act, but only because of legal, not moral issues.
Although many don't admit it, there are a large group of/.ers who would go to long lengths to see the end of the *AA's. Don't think that silence = complacence.
Hey, not that I'm encouraging it, but if more people participated in this type of activity, it could help bring the RIAA to its knees. Think about it, it's not illegal to own the mp3s, only to distribute them, so the RIAA would have to catch you in the act of distributing the hard drive, which takes a LOT more effort than requesting logs and the existing measures
The quote is a modification of a Steven Wright comedy routine where he says, "Why is it a penny for your thoughts but you have to put your two cents in, somebody's making a penny"
Second, what's with that "unnecessary middleman" stuff? You want someone to be a fullt-time entertainer and fly their own planes, do their own accounting, arrange their own bookings, run their own payroll, act as their own lawyers, write their own contracts, prepare their own taxes, etc.?? Without middlemen, those bands you keep referring to as "artists" would never break out of the college bar circuits
I couldn't agree with you more. I mean I joined the CSAA (College Students Association of America) for exactly that reason. I mean, people want me to be a full-time student and do other stuff. I don't know how many times some unreasonable prick says that I should drive myself to school, and handle my own money, schedule my own classes, make my own budget, act as my own lawyer, even file my own taxes. You want to know the crazy thing, some of these lawless "pirates" even want me to HAVE A JOB
I mean, these thieves are foolish. I am doing my best to be a professional college student, that's a full time job, I can't possibly do all of those other things without sacrificing the quality of my work. And before you ask, YES, these people are pirates and thieves. These pirates use free interns to do some of their work instead of hiring ME for 30,000,000 a job. They're depriving me of my income, they're thieves. I mean, if there's one thing the CSAA has taught me it's that the MPAA is right the only reason I can't make that 30 mil a job is because of lawlessness and pirates.
....
In case you couldn't tell, that was sarcasm, BUT... I AM a college student, and I DO all of the aforementioned things myself. To expect multi-million-dollar-earning movie "stars" to do the same is logical. They've led a rediculously pampered life, most of their problems (drug use/abuse, financial problems) brought on to themselves. And I don't want to hear that "oh, I'm a star, I never have any privacy" bullshit, it comes with the job. You don't hear cops (I'm talkin beat cops here) who literally put their lives on the line every day and face REAL dangers from being recognized when they're not working, complaining about that shit, not to mention prosecutors and judges. Listen, if you give me 30 mil, hell, if you give me 3 mil for 1 year of work; I'll be happy as a pig in shit to wave to the reporters and photographers when I get my mail in my underwear every morning.
The MPAA/RIAA have gouged consumers for years and just like any other creature would, they've adapted to the situation and developed ways of subverting the completely unreasonable prices. EIGHT DOLLARS TO SEE A MOVIE, ONCE? Who are they fooling, if the painter/gaffer is going broke, maybe you can take 1 mil of of Mr. DiCaprio's salary and pay 20 painters and gaffers well for a year.
Open Your Eyes, take a step back from your seat of complacency accepting everything that is as correct, and see the real picture.
At $0.99/song, that's $6.5 million in revenue. Amazon does nearly twice that in a day.
But Apple is selling something that has very little cost of production or overhead, as opposed to amazon which doesn't have that high of a profit margin. Not to mention amazon has inventory, shipping, warehouse management and all the other things involved with selling physical products, apple just has servers to manage.
Your home gateway (or maybe a specialized cell phone gateway) can route the packets to the appropriate device based on header values
Right, because the average home luser will know how to configure and maintain a gateway/DNS. NAT requires a lot of work compared to ipV6 if it were implemented and everything just got its own ip. Remember, the common person isn't going to have the ability or want to maintain such a "complicated" system as NAT. The average luser will want an IP (just like a phone number) for each device. For example, even though most cell phones allow users to create a phone book that attaches names to numbers, a very simple 1-user DNS of sorts, there are STILL tons of ignorant people out there who dial the 10 digit number EVERY TIME. How hard is it to set the time on a VCR? I guarantee you at least 1/2 of the VCRs in the world are blinking 12:00. Devices should be available to the user with as little configuration as possible. Giving the user a device and saying "Here's your new techToilet, just connect to the following number and it will give you a list of commands" is a lot easier than saying "Here's your new techToilet, connect to this address, through this port, as long as that port isn't occupied, and make sure your techToilet is configured to use that port...."
On the bright side, imagine the possibilities with almost everything having an IP. A few ideas I like
Leave your windows down in the car, just connect and remotely roll them up (a lifesaver if you drive one car to work and leave another at home)
Actual remote start on a car (warm the car up way before you see it)
Adjust heat/lighting/TV/music in your house so you can wine 'em and dine 'em by the fire with Barry White playing in the background
Remotely tell your Woznet device to shut down/alarm when you realize where it is
Receive remote alerts on everything, "The dishes are done", "Your car is being tampered with, press 3 to alarm"
Parents remotely monitor what their kids are watching on TV (I don't wanna hear any shit privacy people, you buy the TV, you get to know what whoever is watching it is watching)
The list could go on and on, but the point is, the more stuff that's connected, the more benefits are possible (not quite 100% existant) for the user and us all.
Let us not forget that credit cards may be the cause behind SO much unfair cost to the American people, and those of the world for that matter. The interest rates on most credit cards are REDICULOUS, even for those with good credit.
And worse, not only do credit card companies make money off of the consumer, they do so off of the retailer as well. Micropayments may one day create a way to subvert Mr. Visa and Mr. Amex, (whateversupremebeingorlackthereofyoubelievein) bless them. Small businesses would receive HUGE breaks if a working micropayment system could be implemented. I applaud the efforts of all institutions working to further the concept of micropayments.
Think about it, how long are you going to let the already rich credit card companies get richer off of online payments that cost them jack?
...What's there to stop "them" from scanning and storing the serial numbers from each bill you take out from the ATM? If "they" later want to know who where likely to have paid for x, they can compare the bills serial number from both machines
Serial numbers on bills, and bills in general are extremely hard to track due to the nature of cash. Since the serial numbers are only scanned at banks, it is only possible to tell in general where the bill has been. For example, you could tell that somehow a 20 made it from Philly to LA, but you couldn't tell how many "hops" it made, or whether it rode in the back pocket of a trucker the entire time.
Because of this, it is damn near impossible to prove that person A spent bill X for object Y. Even if person A took the bill out of an ATM, there's nothing to prove that he didn't pay person B for a good or service with it and then Person B spent it.
Just like everything Woz comes up with, I don't think it's fair to call this a "good" or a "bad" thing yet.
Right away I'm sure the privacy guys are jumping up and down, and I can't say I blame them. This chip would make it a complete bitch to hook class and/or work.
BUT at the same time, it'd be real nice to hide one of these suckers in my car (I know lowjack exists, but from the article it appears this tech will deliver much better performance) in case it would get stolen. Throwing these things in handhelds and laptops could also be a godsend. Hey, those things are about the size of a keychain, no more looking for your keys ever again.
Again, it's not possible now, or maybe ever to render judgment on this technology. However, Woz better be damn sure to regulate who can and can't locate said devices (how many men want their wives/girlfriends to know their every moves?). 100 years from now we'll look back at Woz as one of the great innovators of our time
... You know the rest of it. Just as comic book characters have such a code, it would appear that computer geeks need one too.
It's obvious that the folks at evidence eliminator know a good bit about tech, and not enough about morality. A lot of other fine folks who run legit/non-shady companies have the same knowledge but don't use it to trick consumers into using their products (probably because they actually make something useful). Just because you have the power to do something doesn't mean you should use it. Imagine if the loyal slashdot crowd were to use our collective resources to advertise any one issue or cause.....
Should we just make the law state "You can drive crazy if you want since everyone seems todo it?"
Or should we make the punishments more severe? Personally I think people rolling through stop lines should be fined 500$. I think speeders should have their license revoked. If the cops spent a day doing a traffic blitz they could probably catch a few hundred people [town of 50K here...] easy.
Your blind allegiance and lack of ANY logistical knowledge amazes me. Firstly, many of the actions you describe make perfect sense based on certain situations. The problem with most laws, including traffic laws, is they require absolute actions rather than encouraging the reasoning behind such actions.
Let's take for example speeding. Speed Limits are intended to encourage drivers (who are viewed as one massive entity) not to exceed a speed at which they maintain control of their vehicles. The speed limit is determined as the maximum safe speed anyone who can pass the driver's examination in any vehicle should travel. Since the driving population is viewed as a singular, the worst abilities of a driver are assumed. The speed limit, therefore, is the maximum safe speed for the worst driver in the worst car. Also remember that most speed limits were determined many years ago, long before the advent of anti-lock brakes, traction control, modern-day independent suspension, HUDs, or current aerodynamic design techniques; all of which increase the maximum safe speed for a driver. Other factors such as ability and training also increase this safe speed dramatically.
For example, I am a 21 year old male. I actively participate in sports which require fast reflexes, quick thinking, and peripheral vision use (ultimate frisbee), as well as those which require concentration and focus (rock climbing). Regular practice of these sports improves the relevant attributes mentioned above, the same attributes which improve driving ability. Also, before I took my licensing test, I went the extra mile and took a driving course. This course included instruction AND PRACTICE of how to handle dangerous situations on the road. In addition to the attributes I possess, my car (a 2002 camry), has most of the attributes mentioned which increase safety.
I regularly make the commute from Cary, NC to York, PA, this trip involves driving on I-95 for an extended period of time. The speed limit on 95 through VA, MD, and PA is 65 mph, 55 in some spots. However, routinely, I make the trip at 80+ mph. Why am I not dead if I have exceeded the speed limit so egregiously? I am not dead, nor have I ever been in a serious accident due to the factors mentioned above, with a good bit of probability(I don't believe in luck) adding to the mix. In an accident that would occur at such speeds, the factors which would differentiate between an accident occurring or not would really be stopping distance, and control of the vehicle. Due to faster reflexes and ABS, my stopping distance would most likely be equal to or even less than the average person due faster reaction times and the significant difference made by ABS, similarly I would be more likely to maintain control of the vehicle, again due to reflexes, but also due to training and familiarity with the vehicle as well as traction control. Additionally, the chances of me ever needing those skills is reduced due to better use of perepheral vision than most and the ability to spot the incident coming. I would take the "pepsi-challenge" to prove that I am just as safe at 80 mph. as the average person at 55 mph.
That's just one example of how speeding is not "crazy driving". I hope you can infer from this example what some others might be.
But you bring up a good point. If it were to be revealed that "everyone" or at least a vast majority of people could handle I-95 at let's say 75 mph, should the speed limit be increased? YES. However along with this, the requirements for licensing should also be changed to adjust for the new add
You're right on with the marketing being behind most of the price on a CD. In fact, this is one of the concepts people often overlook when debating p2p. One of the RIAA's best strategies is to target those who are interested in one CD with advertising for another, similar CD. That's why there are advertisements for metal bands in the metal section of a store, the same for rock, techno, etc. Want to see it in action? Check out any CD on amazon.com, see the section where it says "People who bought this CD also purchased..." there you go.
This type of marketing is especially useful on those who fall for the mega-pop-rock crap. This is why every ten year old with Christina Aguilera CDs also has Britney Spears and Jessica Simpson, the same for the boy bands, and nu(false in my opinion) metal bands like Korn and Limp Bizkit. What the RIAA saw as a huge threat with napster was the fact that little Jimmy with his parents' DSL connection could say "I like band X, this user has all of band X's stuff, I wonder what else he has?" This allowed little Jimmy to find out about up and coming artists. Some indie bands have made it HUGE because of p2p, bands like Dashboard Confessional were playing to crowds in the thousands before ever producing a radio or MTV single, before ever being in mainstream stores. I had a female friend explain to me once, "Yeah I was looking through this guy's files and he had all this Dave (Matthews Band) stuff, he also had stuff by that band so I downloaded it and I really like it" Now, I'm not comparing the two (dmb and dc), but you can see how someone into mainstream might inadvertantly discover a band and lead to their popularity...
So, how do you make your service profitable? You add the ability to "expand" the horizons of the users. Users are much more likely to buy something when it's new, (hence the raised prices on new cars, the new model of a video game system, etc). When they "discover" their new favorite band they'll find their $5 a month well worth it.
So in short, keep track of statistics of what every person downloads (probably should keep them in a secure, seperate area to appease the privacy guru's out there), analyze the trends in these statistics, and automagically suggest new artists/genres for the user to try, hell, you could even give him a sample, or one full song of this new music for free to "prime the pump".
And remember the long run kiddies (I can't say that enough), if we endure these "tough times" until the RIAA is no more, then we can re-enable the features. 80% functionality for a short time in exchange for 100% forever...seems like a good deal to me.
Looking in the long run, allowing those who do not share files now to download may in fact benefit p2p.
Take for example, user X. User X reads the newspapers, watches TV, and realizes that the RIAA in their desperate attempt to save themselves from the same fate as the trolley car, wringer washing machine, and outhouse, is filing lawsuits against users who share. So user X turns off file uploading, and spoofs a participation level...
But if user X is organized enough and has a big enough hard drive, he's organizing and cataloging all of the music he's downloading, thus creating a huge collection of exactly what p2p networks crave. However since user X doesn't share the files, chances are he won't be sued by the RIAA.
Now, here's where the long run comes in. There are only two possible fates in this battle, hopefully (and in my opinion most likely), the RIAA is going to "lose", and p2p will be come legal and everyone's happy, and now, user X has a wonderful collection for users to leech away. Assume however that the RIAA somehow wins this battle, worst case scenario, Kazaa, Grokster, Gnutella, etc. get shut down. History has shown that file sharers adapt, and eventually there will be a new network/method of transmission, and User X will be right there waiting to saturate it with high quality organized music/movies/etc.
Imagine there are 1,000 user X's (not really that far fetched. This creates something similar to one of the best tried and true war strategies, have a hidden army waiting...just in case. Eventually, these users who might not be sharing now, will be sharing, and therefore benefit the file sharing community.
An interesting footnote: With the ever=increasing availability of broadband and large storage, I've noticed numerous non-techie friends who are simply sharing files by burning MP3 CDs and exchanging them, or emailing/ftping/aim sharing directories. This sort of "Grass Roots" campaign is nearly untouchable by the RIAA unless they start kicking down random doors. Like it or not, MP3 trading has caught on, if a user can't find a CD for free through a p2p network, he'll use is ACTUAL peer to peer network. A few phone calls and one could have nearly any CD imaginable. Make no mistakes, the RIAA will not win this battle, it is logistically impossible to stop a snowball this large, the sooner the governments of the world realize this, the better.
You're both wrong, a turn signal stick turns on AND off EITHER the right OR left light that blinks, that's technically four things.
Also, my turn signal stick (Toyota Camry) adds the additional functionality of turning on/off my highbeams, as well as turning my lights from DRL off, to DRL, to parking lights, to headlights.
We just THINK it's simple because we've been educated about the use of the stick and it's been simplified down to the level that, well lets face it, stupid people can understand. My friend rebuilt and drives a 1944 jeep, to turn on his windshield wipers, he needs to manually reach and turn on one motor, then reach over and turn on the other motor. The turn signal mechanism was broken, so in order to have turn signals, he installed two toggle switches, one for left, and one for right.
Cars have made leaps and bounds in UI, imagine if everyone drove that '44 jeep how many people would be driving around with a turn signal constantly on and one windshield wiper. This is an element in which the computer industry is almost completely lacking. The problem is, the people who develop the software, are nearly all familiar with the workings of computer software and therefore end up developing user interfaces that are perfect for...THEMSELVES. Not that every developer is selfish, not that these interfaces aren't good, and not that there aren't some companies who take into account HCI and UI. It's just that the common person can't grasp such concepts (yet, hopefully) as ".exe files as attachments from strange people are probably viruses" and "emails that SAY they are from Grandma might not actually BE from Grandma".
Now, to do a complete 180, I'm not saying that we should dumb down all user interfaces for the idiots. Just like cars, there should be options. For "power users" and the technologically versed, an options should be offered with a lot of flexibility, a lot of customizability, and the ability to do pretty much whatever you want. For the average user, and the idiots(millions) out there, an extremely simple interface which reduces functionality but increases safety, in effect making a computer ever closer to a TV with six buttons on the front, should be developed. If a large percentage of the people are only sending photos and possibly movies to Grandma, this program should then only allow them to view attachments that are...BINGO, photos and movies.
The point is this, the average computer user doesn't understand 90% of the functionality of his/her computer, and as such should not need to deal with that software. Just as the average car driver probably does not need to worry about shifting gears and therefore will be perfectly find with an automatic transmission, why not offer an automatic transmission for the computer user. For the rest of the people who are daring enough to tackle the computer equivilent of manual transmissions, not acquiring viruses and trojans should be easy.
Just imagine if, with no training, no licensing, no experience, no anything, someone threw a car in front of you with manual everything, and for shits and giggles, lets include no speedometer or tachometer, or even a fuel guage (do computers come with any obvious way for the untrained user to guage anything abou the computer?). The average person pretty quickly would figure out, OK, I sit here, and this wheel makes the car turning, but even something a simple as starting the car would confuse them, as does starting a computer for many first time users. In many ways, we've improved, now you boot a standard windows, linux, or macOS machine and you're taken right to a GUI, one giant leap made by software/hardware manufacturers. In the "olde" days, command prompts, which aren't very intuitive to the average user were the standard, just as with manual "everything" to start a car you would have to depress the clutch, pump the gas (no fuel injection), an turn the key at the same time, then slowly release the clutch. Now continue the analogy with the car and you'll end
1) We have single-source logons for all users, even if they migrate workstations.
2) Users can access their apps and data from anywhere on the network, even offsite.
3) Ping times have halved.
4) You wouldn't believe our uptime, sometimes we go for weeks without rebooting.
On my linux network I have all those things, except my ping times are still half of what they are on my m$ network (yes I have 2 networks, one MS, one *ix), and you can replace weeks with months or possibly years (for my simple fileserver) for reboot times.
Really and truthfully, a well-managed.NET network will of course outperform that of a previous m$ network. However, a the same effort put into a unix/linux network will produce far better results, Microsoft just doesn't have it where it counts (efficiency) for servers
I agree, as a Penn State Student I have worked with both.NET and Unix/PHP/Perl/Apache environments. Without a doubt, the latter of the two was far superior in every aspect, INCLUDING EASE OF USE. PHP has got to be the easiest freakin language ever, and Apache trumps IIS with the ability to do the majority of configuring with one file, instead of having to browse through a maze of tabbed windows with options, checkboxes, pop-up boxes, etc.
Without a doubt, the only reasons to use.NET would be if (a), you already have a Microsoft solution and for some reason you want to keep it, or (b), you fall to marketing hype.
Oh yeah, did I forget to mention STABILITY and SECURITY...
Slashdot Mirror
This machine looks quite a bit better than the one in the article. However, since you seem to be somewhat of an officionado of it, any idea on how one would wire it into standard auto power/sound? Or, how one would input to such a machien?
I mean, come on, there have to be tons of computer geeks like me out there that look at public libraries, kinkos, office max, internet cafes, etc; and think that a keystroke logger could be infinitely damaging.
Considering any schmuck could pick up a completely software undetectable and almost completely visually/physically undetectable hardware keystroke logger for under $100, this doesn't surprise me. Does anyone think the employee at kinkos getting paid $6/hr cares enough to learn about keystroke logging or check it out?
Again this brings me back to the opinion that allowing any idiot to do whatever they please on a computer is a rediculous idea. I know this is beating a dead horse, but, do we let people drive a car or fly a plane without a license? Before you jump on my case I'm not saying people should need licenses to use computers, or that computers can physically kill a boatload of people like a car or plane could. What I am saying is that banks might require some for education or training, or even just provide literature, something, ANYTHING to let people know that it's probably not the best idea to do your internet banking from KINKOS!.
I'd also like to point out that gotomypc.com sucks, if I see one more ad for them, I'm going to gototheirpc and smash the living crap out of it
Just to point something out, I go to Penn State and work for them as one of the webmonkeys during the school year. The RIAA couldn't sue Penn State University, or claim, or really do anything, as Penn State University doesn't exist. The correct and legal name is "The Pennsylvania State University", which after now working for them has been burned into the insides of my eyelids.
You've never been to Pennsylvania
Constantly rated the worst road system in the states, but a HUGE workforce, why? Pennsylvania does things horribly inefficiently keeping lots of "public works" jobs. For example, in PA, if there's a pothole, it gets filled with loose gravel, then once the loose gravel eventually gets displaced, it's patched pseudo-properly. Then, once the patch fails and a larger pothole emerges, a new section of road is put down. In Maryland, which borders PA and has some of the best roads in the Nation, if a pothole emerges, it is either patched properly, or a new section of road is put down, CORRECTLY, THE FIRST TIME. PA also does stupid things like not using salt on the roads (they use cinders, and claim it's better for the environment, but then they also allow untreated sludge to be dumped 6' deep on fields, sludge with mercury, lead, biohazardous stuff, YAY PA), and they also have WAY to many police.
I'm just pointing out that if you put enough idiots in office, you can continue to create and fill useless jobs
Bad Analogy,
If you download an album, no one, not even the RIAA or the artist, is out a cent. Reason, there's no loss of tangible items, they still have the original CD, they can still sell the CD to someone else, the CD has the same "opportunity value".
If you burn someone's house down, numerous items with actual value will be lost, and while the insurance company could very well buy them a new house, now the insurance company is out actual money. Face it downloading even an entire album does nothing but possibly diminish the sales of that album. However, often those who download most (college students, geeks), do not have the capital to purchase said album, so would not purchase it anyway and therefore no one has lost anything. However those same "poor college students" tend to support live events more often (there are extra benefits to live concerts, such as the presence of your friends and possibility of cute girls, especially at emo shows, especially at emo shows, i say god damn) than the rest of society. And yes, artists do make a larger percentage off of live performances than they do album sales. So his analogy is correct.
To prove the point; This is why bands used to hand out promotional copies of CDs, so one guy hears it, tells 5 friends, who tell 5 friends, and now there's 26 more people at a show.
However, I would bet that most of the same people wouldn't walk into a store and steal the DVD off of the shelf, or steal much of anything else from a physical store for that matter.
Much to the contrary. I'm not going to bother with the typical, and correct, "copying is not stealing" argument. However, my issue is not just with the (il)legal actions taken by the *aa against file sharers, but with their existence in general. The general tone of the comments on the board correctly indicate that the *AA's are immoral monopolistic organizations which really do hurt starving and independent arguments
It is because of this, that I would very much like to see their downfall, for the sake of this, and current generations. If actual theft of the information didn't carry such harsh legal penalties, I would be inclined to strip the shelves of the local FYE and Suncoast respectively. Keep in mind, I'm speaking in hypotheticals, I have not/would not partake in the act, but only because of legal, not moral issues.
Although many don't admit it, there are a large group of /.ers who would go to long lengths to see the end of the *AA's. Don't think that silence = complacence.
Hey, not that I'm encouraging it, but if more people participated in this type of activity, it could help bring the RIAA to its knees. Think about it, it's not illegal to own the mp3s, only to distribute them, so the RIAA would have to catch you in the act of distributing the hard drive, which takes a LOT more effort than requesting logs and the existing measures
The quote is a modification of a Steven Wright comedy routine where he says, "Why is it a penny for your thoughts but you have to put your two cents in, somebody's making a penny"
Second, what's with that "unnecessary middleman" stuff? You want someone to be a fullt-time entertainer and fly their own planes, do their own accounting, arrange their own bookings, run their own payroll, act as their own lawyers, write their own contracts, prepare their own taxes, etc.?? Without middlemen, those bands you keep referring to as "artists" would never break out of the college bar circuits
I couldn't agree with you more. I mean I joined the CSAA (College Students Association of America) for exactly that reason. I mean, people want me to be a full-time student and do other stuff. I don't know how many times some unreasonable prick says that I should drive myself to school, and handle my own money, schedule my own classes, make my own budget, act as my own lawyer, even file my own taxes. You want to know the crazy thing, some of these lawless "pirates" even want me to HAVE A JOB
I mean, these thieves are foolish. I am doing my best to be a professional college student, that's a full time job, I can't possibly do all of those other things without sacrificing the quality of my work. And before you ask, YES, these people are pirates and thieves. These pirates use free interns to do some of their work instead of hiring ME for 30,000,000 a job. They're depriving me of my income, they're thieves. I mean, if there's one thing the CSAA has taught me it's that the MPAA is right the only reason I can't make that 30 mil a job is because of lawlessness and pirates.
....
In case you couldn't tell, that was sarcasm, BUT... I AM a college student, and I DO all of the aforementioned things myself. To expect multi-million-dollar-earning movie "stars" to do the same is logical. They've led a rediculously pampered life, most of their problems (drug use/abuse, financial problems) brought on to themselves. And I don't want to hear that "oh, I'm a star, I never have any privacy" bullshit, it comes with the job. You don't hear cops (I'm talkin beat cops here) who literally put their lives on the line every day and face REAL dangers from being recognized when they're not working, complaining about that shit, not to mention prosecutors and judges. Listen, if you give me 30 mil, hell, if you give me 3 mil for 1 year of work; I'll be happy as a pig in shit to wave to the reporters and photographers when I get my mail in my underwear every morning.
The MPAA/RIAA have gouged consumers for years and just like any other creature would, they've adapted to the situation and developed ways of subverting the completely unreasonable prices. EIGHT DOLLARS TO SEE A MOVIE, ONCE? Who are they fooling, if the painter/gaffer is going broke, maybe you can take 1 mil of of Mr. DiCaprio's salary and pay 20 painters and gaffers well for a year.
Open Your Eyes, take a step back from your seat of complacency accepting everything that is as correct, and see the real picture.
Comparing high quality compressed audio. Hrm...so when is the RIAA going to hand these guys a C&D or a lawsuit?
At $0.99/song, that's $6.5 million in revenue. Amazon does nearly twice that in a day.
But Apple is selling something that has very little cost of production or overhead, as opposed to amazon which doesn't have that high of a profit margin. Not to mention amazon has inventory, shipping, warehouse management and all the other things involved with selling physical products, apple just has servers to manage.
Your home gateway (or maybe a specialized cell phone gateway) can route the packets to the appropriate device based on header values
Right, because the average home luser will know how to configure and maintain a gateway/DNS. NAT requires a lot of work compared to ipV6 if it were implemented and everything just got its own ip. Remember, the common person isn't going to have the ability or want to maintain such a "complicated" system as NAT. The average luser will want an IP (just like a phone number) for each device. For example, even though most cell phones allow users to create a phone book that attaches names to numbers, a very simple 1-user DNS of sorts, there are STILL tons of ignorant people out there who dial the 10 digit number EVERY TIME. How hard is it to set the time on a VCR? I guarantee you at least 1/2 of the VCRs in the world are blinking 12:00. Devices should be available to the user with as little configuration as possible. Giving the user a device and saying "Here's your new techToilet, just connect to the following number and it will give you a list of commands" is a lot easier than saying "Here's your new techToilet, connect to this address, through this port, as long as that port isn't occupied, and make sure your techToilet is configured to use that port...."
On the bright side, imagine the possibilities with almost everything having an IP. A few ideas I like
- Leave your windows down in the car, just connect and remotely roll them up (a lifesaver if you drive one car to work and leave another at home)
- Actual remote start on a car (warm the car up way before you see it)
- Adjust heat/lighting/TV/music in your house so you can wine 'em and dine 'em by the fire with Barry White playing in the background
- Remotely tell your Woznet device to shut down/alarm when you realize where it is
- Receive remote alerts on everything, "The dishes are done", "Your car is being tampered with, press 3 to alarm"
- Parents remotely monitor what their kids are watching on TV (I don't wanna hear any shit privacy people, you buy the TV, you get to know what whoever is watching it is watching)
The list could go on and on, but the point is, the more stuff that's connected, the more benefits are possible (not quite 100% existant) for the user and us all.Let us not forget that credit cards may be the cause behind SO much unfair cost to the American people, and those of the world for that matter. The interest rates on most credit cards are REDICULOUS, even for those with good credit.
And worse, not only do credit card companies make money off of the consumer, they do so off of the retailer as well. Micropayments may one day create a way to subvert Mr. Visa and Mr. Amex, (whateversupremebeingorlackthereofyoubelievein) bless them. Small businesses would receive HUGE breaks if a working micropayment system could be implemented. I applaud the efforts of all institutions working to further the concept of micropayments.
Think about it, how long are you going to let the already rich credit card companies get richer off of online payments that cost them jack?
Serial numbers on bills, and bills in general are extremely hard to track due to the nature of cash. Since the serial numbers are only scanned at banks, it is only possible to tell in general where the bill has been. For example, you could tell that somehow a 20 made it from Philly to LA, but you couldn't tell how many "hops" it made, or whether it rode in the back pocket of a trucker the entire time.
Because of this, it is damn near impossible to prove that person A spent bill X for object Y. Even if person A took the bill out of an ATM, there's nothing to prove that he didn't pay person B for a good or service with it and then Person B spent it.
Just like everything Woz comes up with, I don't think it's fair to call this a "good" or a "bad" thing yet.
Right away I'm sure the privacy guys are jumping up and down, and I can't say I blame them. This chip would make it a complete bitch to hook class and/or work.
BUT at the same time, it'd be real nice to hide one of these suckers in my car (I know lowjack exists, but from the article it appears this tech will deliver much better performance) in case it would get stolen. Throwing these things in handhelds and laptops could also be a godsend. Hey, those things are about the size of a keychain, no more looking for your keys ever again.
Again, it's not possible now, or maybe ever to render judgment on this technology. However, Woz better be damn sure to regulate who can and can't locate said devices (how many men want their wives/girlfriends to know their every moves?). 100 years from now we'll look back at Woz as one of the great innovators of our time
... You know the rest of it. Just as comic book characters have such a code, it would appear that computer geeks need one too.
It's obvious that the folks at evidence eliminator know a good bit about tech, and not enough about morality. A lot of other fine folks who run legit/non-shady companies have the same knowledge but don't use it to trick consumers into using their products (probably because they actually make something useful). Just because you have the power to do something doesn't mean you should use it. Imagine if the loyal slashdot crowd were to use our collective resources to advertise any one issue or cause.....
Should we just make the law state "You can drive crazy if you want since everyone seems todo it?" Or should we make the punishments more severe? Personally I think people rolling through stop lines should be fined 500$. I think speeders should have their license revoked. If the cops spent a day doing a traffic blitz they could probably catch a few hundred people [town of 50K here...] easy.
Your blind allegiance and lack of ANY logistical knowledge amazes me. Firstly, many of the actions you describe make perfect sense based on certain situations. The problem with most laws, including traffic laws, is they require absolute actions rather than encouraging the reasoning behind such actions.
Let's take for example speeding. Speed Limits are intended to encourage drivers (who are viewed as one massive entity) not to exceed a speed at which they maintain control of their vehicles. The speed limit is determined as the maximum safe speed anyone who can pass the driver's examination in any vehicle should travel. Since the driving population is viewed as a singular, the worst abilities of a driver are assumed. The speed limit, therefore, is the maximum safe speed for the worst driver in the worst car. Also remember that most speed limits were determined many years ago, long before the advent of anti-lock brakes, traction control, modern-day independent suspension, HUDs, or current aerodynamic design techniques; all of which increase the maximum safe speed for a driver. Other factors such as ability and training also increase this safe speed dramatically.
For example, I am a 21 year old male. I actively participate in sports which require fast reflexes, quick thinking, and peripheral vision use (ultimate frisbee), as well as those which require concentration and focus (rock climbing). Regular practice of these sports improves the relevant attributes mentioned above, the same attributes which improve driving ability. Also, before I took my licensing test, I went the extra mile and took a driving course. This course included instruction AND PRACTICE of how to handle dangerous situations on the road. In addition to the attributes I possess, my car (a 2002 camry), has most of the attributes mentioned which increase safety.
I regularly make the commute from Cary, NC to York, PA, this trip involves driving on I-95 for an extended period of time. The speed limit on 95 through VA, MD, and PA is 65 mph, 55 in some spots. However, routinely, I make the trip at 80+ mph. Why am I not dead if I have exceeded the speed limit so egregiously? I am not dead, nor have I ever been in a serious accident due to the factors mentioned above, with a good bit of probability(I don't believe in luck) adding to the mix. In an accident that would occur at such speeds, the factors which would differentiate between an accident occurring or not would really be stopping distance, and control of the vehicle. Due to faster reflexes and ABS, my stopping distance would most likely be equal to or even less than the average person due faster reaction times and the significant difference made by ABS, similarly I would be more likely to maintain control of the vehicle, again due to reflexes, but also due to training and familiarity with the vehicle as well as traction control. Additionally, the chances of me ever needing those skills is reduced due to better use of perepheral vision than most and the ability to spot the incident coming. I would take the "pepsi-challenge" to prove that I am just as safe at 80 mph. as the average person at 55 mph.
That's just one example of how speeding is not "crazy driving". I hope you can infer from this example what some others might be.
But you bring up a good point. If it were to be revealed that "everyone" or at least a vast majority of people could handle I-95 at let's say 75 mph, should the speed limit be increased? YES. However along with this, the requirements for licensing should also be changed to adjust for the new add
This type of marketing is especially useful on those who fall for the mega-pop-rock crap. This is why every ten year old with Christina Aguilera CDs also has Britney Spears and Jessica Simpson, the same for the boy bands, and nu(false in my opinion) metal bands like Korn and Limp Bizkit. What the RIAA saw as a huge threat with napster was the fact that little Jimmy with his parents' DSL connection could say "I like band X, this user has all of band X's stuff, I wonder what else he has?" This allowed little Jimmy to find out about up and coming artists. Some indie bands have made it HUGE because of p2p, bands like Dashboard Confessional were playing to crowds in the thousands before ever producing a radio or MTV single, before ever being in mainstream stores. I had a female friend explain to me once, "Yeah I was looking through this guy's files and he had all this Dave (Matthews Band) stuff, he also had stuff by that band so I downloaded it and I really like it" Now, I'm not comparing the two (dmb and dc), but you can see how someone into mainstream might inadvertantly discover a band and lead to their popularity...
So, how do you make your service profitable? You add the ability to "expand" the horizons of the users. Users are much more likely to buy something when it's new, (hence the raised prices on new cars, the new model of a video game system, etc). When they "discover" their new favorite band they'll find their $5 a month well worth it.
So in short, keep track of statistics of what every person downloads (probably should keep them in a secure, seperate area to appease the privacy guru's out there), analyze the trends in these statistics, and automagically suggest new artists/genres for the user to try, hell, you could even give him a sample, or one full song of this new music for free to "prime the pump".
And remember the long run kiddies (I can't say that enough), if we endure these "tough times" until the RIAA is no more, then we can re-enable the features. 80% functionality for a short time in exchange for 100% forever...seems like a good deal to me.
Looking in the long run, allowing those who do not share files now to download may in fact benefit p2p.
Take for example, user X. User X reads the newspapers, watches TV, and realizes that the RIAA in their desperate attempt to save themselves from the same fate as the trolley car, wringer washing machine, and outhouse, is filing lawsuits against users who share. So user X turns off file uploading, and spoofs a participation level...
But if user X is organized enough and has a big enough hard drive, he's organizing and cataloging all of the music he's downloading, thus creating a huge collection of exactly what p2p networks crave. However since user X doesn't share the files, chances are he won't be sued by the RIAA.
Now, here's where the long run comes in. There are only two possible fates in this battle, hopefully (and in my opinion most likely), the RIAA is going to "lose", and p2p will be come legal and everyone's happy, and now, user X has a wonderful collection for users to leech away. Assume however that the RIAA somehow wins this battle, worst case scenario, Kazaa, Grokster, Gnutella, etc. get shut down. History has shown that file sharers adapt, and eventually there will be a new network/method of transmission, and User X will be right there waiting to saturate it with high quality organized music/movies/etc.
Imagine there are 1,000 user X's (not really that far fetched. This creates something similar to one of the best tried and true war strategies, have a hidden army waiting...just in case. Eventually, these users who might not be sharing now, will be sharing, and therefore benefit the file sharing community.
An interesting footnote: With the ever=increasing availability of broadband and large storage, I've noticed numerous non-techie friends who are simply sharing files by burning MP3 CDs and exchanging them, or emailing/ftping/aim sharing directories. This sort of "Grass Roots" campaign is nearly untouchable by the RIAA unless they start kicking down random doors. Like it or not, MP3 trading has caught on, if a user can't find a CD for free through a p2p network, he'll use is ACTUAL peer to peer network. A few phone calls and one could have nearly any CD imaginable. Make no mistakes, the RIAA will not win this battle, it is logistically impossible to stop a snowball this large, the sooner the governments of the world realize this, the better.
Nope nope,
Should be.."Hell hath no fury like a woman scorned for SEGA"
Watch the movie 10,000 times, listen to what he actually says
You're both wrong, a turn signal stick turns on AND off EITHER the right OR left light that blinks, that's technically four things.
Also, my turn signal stick (Toyota Camry) adds the additional functionality of turning on/off my highbeams, as well as turning my lights from DRL off, to DRL, to parking lights, to headlights.
We just THINK it's simple because we've been educated about the use of the stick and it's been simplified down to the level that, well lets face it, stupid people can understand. My friend rebuilt and drives a 1944 jeep, to turn on his windshield wipers, he needs to manually reach and turn on one motor, then reach over and turn on the other motor. The turn signal mechanism was broken, so in order to have turn signals, he installed two toggle switches, one for left, and one for right.
Cars have made leaps and bounds in UI, imagine if everyone drove that '44 jeep how many people would be driving around with a turn signal constantly on and one windshield wiper. This is an element in which the computer industry is almost completely lacking. The problem is, the people who develop the software, are nearly all familiar with the workings of computer software and therefore end up developing user interfaces that are perfect for...THEMSELVES. Not that every developer is selfish, not that these interfaces aren't good, and not that there aren't some companies who take into account HCI and UI. It's just that the common person can't grasp such concepts (yet, hopefully) as ".exe files as attachments from strange people are probably viruses" and "emails that SAY they are from Grandma might not actually BE from Grandma".
Now, to do a complete 180, I'm not saying that we should dumb down all user interfaces for the idiots. Just like cars, there should be options. For "power users" and the technologically versed, an options should be offered with a lot of flexibility, a lot of customizability, and the ability to do pretty much whatever you want. For the average user, and the idiots(millions) out there, an extremely simple interface which reduces functionality but increases safety, in effect making a computer ever closer to a TV with six buttons on the front, should be developed. If a large percentage of the people are only sending photos and possibly movies to Grandma, this program should then only allow them to view attachments that are...BINGO, photos and movies.
The point is this, the average computer user doesn't understand 90% of the functionality of his/her computer, and as such should not need to deal with that software. Just as the average car driver probably does not need to worry about shifting gears and therefore will be perfectly find with an automatic transmission, why not offer an automatic transmission for the computer user. For the rest of the people who are daring enough to tackle the computer equivilent of manual transmissions, not acquiring viruses and trojans should be easy.
Just imagine if, with no training, no licensing, no experience, no anything, someone threw a car in front of you with manual everything, and for shits and giggles, lets include no speedometer or tachometer, or even a fuel guage (do computers come with any obvious way for the untrained user to guage anything abou the computer?). The average person pretty quickly would figure out, OK, I sit here, and this wheel makes the car turning, but even something a simple as starting the car would confuse them, as does starting a computer for many first time users. In many ways, we've improved, now you boot a standard windows, linux, or macOS machine and you're taken right to a GUI, one giant leap made by software/hardware manufacturers. In the "olde" days, command prompts, which aren't very intuitive to the average user were the standard, just as with manual "everything" to start a car you would have to depress the clutch, pump the gas (no fuel injection), an turn the key at the same time, then slowly release the clutch. Now continue the analogy with the car and you'll end
So coming from a computer geek with a mild interest in cars, please elaborate on or provide links to these OBD and OBD2 ports....
1) We have single-source logons for all users, even if they migrate workstations. 2) Users can access their apps and data from anywhere on the network, even offsite. 3) Ping times have halved. 4) You wouldn't believe our uptime, sometimes we go for weeks without rebooting.
On my linux network I have all those things, except my ping times are still half of what they are on my m$ network (yes I have 2 networks, one MS, one *ix), and you can replace weeks with months or possibly years (for my simple fileserver) for reboot times.
Really and truthfully, a well-managed .NET network will of course outperform that of a previous m$ network. However, a the same effort put into a unix/linux network will produce far better results, Microsoft just doesn't have it where it counts (efficiency) for servers
I agree, as a Penn State Student I have worked with both .NET and Unix/PHP/Perl/Apache environments. Without a doubt, the latter of the two was far superior in every aspect, INCLUDING EASE OF USE. PHP has got to be the easiest freakin language ever, and Apache trumps IIS with the ability to do the majority of configuring with one file, instead of having to browse through a maze of tabbed windows with options, checkboxes, pop-up boxes, etc.
Without a doubt, the only reasons to use .NET would be if (a), you already have a Microsoft solution and for some reason you want to keep it, or (b), you fall to marketing hype.
Oh yeah, did I forget to mention STABILITY and SECURITY...