Each and every time I see something like this I want to say, "Show me the money."
How do we know this isn't disinformation from the MPAA?
I have looked on all the normal underground channels for it, but haven't seen it. There have been filenames that would make you think it is it, but it's a bogus file.
It's an escalation of arms at this point. Total war. Never in our histroy have we been subjected to such comprehensive privacy invasion.
It doesn't matter that the data doesn't say Mr. Smith watched such and such. The thought that the entertainment industry will have access to this data implies that they will use it against the viewers. Incredible.
Maybe they should read what the court has said in the past about privacy and viewing habits.
This raises a great point about the DCMA. If I have a company that produces a tool to help me create products I am ok. Now, if my tool is used by others to circumvent what they call protection am I liable?
In this case preventing someone from embedding a font doesn't protect the font. The font can easily be included with the document. This is nuts.
The embedding bits were orginally designed to make things easier for people to *distribute* fonts, not impede the distribution.
"Most foundries and type designers set the embedding level of their fonts to Editable embedding allowed or Print & Preview embedding allowed. However, a few foundries set the embedding level to No embedding allowed. If you feel that embedding technology has a place within your organization, be sure to ask the type vendor about it before you part with any money."
I have no words to describe this. It's amazing. Yep, it is TV, but to some people, you know, the people who actually make up the whole Slashdot community, it's something they look forward to.
Again, I am stupified concerning your smart ass apology. Wow. I guess the Slashdot owners really don't get the community building ideas.
"If only they would devote a little bit of the millions of dollars they're spending on this ad campaign to help stop illegal downloading... but that wouldn't help them sell more CD burners, would it," said Hilary Rosen, CEO of the Recording Industry Association of America.
I would like it better if it said:
"If only the RIAA would understand that people want to pay for music they can enjoy anywhere at anytime. We understand that $15.00 for a CD full of crap isn't worth the money, but $1.00 per song is a goldmine."
That would have been me. My CD collection soared when Napster was online. I would spend hours going from song to song from groups I liked. The songs I found may have been from earlier CDs that I didn't no exist.
The other thing that Napster did was turn me on to other bands. I would hang out in the chat rooms and ask for suggestions based on what I liked. People were happy to show me other bands. I'd download a tune, listen to it, if I liked it I picked up a couple more. If I liked them all I'd go buy the CD online.
Why did I buy the CD? Was it for a sense of obligation? Sheepishly I'll tell you it wasn't. It was for the simple fact that I like to rip my songs at 320K. I'd buy the CD, rip the songs to 320K and use the resulting MP3s to listen to.
That is fair use in my opinion and one that the RIAA wants to take away from me.
I have read the 60 or so replies so far and no one has stated the fact that bandwidth is ultra cheap right now. There is over capacity in the industry and lines can be had for 50% less than they were two years ago.
What hasn't gone down is the infrastructure costs for DSL and cable companies. The rise in costs is due to the expansion necessary in the infrastructure and not the back end bandwidth. The costs do not rise at the same rate.
Think about it... when a cable company adds a new subdivision their costs are in the components that are necessary to connect each house not in the actual bandwidth used by the houses.
This is the beauty of the model as anyone who has worked for an ISP knows. You can "oversell" bandwidth capacity without any issues as the lines are very rarely taxed.
Add to this the stranglehold the LECs have placed on independent DSL companies and you really see where the costs are.
Um, I think you need to understand that the bandwidth costs are cheap. Very cheap. The costs come into play with the infrastructure... especially for cable companies. The more people you add the more your infrastructure costs rise, but the bandwidth demands don't rise proportionately.
If you're not a LEC you pay the LEC for the infrastructure to offer DSL. That's what sunk them. It wasn't the bandwidth costs as that is extremely inexpensive right now due to the glut in the market.
http://www.libn.com/Column_details.cfm?ID=1249 "Novak, meanwhile, said he has further legal targets. One is the Better Business Bureau of Metropolitan New York. The BBB gives Pets Warehouse an "unsatisfactory rating," the organization's lowest. Novak said some of the complaints were from another business that licensed the Pets Warehouse name and that he didn't get adequate opportunity to respond. "
Wow. So if someone thinks my business sucks and they tell people about it I can get rich. Kick ass.
What I found exceptional about this article is that the guy from Pets Warehouse was representing himself. His costs out of pocket were court fees. It doesn't appear that he paid anyone to serve most of the summons'.
The most striking question I have is why didn't everyone who was sued band together? I see the reference to the defense fund, but no mention of targeting the suit's validity in front of a court. Wouldn't that be the first step?
Between this and "recollecting" memories of being abused by priests, one could make a nice living.
Some people enjoy the experience of the internet and this may be one of the things for them. How else can you explain Flash's popularity
Seriously, the key here is the ability to turn it off if you don't want it. They've already built-in the functionality for limiting it to certain websites. As mentioned, weather.com is thinking about it. Personally, it'd be cool if they threw is some weather tools on the toolbar like standard conversions, rain=snow measurements, etc.
You have to admit it beats the heck out of a car driving across your screen...
They ran an hour long program where they interviewed two key people... the mechanical engineer who built the towers and a forensic mechanical engineer who was looking at the wreckage.
Each had unique viewpoints. The designing mechanical engineer is haunted to the core over this. Most of his sentances trailed off as he was reliving what happened.
The forensic scientist identified the fact that the fireproofing material was blown off from the original impact. This hastened the collapse. He also commented that the support structures for the floors were the first things to fail.
My question is did anyone really think they were going to fall? Remembering back to the day no one in the media raised the question. None of my friends or family I was talking to that day even thought of it as a remote possibility.
This raises a very interesting question about our expectations vs. reality. After the shuttle disaster I think this stands as one of the most shocking slaps in the face to us concerning technology.
Of course the buildings weren't going to survive, but our faith in technology made us think that day that the buildings collapsing wasn't a possibility.
god love the submit process ...
on
AdCritic To Return
·
· Score: 0, Troll
2002-03-28 08:08:57 AdCritic is coming back... Wooo Hooo! (articles,news) (rejected)
:-)
I would love to see a Slashdot feature that shows the rejected articles. It'd bring back the fun in posting...
As a diehard IE user who made the switch from netscape to IE 3.x, I am quite shocked at how well Mozilla performs in the.99 version.
I've kept tabs on the performance and functionality as various betas came out and was always extremely disheartened that it just wasn't there. I was beginning to think that one of the most visible efforts by a community to really create a useful application was going to fail.
With.99 my view was changed completely. I don't use an integrated bookmark manager or email, but for browsing I find myself opening up Mozilla more and more during the day.
Congratulations to everyone involved in the development and testing. This is quite a success and one that I hope garners a ton of attention!
That just sucks. I didn't really even think about that considering that the industry attempts at even anything resembling what others have offered is putrid.
Wouldn't that put them in a precarious legal position? Shut out the competition then open up your own shop? Wouldn't that invalidate their arguments?
This quote from the article says it all, "The rates should be closer to the deals negotiated between the RIAA and more than two dozen companies, RIAA attorney Steve Marks said, even though many of those companies are no longer Webcasting or even in business."
Did I miss something?
Wouldn't you want to partner with those who are distributing your product to ensure your revenue is generated? If you price your product too high you cease to get ANY revenue at all. Period.
What is going on? Why is the RIAA hellbent on staying in the 20th century? Seriously... if anyone can answer that for me without being flippant, I'd love it.
Have we ever seen any industry at any other time do the same thing?
Not flamebait at all. I don't want to have a day when I go to buy software I have to look and see if it's HP Windows, Dell Windows, Sun Windows, etc.
Yes, I did forget Tandy DOS. Sorry:-)
As for being an MS Apologist and thowing up their same arguments... I'm not. I just happen to like the fact the industry has been standardized. I know that's not a popular opinion, but I don't think it's flamebait at all.
And yes, what Microsoft did to DR DOS sucked. I remember finding out about that when I tried to install 3.1 in a compnay who solidly was using Novell products. Quite a shock.
Slashdot Mirror
Once again, prove it.
Which network did you find it on?
What was the filename?
Which IRC chatroom should I go to?
Have you actually downloaded it and watched it?
Has anyone?
In looking around I have seen files with the name, but they are always bogus. Big time bogus. Different movie, not large enough, etc.
Has anyone for a single second considered that this could be a disinformation campaign created by the MPAA?
Each and every time I see something like this I want to say, "Show me the money."
How do we know this isn't disinformation from the MPAA?
I have looked on all the normal underground channels for it, but haven't seen it. There have been filenames that would make you think it is it, but it's a bogus file.
Has anyone actually seen this?
I know you got modded off topic, but damn, I agree with you.
Slashdot is more than willing to post his stuff all the time, but when he shares what happens and discusses his plans for fixing it they don't do it.
Hell, I am sure that with everyone who visits slashdot that a solution to the problem he posted is within our means.
Bingo. That is exactly what I was saying. It doesn't matter if it doesn't link someone's name with the data. There are ways around that.
is slashing their own throats.
It's an escalation of arms at this point. Total war. Never in our histroy have we been subjected to such comprehensive privacy invasion.
It doesn't matter that the data doesn't say Mr. Smith watched such and such. The thought that the entertainment industry will have access to this data implies that they will use it against the viewers. Incredible.
Maybe they should read what the court has said in the past about privacy and viewing habits.
Here is the link to Cable TV Privacy Act of 1984
Assholes.
Here is the right link.
This raises a great point about the DCMA. If I have a company that produces a tool to help me create products I am ok. Now, if my tool is used by others to circumvent what they call protection am I liable?
2 .h tm
In this case preventing someone from embedding a font doesn't protect the font. The font can easily be included with the document. This is nuts.
The embedding bits were orginally designed to make things easier for people to *distribute* fonts, not impede the distribution.
Check out this from Microsoft:
http://www.microsoft.com/typography/embed/embed
The best quote:
"Most foundries and type designers set the embedding level of their fonts to Editable embedding allowed or Print & Preview embedding allowed. However, a few foundries set the embedding level to No embedding allowed. If you feel that embedding technology has a place within your organization, be sure to ask the type vendor about it before you part with any money."
Wow.
What a lack of consideration.
"(But it is just TV, after all)"
I have no words to describe this. It's amazing. Yep, it is TV, but to some people, you know, the people who actually make up the whole Slashdot community, it's something they look forward to.
Again, I am stupified concerning your smart ass apology. Wow. I guess the Slashdot owners really don't get the community building ideas.
"If only they would devote a little bit of the millions of dollars they're spending on this ad campaign to help stop illegal downloading ... but that wouldn't help them sell more CD burners, would it," said Hilary Rosen, CEO of the Recording Industry Association of America.
I would like it better if it said:
"If only the RIAA would understand that people want to pay for music they can enjoy anywhere at anytime. We understand that $15.00 for a CD full of crap isn't worth the money, but $1.00 per song is a goldmine."
Bingo.
That would have been me. My CD collection soared when Napster was online. I would spend hours going from song to song from groups I liked. The songs I found may have been from earlier CDs that I didn't no exist.
The other thing that Napster did was turn me on to other bands. I would hang out in the chat rooms and ask for suggestions based on what I liked. People were happy to show me other bands. I'd download a tune, listen to it, if I liked it I picked up a couple more. If I liked them all I'd go buy the CD online.
Why did I buy the CD? Was it for a sense of obligation? Sheepishly I'll tell you it wasn't. It was for the simple fact that I like to rip my songs at 320K. I'd buy the CD, rip the songs to 320K and use the resulting MP3s to listen to.
That is fair use in my opinion and one that the RIAA wants to take away from me.
I have read the 60 or so replies so far and no one has stated the fact that bandwidth is ultra cheap right now. There is over capacity in the industry and lines can be had for 50% less than they were two years ago.
... when a cable company adds a new subdivision their costs are in the components that are necessary to connect each house not in the actual bandwidth used by the houses.
What hasn't gone down is the infrastructure costs for DSL and cable companies. The rise in costs is due to the expansion necessary in the infrastructure and not the back end bandwidth. The costs do not rise at the same rate.
Think about it
This is the beauty of the model as anyone who has worked for an ISP knows. You can "oversell" bandwidth capacity without any issues as the lines are very rarely taxed.
Add to this the stranglehold the LECs have placed on independent DSL companies and you really see where the costs are.
Um, I think you need to understand that the bandwidth costs are cheap. Very cheap. The costs come into play with the infrastructure ... especially for cable companies. The more people you add the more your infrastructure costs rise, but the bandwidth demands don't rise proportionately.
If you're not a LEC you pay the LEC for the infrastructure to offer DSL. That's what sunk them. It wasn't the bandwidth costs as that is extremely inexpensive right now due to the glut in the market.
From the Long Island Business News ...
...
http://www.libn.com/Column_details.cfm?ID=1249
"Novak, meanwhile, said he has further legal targets. One is the Better Business Bureau of Metropolitan New York. The BBB gives Pets Warehouse an "unsatisfactory rating," the organization's lowest. Novak said some of the complaints were from another business that licensed the Pets Warehouse name and that he didn't get adequate opportunity to respond. "
Shoot for the stars
Wow. So if someone thinks my business sucks and they tell people about it I can get rich. Kick ass.
What I found exceptional about this article is that the guy from Pets Warehouse was representing himself. His costs out of pocket were court fees. It doesn't appear that he paid anyone to serve most of the summons'.
The most striking question I have is why didn't everyone who was sued band together? I see the reference to the defense fund, but no mention of targeting the suit's validity in front of a court. Wouldn't that be the first step?
Between this and "recollecting" memories of being abused by priests, one could make a nice living.
... if it is made optional.
...
Some people enjoy the experience of the internet and this may be one of the things for them. How else can you explain Flash's popularity
Seriously, the key here is the ability to turn it off if you don't want it. They've already built-in the functionality for limiting it to certain websites. As mentioned, weather.com is thinking about it. Personally, it'd be cool if they threw is some weather tools on the toolbar like standard conversions, rain=snow measurements, etc.
You have to admit it beats the heck out of a car driving across your screen
They ran an hour long program where they interviewed two key people ... the mechanical engineer who built the towers and a forensic mechanical engineer who was looking at the wreckage.
Each had unique viewpoints. The designing mechanical engineer is haunted to the core over this. Most of his sentances trailed off as he was reliving what happened.
The forensic scientist identified the fact that the fireproofing material was blown off from the original impact. This hastened the collapse. He also commented that the support structures for the floors were the first things to fail.
My question is did anyone really think they were going to fall? Remembering back to the day no one in the media raised the question. None of my friends or family I was talking to that day even thought of it as a remote possibility.
This raises a very interesting question about our expectations vs. reality. After the shuttle disaster I think this stands as one of the most shocking slaps in the face to us concerning technology.
Of course the buildings weren't going to survive, but our faith in technology made us think that day that the buildings collapsing wasn't a possibility.
2002-03-28 08:08:57 AdCritic is coming back ... Wooo Hooo! (articles,news) (rejected)
...
:-)
I would love to see a Slashdot feature that shows the rejected articles. It'd bring back the fun in posting
As a diehard IE user who made the switch from netscape to IE 3.x, I am quite shocked at how well Mozilla performs in the .99 version.
.99 my view was changed completely. I don't use an integrated bookmark manager or email, but for browsing I find myself opening up Mozilla more and more during the day.
I've kept tabs on the performance and functionality as various betas came out and was always extremely disheartened that it just wasn't there. I was beginning to think that one of the most visible efforts by a community to really create a useful application was going to fail.
With
Congratulations to everyone involved in the development and testing. This is quite a success and one that I hope garners a ton of attention!
Joseph Melle proposed to post 1 million AOL email addresses on the net for free for people to use to spam.
http://www.compunotes.com/Interviews/jmelle.htm
I wonder what happened to him?
You're kidding, right?
This isn't just some cobbled hack. This is really solid use of image recognition in daily life.
That just sucks. I didn't really even think about that considering that the industry attempts at even anything resembling what others have offered is putrid.
Wouldn't that put them in a precarious legal position? Shut out the competition then open up your own shop? Wouldn't that invalidate their arguments?
This quote from the article says it all, "The rates should be closer to the deals negotiated between the RIAA and more than two dozen companies, RIAA attorney Steve Marks said, even though many of those companies are no longer Webcasting or even in business."
... if anyone can answer that for me without being flippant, I'd love it.
Did I miss something?
Wouldn't you want to partner with those who are distributing your product to ensure your revenue is generated? If you price your product too high you cease to get ANY revenue at all. Period.
What is going on? Why is the RIAA hellbent on staying in the 20th century? Seriously
Have we ever seen any industry at any other time do the same thing?
Not flamebait at all. I don't want to have a day when I go to buy software I have to look and see if it's HP Windows, Dell Windows, Sun Windows, etc.
:-)
... I'm not. I just happen to like the fact the industry has been standardized. I know that's not a popular opinion, but I don't think it's flamebait at all.
Yes, I did forget Tandy DOS. Sorry
As for being an MS Apologist and thowing up their same arguments
And yes, what Microsoft did to DR DOS sucked. I remember finding out about that when I tried to install 3.1 in a compnay who solidly was using Novell products. Quite a shock.