I've been saying this for a while, the subscription model (all you can eat, no per-item fees) is the ONLY way that the media industry is going to battle things like Kazaa and Suprnova (without resorting to lawsuits and battling with customers). People who are going online to download all they want now aren't going to move to a service that doesn't let them do legally what they already are doing for free.
I'm going to do some more research on this, see if it's DRM'd, what movies they have on there. Kudos to Real for listening to customers!
According to research, the ISPs in question are Lycos for the US ISP (mentioned directly in the PDF a few times where he probably meant to x out) and Wanadoo (note in the PDF that their site was johannamuhle.mysite.xxxxx.com, and that Wanadoo hosts sites under that DNS).
Keep in mind that I could be wrong here, this is only from some quick research on Google.
And I read this Slashdot article... I might be forced to avoid any non-Microsoft product that had this functionality. This is what this patent is about, fear, uncertainty, and doubt, no more. I doubt Microsoft really needs to bring this into court for it to have its desired effect, just publicize the fact that they have it. Through, say, a public news source...
I have only ever experienced this with Tabbrowser Extensions installed. Once I disabled it, Firefox was VERY stable again. Could this be the same with your issue?
If you can't run Windows Update, it's because you're using a Corporate version of Windows XP with a pirated key usually starting with FCK. Simply change the key you're using using a key changer which... I've... heard... is available on may peer to peer file sharing networks, reboot, and you should be able to update.
Because SBC is a major internet service provider in some areas of the United States, providing both dial-up and (I believe) high speed internet access to thousands.
Also, being at work myself and working at a large technical support outsourcer, a technical union like this is very interesting. I think we would benefit from it.
You're telling me. If Apple wanted to really annoy someone, they could say that since listboxes are a pivotal part of their interface, any use of listboxes must be licensed by Apple...
Please be careful with your use of the word communism. FUD campaigns by major corporations like Microsoft try to make the open source community look like communists (because people [still] associate communism with evil and such). You are completely right, but if someone took excerpts of this post out of context it would look like you wanted the US to become communist.
Agreed, from a customer perspective it would be much better if it supported - and + media. I've had a few calls where people had bought - media and I've had to tell them it's incompatible.
When you can't access the internet because New Dot Net or something equally as sinister has screwed up your TCP/IP stack nearly beyond repair, that is NOT all it takes.
And by the way, where I work (outsourcer for Compaq / HP tech support), the 12% estimate is probably very very low, unless they're counting the recent Sasser worm calls. I'd say, normally, it's a little more like 50%.
Q: How does the merger expand G4's subscriber growth? A: The merged network will be available to 44 million cable and satellite customers, representing every major MSO and satellite provider (28 million cable and 16 million satellite). G4, launched in April, 2002, is currently available in 15 million homes in 47 of the nation's top 50 television markets.
Q: What MSO's and satellite companies will carry the combined network? A: Comcast; Time Warner; Mediacom; Insight; Cablevision; Charter; Adelphia; Cox; Cable One; Dish; and DirecTV.
Q: Who will be the network's chief executive? A: Charles Hirschhorn, currently founder and CEO of G4, will oversee the merged network as CEO.
Q: Will the two services run independently of each other or be immediately combined? A: The two channels will merge into one network. In the meantime, both G4 and TechTV will continue to air as independent channels, pending customary regulatory approvals underway.
Q: Where will the network be headquartered? A: The merged network will be headquartered in Los Angeles.
Programming:
Q: What will a typical programming day look like? A: The merged network will be the nation's premier 24/7 television network all about video games, technology and the gamer lifestyle. The G4 programming day will showcase many existing G4 and TechTV series such as G4's ICONS; PULSE; JUDGMENT DAY; PLAYERS, and CHEAT! as well as TechTV's ANIME UNLEASHED; X-PLAY; SCREEN SAVERS; FRESH GEAR; and ROBOT WARS. G4 will also premiere new original programming which will be announced at a later date.
Q: How many hours of original programming will the merged network produce? A: After the networks merge, G4 will air more than 20 series and 800 episodes per year. New programs continue to be in development.
<1:34> <borg> http://slashdot.org/articles/04/05/06/1325231.shtm l?tid=126&tid=95 <1:58:pm> <Spoom>|<zZzZz> damn wireless network keeps dying out here <2:31:pm> <@LD|Zz> "Probably no more than 500,000 people are using I.R.C. worldwide at any time" <-- this made me laugh <2:34:pm> <ZeroByte> "I.R.C. is where you are going to find your 'elite' level pirates,'' said John R. Wolfe, director for enforcement at the Business Software Alliance <-- this would have been better in l33t <2:34:pm> <ZeroByte> or at least if elite was changed to l33t <2:34:pm> <@LD|Zz> hehe, i'm a 1337 p1r4t3:D <2:36:pm> <borg> haha, now im convinced that BSA are a bunch of idiots <2:47:pm> <Spoom> bwahahaha, they think that networking is used JUST to hide ip addressed:^D <2:47:pm> <Spoom> addresses* <2:47:pm> <Spoom> we can do that on one server thank you very much;^)
^^ IRC reaction to this story (noted between my rounds of uploading 0 day warez of course):^)
Yes, but customers don't know that. Witness a news story I heard about the Sasser worm after a day of doing tech support for it... it ended with "...a patch is now available to protect against the worm from Microsoft." Customers think "oooh, thanks Microsoft!", not knowing that it was a huge hole in their product that allowed the worm in the first place. Subtle misdirection and Microsoft didn't even have to pay for it. Thanks, CBC!
Feel free to repost this (with attribution if you feel like it) in response to reposts of the above article.
And that (the parent), folks, is called generalization, and is the song of the hypocrite, one who won't bother to read any rational arguments and instead, much like the people parent mentions in their post, takes a sample (chosen by the parent to support his argument) instead of considering the true point of some of us here.
We have the internet now. We have discovered that digital information can be copied flawlessly in seconds, millions of times over. Hence, we use this ability, combined with having media in a file, to access the media we want to watch. Is it wrong to access information that isn't yours? Yes, of course it is. Is it wrong for recording companies to try to suppress the internet as a way of distributing music because it would force them to innovate and create subscription services that would benefit both themselves, the artists, and their customers? Yes, it is.
Recording companies realize that they have a pretty sweet deal as it is with their current, fully controlled distribution system (CD, radio, TV). Of course, these media are also largely controlled by the recording companies. ClearChannel. MTV. Resellers that, like the recording companies themselves, will not create a subscription service that benefits customers.
Do you not think that if a service was put in place that charged a nominal monthly rate for unlimited download access to a fast peer to peer network and benefitted the artists who made their work available to it that people would use it? As good as Kazaa and many of the other peer to peer networks are, they are often filled with spyware and other ways that the programmers can make money, often in annoying and legally questionable ways. If a service was in place where people could access fast downloads of the music (or other media, though starting with music would probably be best) they want, without any of the crap that comes with many P2P services, I believe that many would want to use it.
But back to the rebuttal. I admit that many of the points the parent makes are true. Sharing is not free advertising. Sharing is illegal. Sharing is piracy. Wait... Did I just admit half of the parent's post? Oh yes... that's because it was misguided attacks at only a few other posts, none of which really had any merit. Scratch that. ONE other post. Once again, the hypocrite is very good at taking the words of some and indicating that these are the words of all.
Why should the record companies invest in a subscription service for their works? Well, for one thing, it's what their customers want. For another, their industry is on the verge of collapse as it is. The internet is an enabler for artists, as well. If artists created their own distribution system, and distributed their works through digital file formats, what would be left for the recording companies to claim? CD pressing? Entirely unnecessary. Talent finding? If you have talent, distribute your files though this service and you will be heard. Studio recording? Can be found through independant shops. Marketing? Perhaps, but again, go to a marketing company. If they feel that you have talent and are a good risk, they'll help you.
Additionally, without such a distribution system, artists may go alternative routes and try new methods of releasing works while gaining funds, like the Digital Art Auction (finally starting to get ready for actual auctions) or the Street Performer Protocol. These make copyright entirely unnecessary, and if they gain popularity, may make much of the media on peer to peer networks fully legal.
But perhaps it's because I'm not an apologist that some of the things I am saying here make sense. In that form it shows that the parent is targetting the unrational trolls of our side and misrepresenting us as being
Slashdot Mirror
If you're interested in running a truly oldschool BBS, check out Synchronet. Free, good telnet BBS server.
And if you don't run LORD, you should be shot.
I've been saying this for a while, the subscription model (all you can eat, no per-item fees) is the ONLY way that the media industry is going to battle things like Kazaa and Suprnova (without resorting to lawsuits and battling with customers). People who are going online to download all they want now aren't going to move to a service that doesn't let them do legally what they already are doing for free.
I'm going to do some more research on this, see if it's DRM'd, what movies they have on there. Kudos to Real for listening to customers!
Those are post IDs, so it WOULD make sense ;^)
According to research, the ISPs in question are Lycos for the US ISP (mentioned directly in the PDF a few times where he probably meant to x out) and Wanadoo (note in the PDF that their site was johannamuhle.mysite.xxxxx.com, and that Wanadoo hosts sites under that DNS).
Keep in mind that I could be wrong here, this is only from some quick research on Google.
And I read this Slashdot article... I might be forced to avoid any non-Microsoft product that had this functionality. This is what this patent is about, fear, uncertainty, and doubt, no more. I doubt Microsoft really needs to bring this into court for it to have its desired effect, just publicize the fact that they have it. Through, say, a public news source...
The real fix should be available shortly.
What's it going to be named? ;^)
I have only ever experienced this with Tabbrowser Extensions installed. Once I disabled it, Firefox was VERY stable again. Could this be the same with your issue?
const int ANSWERTOEVERYTHINGINUNIVERSE = 42; Hehe... Reason: Don't use so many caps. It's like YELLING.
If you can't run Windows Update, it's because you're using a Corporate version of Windows XP with a pirated key usually starting with FCK. Simply change the key you're using using a key changer which... I've... heard... is available on may peer to peer file sharing networks, reboot, and you should be able to update.
That chart is very interesting, gotta remember it. I'm making blogging software myself (mostly because I'm bored).
Because SBC is a major internet service provider in some areas of the United States, providing both dial-up and (I believe) high speed internet access to thousands.
Also, being at work myself and working at a large technical support outsourcer, a technical union like this is very interesting. I think we would benefit from it.
*glances for a second at SCO vs. IBM*
You're telling me. If Apple wanted to really annoy someone, they could say that since listboxes are a pivotal part of their interface, any use of listboxes must be licensed by Apple...
Please be careful with your use of the word communism. FUD campaigns by major corporations like Microsoft try to make the open source community look like communists (because people [still] associate communism with evil and such). You are completely right, but if someone took excerpts of this post out of context it would look like you wanted the US to become communist.
Agreed, from a customer perspective it would be much better if it supported - and + media. I've had a few calls where people had bought - media and I've had to tell them it's incompatible.
Remember, the link has to SAY nigritude ultramarine ;^)
I did too! I was also thinking, "this probably isn't a good idea..."
At least I got one part right.
You're here, aren't you?
When you can't access the internet because New Dot Net or something equally as sinister has screwed up your TCP/IP stack nearly beyond repair, that is NOT all it takes.
And by the way, where I work (outsourcer for Compaq / HP tech support), the 12% estimate is probably very very low, unless they're counting the recent Sasser worm calls. I'd say, normally, it's a little more like 50%.
From the FAQ:
Q: How does the merger expand G4's subscriber growth?
A: The merged network will be available to 44 million cable and satellite customers, representing every major MSO and satellite provider (28 million cable and 16 million satellite). G4, launched in April, 2002, is currently available in 15 million homes in 47 of the nation's top 50 television markets.
Q: What MSO's and satellite companies will carry the combined network?
A: Comcast; Time Warner; Mediacom; Insight; Cablevision; Charter; Adelphia; Cox; Cable One; Dish; and DirecTV.
Q: Who will be the network's chief executive?
A: Charles Hirschhorn, currently founder and CEO of G4, will oversee the merged network as CEO.
Q: Will the two services run independently of each other or be immediately combined?
A: The two channels will merge into one network. In the meantime, both G4 and TechTV will continue to air as independent channels, pending customary regulatory approvals underway.
Q: Where will the network be headquartered?
A: The merged network will be headquartered in Los Angeles.
Programming:
Q: What will a typical programming day look like?
A: The merged network will be the nation's premier 24/7 television network all about video games, technology and the gamer lifestyle. The G4 programming day will showcase many existing G4 and TechTV series such as G4's ICONS; PULSE; JUDGMENT DAY; PLAYERS, and CHEAT! as well as TechTV's ANIME UNLEASHED; X-PLAY; SCREEN SAVERS; FRESH GEAR; and ROBOT WARS. G4 will also premiere new original programming which will be announced at a later date.
Q: How many hours of original programming will the merged network produce?
A: After the networks merge, G4 will air more than 20 series and 800 episodes per year. New programs continue to be in development.
<1:34> <borg> http://slashdot.org/articles/04/05/06/1325231.shtm l?tid=126&tid=95 :D :^D ;^)
:^)
<1:58:pm> <Spoom>|<zZzZz> damn wireless network keeps dying out here
<2:31:pm> <@LD|Zz> "Probably no more than 500,000 people are using I.R.C. worldwide at any time" <-- this made me laugh
<2:34:pm> <ZeroByte> "I.R.C. is where you are going to find your 'elite' level pirates,'' said John R. Wolfe, director for enforcement at the Business Software Alliance <-- this would have been better in l33t
<2:34:pm> <ZeroByte> or at least if elite was changed to l33t
<2:34:pm> <@LD|Zz> hehe, i'm a 1337 p1r4t3
<2:36:pm> <borg> haha, now im convinced that BSA are a bunch of idiots
<2:47:pm> <Spoom> bwahahaha, they think that networking is used JUST to hide ip addressed
<2:47:pm> <Spoom> addresses*
<2:47:pm> <Spoom> we can do that on one server thank you very much
^^ IRC reaction to this story (noted between my rounds of uploading 0 day warez of course)
Yes, but customers don't know that. Witness a news story I heard about the Sasser worm after a day of doing tech support for it... it ended with "...a patch is now available to protect against the worm from Microsoft." Customers think "oooh, thanks Microsoft!", not knowing that it was a huge hole in their product that allowed the worm in the first place. Subtle misdirection and Microsoft didn't even have to pay for it. Thanks, CBC!
While I appreciate that you want to get in touch with the open source community here at Slashdot, is the Real codec itself open source?
Feel free to repost this (with attribution if you feel like it) in response to reposts of the above article.
And that (the parent), folks, is called generalization, and is the song of the hypocrite, one who won't bother to read any rational arguments and instead, much like the people parent mentions in their post, takes a sample (chosen by the parent to support his argument) instead of considering the true point of some of us here.
We have the internet now. We have discovered that digital information can be copied flawlessly in seconds, millions of times over. Hence, we use this ability, combined with having media in a file, to access the media we want to watch. Is it wrong to access information that isn't yours? Yes, of course it is. Is it wrong for recording companies to try to suppress the internet as a way of distributing music because it would force them to innovate and create subscription services that would benefit both themselves, the artists, and their customers? Yes, it is.
Recording companies realize that they have a pretty sweet deal as it is with their current, fully controlled distribution system (CD, radio, TV). Of course, these media are also largely controlled by the recording companies. ClearChannel. MTV. Resellers that, like the recording companies themselves, will not create a subscription service that benefits customers.
Do you not think that if a service was put in place that charged a nominal monthly rate for unlimited download access to a fast peer to peer network and benefitted the artists who made their work available to it that people would use it? As good as Kazaa and many of the other peer to peer networks are, they are often filled with spyware and other ways that the programmers can make money, often in annoying and legally questionable ways. If a service was in place where people could access fast downloads of the music (or other media, though starting with music would probably be best) they want, without any of the crap that comes with many P2P services, I believe that many would want to use it.
But back to the rebuttal. I admit that many of the points the parent makes are true. Sharing is not free advertising. Sharing is illegal. Sharing is piracy. Wait... Did I just admit half of the parent's post? Oh yes... that's because it was misguided attacks at only a few other posts, none of which really had any merit. Scratch that. ONE other post. Once again, the hypocrite is very good at taking the words of some and indicating that these are the words of all.
Why should the record companies invest in a subscription service for their works? Well, for one thing, it's what their customers want. For another, their industry is on the verge of collapse as it is. The internet is an enabler for artists, as well. If artists created their own distribution system, and distributed their works through digital file formats, what would be left for the recording companies to claim? CD pressing? Entirely unnecessary. Talent finding? If you have talent, distribute your files though this service and you will be heard. Studio recording? Can be found through independant shops. Marketing? Perhaps, but again, go to a marketing company. If they feel that you have talent and are a good risk, they'll help you.
Additionally, without such a distribution system, artists may go alternative routes and try new methods of releasing works while gaining funds, like the Digital Art Auction (finally starting to get ready for actual auctions) or the Street Performer Protocol. These make copyright entirely unnecessary, and if they gain popularity, may make much of the media on peer to peer networks fully legal.
But perhaps it's because I'm not an apologist that some of the things I am saying here make sense. In that form it shows that the parent is targetting the unrational trolls of our side and misrepresenting us as being