IIRC, the RIAA uploads stuff from the purported infringers to confirm that they are indeed sharing copyrighted material. This would break your method.
More to the point, I am not sure what you hope to accomplish. At best, you might get a headline here or there because the RIAA would lose their lawsuit against you. You, in the meantime, would still be stuck with the legal bill for your defense. Seems like a bad investment to me.
Msft's claims are rather misleading. There is no problem using iTunes with existing MP3 or WAV files. Of course, one wouldn't expect high praise to be coming from Redmond.
As for being "the greatest Windows app ever..." I don't quite see it. I had problems installing it on a Dell laptop running W2K SP4. The installer conflicted with the Synaptics track pad, and I had to kill the Synaptics extensions to get Quicktime to install. I also got a BSOD when I ejected a CDR after writing a data file using Adaptec DirectCD. Hadn't seen one of those in ages. I haven't exercised the CDRW further yet, so I don't know whether that was just coincidence. I don't much believe in coincidence, though.
Otherwise, iTunes is pretty enough but the only thing new it does for me is let me see what the Apple store has for sale. I listen to classical music only, and Apple's selection is tiny and not at all cheap. Since I don't have an iPod, I will probably just keep using WinAmp for now, but will keep an eye on how the prices and selection of the store develop.
Insurance works by spreading the risk over a large pool of people. If future scientific advances give us the ability to predict with total certainty who will get sick and who will not, the lucky ones will know that they don't need insurance and the unlucky ones won't be able to buy it. End of insurance.
If a new protocol could really eliminate spam, I would guess that large organizations would be among the first to adopt it. Yes, it's a hassle to change--and some may choose not to. Still, the benefit would be considerable, especially to ISPs and corporations that are spending lots of money on their email infrastructures.
It is way too easy to mock executives who don't know how to use computers. Perhaps if you think about your parents instead you will see it from another perspective. Computer user interfaces have not changed significantly in almost twenty years. The Web has made navigation even more mysterious to non-techies than the local hierarchical file system. Computers are still too hard to use for most people who did not grow up with them. And that's a failure of design by the technical experts.
Not to quibble, but there are still quite a few AIX boxes out there. I think IBM saw a good strategic possibility in moving towards Linux, but it was certainly not out of necessity.
Well, as I write this, both houses of Congress have passed legislation specifically authorizing the FTC to implement the do not call list, and W will sign it tomorrow. The case will still need to be heard by an appeals court, but the outcome is no longer in doubt.
On a personal note, a couple of years ago I stopped being sarcastic (or abusive) to telemarketers and simply interrupted them immediately and told them to remove me from their call list. Every single time. This has been more successful than you might think. I now get less than one call a week. Since the current law excludes charities, political groups and polling organizations, these guys will keep trying. But my experience is that they, too, go away when you tell them to.
The one thing that still is bugging me is the pre-recorded stuff. I am not willing to listen to the whole pitch so that I can tell them to piss off. If anyone has figured out a better way to deal with this than just hanging up, I would love to hear about it.
From what I have read about Longhorn, Microsoft is thinking about differentiating consumer and business desktops in terms of control and management. This makes sense. It remains to be seen whether they will side with the RIAA or consumer regarding DRM and music files, though I think the EULA of the latest MS Media Player gives a pretty strong indication of their direction. I read it and canceled the installation.
I have to say that I am less optimistic than you about corporate rejection of MS because of the additional expense of DRM infrastructure. Corporations have had years of experience dealing with 1) MS basic instability (blue screens of death), now largely resolved; 2) horrendous vulnerability to viruses and worms that led to major service interruptions--ongoing; and 3) unattractive licensing terms. If these have not dissuaded corporations from implementing alternatives, it is a bit of a stretch to think that incorporating DRM servers will make them look elsewhere. After all, it will be fairly easy to sell the idea at the board level, given that nobody there will have any idea of what they are buying into. Oh, better control and security? Sure, go for it!
This is not just a matter of making it more difficult to trade music files. The main appeal of the Microsoft DRM initiative is going to be in major corporations, which are becoming increasingly concerned with the visibility and portability of internal documents. Copyright protection is the least of their concerns, so complaints about the failure of DRM to protect fair use mean very little. Oh, yeah, and the RIAA (and other content providers) will be delighted.
What I find most troublesome is that Microsoft seems to be taking the lead in providing a means of control that goes beyond the ACL approach that has been traditional until now. It's an astute move for M$. If the rest of the world doesn't come up with an alternative, it will become all that much harder to dislodge Windows from the corporate desktop. And M$ will have found a way to tax accessing your own documents.
Jeeze, I think you may be overreacting a bit. Are you really serious? How about ASCII? How about IP, TCP and HTTP? Want to roll your own?
Standards are a good thing, even if hijacking them for profit is an inherent risk. As long as Microsoft is with us, I don't think there is any threat to diversity. If you were being ironic, I apologize, but I didn't see the end sarcasm tag or winking emoticon that I expected.
Me, again. The thing I left out from my last posting is that the P2P with a central server model distributes the bulk of storage, processing and bandwidth requirements, whereas a typical Web server would have to assume all that overhead. Of course, if Google would agree to cache and serve all the music in the world, that would be great;)
If you ever used AudioGalaxy or Napster, you know that the central server provides additional services as well, like knowing how many users are currently offering something you want. Well, um...provided. Google cannot do that.
I suppose I should have elaborated a bit. My point is that Napster and AG were better implementations of file sharing than anything that has happened since. IMHO, your mileage may vary, etc.
The protocol is beside the point. The evolution of file sharing has been largely a game of cat and mouse since its inception. The cat has not changed, but the mice have adapted and will likely continue to do so. If the cat suddenly gave up on mice and chased birds instead, HTTP would not be the technology of choice for file sharing, at least not for free. P2P with a central directory service is more efficient.
"Search engines are doing a good job but not a perfect job," said Koenigsbauer, adding most search results today "don't deliver the results people are looking for."
This is certainly true. If Microsoft can do a better job than Google, that would be great. Given the pathetic search capability of Microsoft's own online knowedgebase, and their retarded clippy help system, one is not terribly hopeful.
However, after many years and many millions they have managed to build a stable (if not secure) desktop operating system and IE is the overwhelming winner in the browser market. If they are really determined to own the search market they may succeed. Some day.
Well, your observations are interesting, but not enough to call in the Feds. It is certainly plausible that some of the elite in UAE and Saudi Arabia knew what was coming and tried to protect their kids. But no smoking gun here, I'm afraid. Anyway, thanks for the insights.
Yes, you are correct. But the connection needn't be a download necessarily. You establish a connection when you browse someone's files (otherwise, how could this happen?). The key to the whole thing is that the RIAA can just do what any P2P user does and get everything they need other than your real identity.
Just to make it even more sinister, the RIAA could offer files for you to download. They (presumably) have the permission of the copyright holder. So one could imagine a future escalation in which the RIAA could set up honeypot accounts and bust anyone who downloads from them. Entrapment, you say? Perhaps, but narcs have been busting buyers for years by exactly the same technique.
Did your friends offer any explanation after they got home? Please understand, I am keeping an open mind about this. I'm sure you understand that if a clear pattern could be established, it would be a major story. How many friends are you talking about? What do you know about their family backgrounds?
This sounds fascinating. But is there any evidence to support it? There were claims immediately following the 9-11 attacks that all the Jews in the WTC were told to stay home that day. This was demonstrably bogus, of course.
Slashdot Mirror
More to the point, I am not sure what you hope to accomplish. At best, you might get a headline here or there because the RIAA would lose their lawsuit against you. You, in the meantime, would still be stuck with the legal bill for your defense. Seems like a bad investment to me.
As for being "the greatest Windows app ever..." I don't quite see it. I had problems installing it on a Dell laptop running W2K SP4. The installer conflicted with the Synaptics track pad, and I had to kill the Synaptics extensions to get Quicktime to install. I also got a BSOD when I ejected a CDR after writing a data file using Adaptec DirectCD. Hadn't seen one of those in ages. I haven't exercised the CDRW further yet, so I don't know whether that was just coincidence. I don't much believe in coincidence, though.
Otherwise, iTunes is pretty enough but the only thing new it does for me is let me see what the Apple store has for sale. I listen to classical music only, and Apple's selection is tiny and not at all cheap. Since I don't have an iPod, I will probably just keep using WinAmp for now, but will keep an eye on how the prices and selection of the store develop.
Insurance works by spreading the risk over a large pool of people. If future scientific advances give us the ability to predict with total certainty who will get sick and who will not, the lucky ones will know that they don't need insurance and the unlucky ones won't be able to buy it. End of insurance.
If a new protocol could really eliminate spam, I would guess that large organizations would be among the first to adopt it. Yes, it's a hassle to change--and some may choose not to. Still, the benefit would be considerable, especially to ISPs and corporations that are spending lots of money on their email infrastructures.
I think you win!
It is way too easy to mock executives who don't know how to use computers. Perhaps if you think about your parents instead you will see it from another perspective. Computer user interfaces have not changed significantly in almost twenty years. The Web has made navigation even more mysterious to non-techies than the local hierarchical file system. Computers are still too hard to use for most people who did not grow up with them. And that's a failure of design by the technical experts.
Too bad they're backing off. This was so patently absurd that it provided terrific support to the anti-DCMA forces.
OK, so what does the front end file system look like?
Hmmm...guess not. I've had a piece in my refrigerator for about seven years and it smells just like new...
Apologies if someone else has already made this obvious point.
What's the hurry? The moon will keep. Think science, not Star Wars.
Not to quibble, but there are still quite a few AIX boxes out there. I think IBM saw a good strategic possibility in moving towards Linux, but it was certainly not out of necessity.
On a personal note, a couple of years ago I stopped being sarcastic (or abusive) to telemarketers and simply interrupted them immediately and told them to remove me from their call list. Every single time. This has been more successful than you might think. I now get less than one call a week. Since the current law excludes charities, political groups and polling organizations, these guys will keep trying. But my experience is that they, too, go away when you tell them to.
The one thing that still is bugging me is the pre-recorded stuff. I am not willing to listen to the whole pitch so that I can tell them to piss off. If anyone has figured out a better way to deal with this than just hanging up, I would love to hear about it.
If Microsoft is successful at deploying its DRM scheme, then interoperability will likely go out the window, no pun intended. Just as planned?
I have to say that I am less optimistic than you about corporate rejection of MS because of the additional expense of DRM infrastructure. Corporations have had years of experience dealing with 1) MS basic instability (blue screens of death), now largely resolved; 2) horrendous vulnerability to viruses and worms that led to major service interruptions--ongoing; and 3) unattractive licensing terms. If these have not dissuaded corporations from implementing alternatives, it is a bit of a stretch to think that incorporating DRM servers will make them look elsewhere. After all, it will be fairly easy to sell the idea at the board level, given that nobody there will have any idea of what they are buying into. Oh, better control and security? Sure, go for it!
What I find most troublesome is that Microsoft seems to be taking the lead in providing a means of control that goes beyond the ACL approach that has been traditional until now. It's an astute move for M$. If the rest of the world doesn't come up with an alternative, it will become all that much harder to dislodge Windows from the corporate desktop. And M$ will have found a way to tax accessing your own documents.
Standards are a good thing, even if hijacking them for profit is an inherent risk. As long as Microsoft is with us, I don't think there is any threat to diversity. If you were being ironic, I apologize, but I didn't see the end sarcasm tag or winking emoticon that I expected.
Me, again. The thing I left out from my last posting is that the P2P with a central server model distributes the bulk of storage, processing and bandwidth requirements, whereas a typical Web server would have to assume all that overhead. Of course, if Google would agree to cache and serve all the music in the world, that would be great ;)
I suppose I should have elaborated a bit. My point is that Napster and AG were better implementations of file sharing than anything that has happened since. IMHO, your mileage may vary, etc.
The protocol is beside the point. The evolution of file sharing has been largely a game of cat and mouse since its inception. The cat has not changed, but the mice have adapted and will likely continue to do so. If the cat suddenly gave up on mice and chased birds instead, HTTP would not be the technology of choice for file sharing, at least not for free. P2P with a central directory service is more efficient.
"Search engines are doing a good job but not a perfect job," said Koenigsbauer, adding most search results today "don't deliver the results people are looking for."
This is certainly true. If Microsoft can do a better job than Google, that would be great. Given the pathetic search capability of Microsoft's own online knowedgebase, and their retarded clippy help system, one is not terribly hopeful.
However, after many years and many millions they have managed to build a stable (if not secure) desktop operating system and IE is the overwhelming winner in the browser market. If they are really determined to own the search market they may succeed. Some day.
Well, your observations are interesting, but not enough to call in the Feds. It is certainly plausible that some of the elite in UAE and Saudi Arabia knew what was coming and tried to protect their kids. But no smoking gun here, I'm afraid. Anyway, thanks for the insights.
Just to make it even more sinister, the RIAA could offer files for you to download. They (presumably) have the permission of the copyright holder. So one could imagine a future escalation in which the RIAA could set up honeypot accounts and bust anyone who downloads from them. Entrapment, you say? Perhaps, but narcs have been busting buyers for years by exactly the same technique.
Did your friends offer any explanation after they got home? Please understand, I am keeping an open mind about this. I'm sure you understand that if a clear pattern could be established, it would be a major story. How many friends are you talking about? What do you know about their family backgrounds?
This sounds fascinating. But is there any evidence to support it? There were claims immediately following the 9-11 attacks that all the Jews in the WTC were told to stay home that day. This was demonstrably bogus, of course.