Thank god there are still SOME people out there that understand the probelms of transcoding, and willing to explain it to deaf ears, one person at a time.
Probably a waste of time, considering these are the same people that use crappy ripper/encoders because they're 3 times faster
Good point. My friend's letter specifically stated the exact movie he was infringing on also. Kudos for the MPAA for going the extra mile on that one, I guess.
Not to burst your bubble, but you were one of 10's of thousands of people who were mass-mailed Cease & Desist letters from one of the movie-houses.
You were quite faceless to them, and were no more than a line in their mailing list.
The tactic was to scare a large percentage of people on the list, with a simple letter. Which seems to have worked with you. Don't get me wrong, it's possible that if you showed up again on a future sweep as a repeat offender they'd take it further. (I have no idea on their internal workings)
The MPAA is at a point in time where downloading of movies isn't as rampant as music. They also have the luxury of trying to learn from the RIAA's mistakes, and are trying not to make too much bad publicity. So really, the only thing you were lucky about was that you were just part of their C&D technique at the time.
If it was as easy as you say, why aren't they busting everyone? 18 months for Operation Buccaneer, and now this one. It's such a small sliver of the communitee.
It's like saying the FBI can UC into any drug ring. Look how effective that is!
And let true artists who does art for the love of art (not money) do a decent job.
Funny thing is, none of the artists are to blame. It's not like they own the copyright... they gave it up to "the publishers". It's these non-artists holding the copyrights for the sake of making money that is causing the problem. It's not about art, it's now a sweat shop.
I do realize that we are not arguing here at all...
Are you thinking of the DMCA? Well, you need to be the copyright holder and then sue your offender for attemping to crack your digital protection. Kind of a big undertaking of for a trader going to college, who has already signed the college's TOS.
I agree. And I think that MikeMo just has very nice burners.
My theory (yes, can you believe it's not a scientific fact) is that when companies push out their 32X, 56X, etc, a few years ago they are pushing the speed for marketing purposes. Going down a speed will not tax the crappy player (that was assembled by someone with slave wages)
Well, your example was mimicing a pixel or two being off which is ok, vs. a bit being off, which is not ok. PAR can checksum your files if you break them up. You can store some here, some there, and store backup par files here, some there, and par files some here, some there.
If you're saying the WHOLE drive will be corrupt, then yes, it's possible. But PAR is a great solution for partial data degradation. Spread this to 2 hard drives, and 2 CD-r Backups, and you're set
Heheh, well, don't you think a computer with ISO standard firewire, USB, ATA hard drive, IR, serial port, CDROM, parallel port, ethernet, and visual screen might be good enough to get the data off somehow?
Well, maybe you're right. But it's got to have more outs than a CD-R disc that you can't find a player for in 2034. Remember, the inaccessible problems we're hearing about today are reels of tape that we can't find working readers for. 0's and 1's we can't physically read and transcribe. At least with a fully working system, you can start to hack together a solution. Manually transcribing words from a screen, printing 4 million pages... anolog recording of sound.... Solder some chips together to push out electrons in Morse Code...or something!
As far as your comment about "cheapest 30-year old monitor" out there...
Well, the example the poster had was audio. So I say make sure you have speakers.:)
Also, the minimum requirement here is to be able to access that data. And if the computer I'm shelving can play grandpa's WAV/MP3/FLAC fine on those speakers in 2004, then it should be just fine in 2034.
That's the minimum requirement. The maximum success of course would be the capability of porting the data to the modern platform.
Sounds good in theory. In the real world, there are going to be plenty of examples where you're not going to remember to do this every 2 to 5 years. And when talking about a span of time that will completely outlast a current hobby of yours, you have to take yourself out of the picture, too. Family heirloom type stuff is a perfect example of something that is going to get shelved, and turn into gold 3 generations later.
You really think the grandpa cared about his voice on tape back then? Well, two generations later, someone did. Finding crap in the attic is the stuff legends are made of!
I just don't think that the solution to "CD-R's dying in 5 years" is to say: "Oh, just make a new backup every 2-5 years, and you're set". And I'd argue that my one-time backup is much less hassle than someone guaranteeing that you actively keep making new backups of esoteric data. (Not to mention you'll want multiple copies, since the current problem is CD-R's are flaky)
I gave an example above where I said I put all the important things on a hard drive, pull it, and put it on the shelf. This works for me, because I'm only interested in short archival period: like 5 years.
In the poster's example of wanting to repeat another 30-year archival... I'd have to imagine that ATA33 hard drive might not hook up to my grandkid's quantum computer 30 years from now.
So I would look into pulling a plug on a whole working computer. In other words, I would go to mini-itx.com and but a $99 motherboard, build a cheap box, slip in an above-average hard drive, get the cheapest possible LCD or monitor, install everything that is needed to make it work, load up the hard drive, and then pull the plug and store the computer. I would hope that the only thing needed to work in 30 years is a compatible power plug.
I suppose it depends on the total size you want to keep safe.
RAID 5 is the way I'd go if I could afford it. If a drive goes down, you can replace it. This works well if you need constant access to the files.
For archival needs only, I usually just make 2 copies of CD-r's. Of course now I use Princo DVD-R's.
To be even more secure, you could make PAR files. That way if any individual files are bad, you can recreate from the PAR files. If the collection is big enough that spans many CD/DVD-r's, you can even have enough pars to recreate a WHOLE disc that went bad. Unfortunately, of course, if the medium is suspect... then obviously the PAR files are also vulnerable. Basically PAR files would only increase your chances of recovery based only on partial errors.
And last but not least, put everything on a new hard drive, and pull it. Put it on the shelf. This illiminates almost all wear-and-tear, and you only have to worry about hard drive decomposition. (Which I believe is not really a big scare nowadays) You can even buy those Hard drive bracket/rack thingys so that you can cold-swap in and out of your case with ease.
I have a ton of CD-R's from 1998 also.
Very few have errors, and I'm not sure if those errors were present back then.
They have been saved in LogicTech-type binder, or in the original spindle. I hate to talk like I did scientific experiments or anything, but darkness is your #1 ally.
There are reasons why people keep pointing out the theft vs. non-theft. Many of those reasons are wrong, but the main correct reason is because the punishment and definition is different in the law books.
This is especially apparent in civil vs. criminal penalties of each.
And although off topic, one of the things that is really starting to bug me is that it's possible to get in LESS trouble for stealing a CD from from a store than it would be to download it! Don't you think $150,000 per infringement is a little excessive?
Criminal infringement. Any person who infringes a copyright willfully either--
for purposes of commercial advantage or private financial gain, or
by the reproduction or distribution, including by electronic means, during any 180-day period, of 1 or more copies or phonorecords of 1 or more copyrighted works, which have a total retail value of more than $ 1,000, shall be punished as provided under section 2319 of title 18...
Well, it's no joke. Living dinosaur, indeed. I can't find a damn thing to support my point.
Your Mona Lisa example is stupid. You must be trolling. I drew a mona lisa from memory (or even a picture of it) and I can go to jail for hanging it in my basement, and never selling it, advertising it, etc. Yea right.
You beat me to it. I was going to append to most of my posts today that my insistence that only uploaders are getting sued means just that. THe downloading part is simply unproven in court.
Your constant quoting of 17 USC 106 is a little disturbing. That is not all there is to it. It can not be black and white like that. Why didnt' you then post 107? By only posting 106, even fair use is illegal.
Sorry, you're incorrect! You can not make a copy of something you do not have the original copy of. I'm sorry I don't have the links for this, today.
Napster actually got in trouble for hosting everyone's list. What was the term? What was the analogy -- Racketeering? Such as "hosting the warehouse" where gun-dealers sold illegal guns, etc.
Slashdot Mirror
...actually the #1 reason we occasionally buy bottled water!
Yea! Unfucking believable that the FBI didn't swoop in and shoot the violator!
Wow, even after all these years, I still change the channel when a Metallica song comes on.... Glad to hear I'm not the only one
Probably a waste of time, considering these are the same people that use crappy ripper/encoders because they're 3 times faster
Good point. My friend's letter specifically stated the exact movie he was infringing on also. Kudos for the MPAA for going the extra mile on that one, I guess.
You were quite faceless to them, and were no more than a line in their mailing list.
The tactic was to scare a large percentage of people on the list, with a simple letter. Which seems to have worked with you. Don't get me wrong, it's possible that if you showed up again on a future sweep as a repeat offender they'd take it further. (I have no idea on their internal workings)
The MPAA is at a point in time where downloading of movies isn't as rampant as music. They also have the luxury of trying to learn from the RIAA's mistakes, and are trying not to make too much bad publicity. So really, the only thing you were lucky about was that you were just part of their C&D technique at the time.
It's like saying the FBI can UC into any drug ring. Look how effective that is!
Funny thing is, none of the artists are to blame. It's not like they own the copyright... they gave it up to "the publishers". It's these non-artists holding the copyrights for the sake of making money that is causing the problem. It's not about art, it's now a sweat shop.
I do realize that we are not arguing here at all...
Exactly! Now with DVD's coming out with unskippable previews... it just makes you want to rip your legal copy into XIVD and be done with it!
Yea right. I think you're leaving something out. I am interested in hearing it, though.....
Are you thinking of the DMCA? Well, you need to be the copyright holder and then sue your offender for attemping to crack your digital protection. Kind of a big undertaking of for a trader going to college, who has already signed the college's TOS.
Suspicious.... as in doing things in your own home, behind locked doors is suspicious? It's like saying using PGP to send email is susupicious.
My theory (yes, can you believe it's not a scientific fact) is that when companies push out their 32X, 56X, etc, a few years ago they are pushing the speed for marketing purposes. Going down a speed will not tax the crappy player (that was assembled by someone with slave wages)
If you're saying the WHOLE drive will be corrupt, then yes, it's possible. But PAR is a great solution for partial data degradation. Spread this to 2 hard drives, and 2 CD-r Backups, and you're set
Well, maybe you're right. But it's got to have more outs than a CD-R disc that you can't find a player for in 2034. Remember, the inaccessible problems we're hearing about today are reels of tape that we can't find working readers for. 0's and 1's we can't physically read and transcribe. At least with a fully working system, you can start to hack together a solution. Manually transcribing words from a screen, printing 4 million pages... anolog recording of sound.... Solder some chips together to push out electrons in Morse Code...or something!
As far as your comment about "cheapest 30-year old monitor" out there... :)
Well, the example the poster had was audio. So I say make sure you have speakers.
Also, the minimum requirement here is to be able to access that data. And if the computer I'm shelving can play grandpa's WAV/MP3/FLAC fine on those speakers in 2004, then it should be just fine in 2034.
That's the minimum requirement. The maximum success of course would be the capability of porting the data to the modern platform.
You really think the grandpa cared about his voice on tape back then? Well, two generations later, someone did. Finding crap in the attic is the stuff legends are made of!
I just don't think that the solution to "CD-R's dying in 5 years" is to say: "Oh, just make a new backup every 2-5 years, and you're set". And I'd argue that my one-time backup is much less hassle than someone guaranteeing that you actively keep making new backups of esoteric data. (Not to mention you'll want multiple copies, since the current problem is CD-R's are flaky)
I gave an example above where I said I put all the important things on a hard drive, pull it, and put it on the shelf. This works for me, because I'm only interested in short archival period: like 5 years.
In the poster's example of wanting to repeat another 30-year archival... I'd have to imagine that ATA33 hard drive might not hook up to my grandkid's quantum computer 30 years from now.
So I would look into pulling a plug on a whole working computer. In other words, I would go to mini-itx.com and but a $99 motherboard, build a cheap box, slip in an above-average hard drive, get the cheapest possible LCD or monitor, install everything that is needed to make it work, load up the hard drive, and then pull the plug and store the computer. I would hope that the only thing needed to work in 30 years is a compatible power plug.
RAID 5 is the way I'd go if I could afford it. If a drive goes down, you can replace it. This works well if you need constant access to the files.
For archival needs only, I usually just make 2 copies of CD-r's. Of course now I use Princo DVD-R's.
To be even more secure, you could make PAR files. That way if any individual files are bad, you can recreate from the PAR files. If the collection is big enough that spans many CD/DVD-r's, you can even have enough pars to recreate a WHOLE disc that went bad. Unfortunately, of course, if the medium is suspect... then obviously the PAR files are also vulnerable. Basically PAR files would only increase your chances of recovery based only on partial errors.
And last but not least, put everything on a new hard drive, and pull it. Put it on the shelf. This illiminates almost all wear-and-tear, and you only have to worry about hard drive decomposition. (Which I believe is not really a big scare nowadays) You can even buy those Hard drive bracket/rack thingys so that you can cold-swap in and out of your case with ease.
Very few have errors, and I'm not sure if those errors were present back then.
They have been saved in LogicTech-type binder, or in the original spindle. I hate to talk like I did scientific experiments or anything, but darkness is your #1 ally.
Same here. My DVD player (entertainment, non-PC) will skip on 8X SVCD's, but play fine on 4X.
This is especially apparent in civil vs. criminal penalties of each.
And although off topic, one of the things that is really starting to bug me is that it's possible to get in LESS trouble for stealing a CD from from a store than it would be to download it! Don't you think $150,000 per infringement is a little excessive?
If you violate RIAA copyrights, they can sue your ass. You ain't going to be arrested.
Criminal Infringement
Criminal infringement. Any person who infringes a copyright willfully either--
for purposes of commercial advantage or private financial gain, or
by the reproduction or distribution, including by electronic means, during any 180-day period, of 1 or more copies or phonorecords of 1 or more copyrighted works, which have a total retail value of more than $ 1,000, shall be punished as provided under section 2319 of title 18...
Your Mona Lisa example is stupid. You must be trolling. I drew a mona lisa from memory (or even a picture of it) and I can go to jail for hanging it in my basement, and never selling it, advertising it, etc. Yea right.
Your constant quoting of 17 USC 106 is a little disturbing. That is not all there is to it. It can not be black and white like that. Why didnt' you then post 107? By only posting 106, even fair use is illegal.
Napster actually got in trouble for hosting everyone's list. What was the term? What was the analogy -- Racketeering? Such as "hosting the warehouse" where gun-dealers sold illegal guns, etc.