I think this is an attempt to stir up the masses with references to "censorship."
Exactly. They use things like "protecting personal information" as a rationalization to censor. This is the spin that's being used to get the public to go for it. Censorship is now "protection". It's very similar to, if not exactly like, the "innovation" spin being put on IP law to get the public to go for that. The "reefer madness" is yet another example of getting people to support prohibition. I have to grant that it's very effective, and amazingly easy. Chalk another one up for Ma Nature.
As it is now, "We The People" (about 300 million) are "represented" by only 535 members of Congress.
And 51% of the voters are ok with that. If they were smart, they would buy a Mac.
I don't believe in letting 535 citizens write laws for the other 299,999,465!
But 51% of your neighbors do. They give them the power. And speaking of power, did you see that part where it says that the Xserve consumes just over half the power as a comparable Xeon?
...then nothing in the world is 'wrong' because someone somewhere considers it not to be.
And that would be right. Killing people is wrong, yet we come up with all sorts of reasons to do it anyway. Killing is wrong no matter who does it. Your reasons don't make it any more right. The UK/US/Chinese/European/world's govenments are commiting mass murder right now. Please save the lectures on the "mass murderer living next door" for someone who believe it's any different. I'm not falling for it. We do have a right to disregard a law we disagree with. Prohibition and IP law come to mind here. Some would say we have an obligation to do so. I don't believe in letting 51% of the people write laws for the other 49%. This whole case is nothing more than a publicity stunt anyway. All this noise can only help sales. Apple's only real concern here is that they get the names right.
You're not getting any disagreement from me in that regard. I'm still not sure who the guy should call first, the boss or the police. If he does talk to the boss first, he'll probably need evidence that he brought up the problem if and when the cops show up anyway. The boss could destroy any evidence of illegal activity before the cops arrive. This could leave the admin in a bad position to say the least. Next thing you know, they'll be accusing him of the illegal activity, and the real perps get away. That's why I would take the "silent alarm" approach and call the police and let them take over the investigation to determine if there is criminal activity. If violating copyright is a criminal offense, then that angle is taken care of, also, and the RIAA might send me a box of chocolates for my efforts. BUT, I am against snitching, and I would most likely give up my job before I'd call the police for anything less than cold blooded murder. I have no interest in getting tangled up in the system. My personal interest in leading a peaceful life outweigh the company's interests by a long shot, and the present system is not very conducive to honesty here. So, off I go to a better place.
I simply do not understand why music downloads have not been embraced by the people who own the music.
That's because you're looking at it from a pure and simple business perspective... Now throw in some human emotion and animal husbandry, and you'll be one step closer to understanding their motivations.
If an admin had reason to believe that his or her network was being used to traffic music illegally, then he has an obligation to tell his employer. (Not the police, because this is a civil matter.)
I'd like to see if they can consider it trafficing if no money changes hands. Actual trafficing might be a criminal offense. Also, there are times it might be better to call the cops, especially if you think your employer is the culprit, and you don't want to end up floating face down in the pool(Seen too many movies). If it turns out there was a criminal offense, it's possible the admin could still get into trouble for not calling the cops first. He would certainly be questioned about it. That said, I would never confront anybody unless they're doing what I personally consider wrong. If we start snitching on everybody for every triviality that's on the books, and not necessarily wrong(not implying that here, just in general), life would become very unpleasent. I would never trust anybody. Didn't the Soviets encourage this kind of thing? It just put everyone into a permanent state of fear of everbody else. Everybody will be spying on you, not just the RIAA. Here again, if you're using somebody else's equipment, don't expect any privacy of any kind. The owner will/should cover his ass, not your's.
All I can say is that you're right on both counts. If we really want to influence the behavior of ISPs, it's up to us to check those contracts carefully. Oh well, you and I both know that doesn't happen, and people complain when they get cut off for violations clearly spelled out on the paper. I would love to see a simple contract that simply says, "this severice at that price", but that aint gonna happen either. Well, it could if enough people asked. I'm starting to care less. The beautiful weather is makeing the internet irrelevent. Time to go out and enjoy it.
The US may be the latgest debtor nation now, but I don't believe that anyone is going to send "Vito" over to bash any kneecaps:)
I'm a compete non-believer in the concept of "dwindling resources". Every single shortage(especially since the "big one", WW2) of any kind has turned out to be nothing more than a disagreement over the price. This includes the "shortage" of alternative sources of energy. A prime example is our preparation for future wars over water. There is no way that I'm going to take any talk of "water shortages" seriously while I'm standing on the beach, looking at all that beautiful crystal clear ocean while it's pouring rain at several millions of gallons per second. The people who believe there is a shortage must believe it's easier just to go in with a gun and steal it from their neighbor. I will will grant that it is more profitable for our present rulers to do things this way. But real, actual shortage? Nah!
Unless the traffic is going through a good VPN, I would guess that the ISPs could identify all the data going through their circuits if they wish. If they were to start checking for music or other material that somebody wants them to check on, the customers would be rightly pissed off about the spying that would be necessary to pull this off. To do this would only confirm people's suspicion that they have no privacy, and that could encourage wide spread encryption use. And the arms race would continue unabated back and forth like a Tom and Jerry cartoon.(the good pre-war and wartime ones. After that, they sucked.) We should maintain the same freedoms we have for the phone, and insure that the ISP is treated and acts as the pipe(in both directions), nothing else. If the law is being broken, call a cop. Go through channels. The procedure is pretty well spelled out. If we can't have vigilante justice, we sure shouldn't give to anybody else. The only code of conduct an ISP(or any business) should be held to is that which enforces honesty and adherence to signed contracts. It's up to us to read and understand said contracts before we sign them. I would hope that nobody tolerates ISP restraints on the type of information they can access.
all along! According to the draft, the duo want ISPs and network operators to 'enforce terms of service that prohibit a subscriber from operating a server...
They're trying to stop all uploading! I love that ruse, "Excessive" bandwidth usage is a good sign of infringement. They want the net to be "client-server". They're the server. You're the client. How sweet. They can feed us all the propa...er...information we should need. That they're trying this doesn't bother me at all. It's to be expected. I'm worried that some dummy is out there believing it. It looks like it's back to solitare for me. Heh, screw that! It's back to the beach!
Some countries have traditions of institutionalized graft.
Got news for you. ALL countries have traditions of institutionalized graft. Some are just more affordable to the general public. Others will only occur in the famous "smoke filled room"...out of sight out of mind.
It makes things impersonal and employees are considered assets rather than people.
Actually, I believe employees are written off as expenses. If they were assets, they would have to declare them as such and pay a property tax on them. As it is, they can deduct the money paid out to them, even though they do pay a payroll tax, which I believe is deducted from the employee's check. Which is a neat way of paying you less than what is stated on the contract. Remeber gang, always negociate your net pay.
The chinese will move their factories to the US, Japan, England, and so on! Our starving and uneducated populations will *want* these jobs...
Let's not forget that the very profitable prison industry will become even more so. This can not be overstated. When greed and poverty fail to motivate people, prison will be the only option left. Nine years for the spammers won't be enough. We'll need to lock people up for "failure to maintain gainful employment". Vagrancy laws will get real teeth, and it will "fix" the homeless problem. The American collapse into a police state looks more likely every year, but few are seeing it.
What riles me is that so many of my "peers", if you can call them that, have done an about-face with regard to technological development. Primarily because they 'got theirs' and don't want an up-and-coming generation to threaten their position on the ladder with new technologies that they themselves don't want to take the time to master or adapt to.
You hit it right on. I've had similar discussions with him and ususally get the usual "non-responsive" response. This is what happens when when you deal with people who have entrenched interest in the status quo. They will never see the problems that their system is causing. They are incapable or totally unwilling to understand your main point. They will pick up on some grammatical or spelling error to distract and confuse. Or they may pick up on some slight irrelevency in your comments for the same purpose. All sorts of payments methods have been discussed, the live perforance one being the fairest, but he, and others like him refuse to see it and continues to whine that we don't want to pay artists at all. This is very common amongst the drones. They have to spread the FUD to keep the public in their camp.
I don't know what's scarier: That he'd say something like that, or that there's probably a couple hundred million Americans who would nod their heads in "understanding".
I'll make it easy for you. It's the latter...by far. A goon shooting off his mouth is mostly harmless. One person is easy to deal with. His follwers are quite a different story. I don't care about Bush and his buddies. It's the majority that voted for him and re-elected him that are dangerous. The gov't can't take away your freedoms if the voters don't approve. The majority affirmed their approval of the Patriot Act, TSA, etc. in the last election. That is indeed scary. And remember all those students who think that the 1st Amendment goes too far in protecting one's freedom are going to able able to vote soon. I'll bet a repeal is already in the works, just waiting for them.
Blame Congress?? And then re-elect them?? Now I'm confused. What are you saying here? This doesn't make sense. Even the TV weatherman can't get away with being wrong that often and expect to keep their job. Sorry, I can't blame Congress. No siree, bob. We elected them. You know where that puts the ball.
Putting people in prison for trivial offenses(that is what this is. Quit your whining) is definitely good for this business. Who says crime doesn't pay?
Damn you! You beat me to it! Now, all I can say is "I agree!!" and get modded redundant. I guess the submitter isn't a great believer in due process, much less appropriate punishment. Jail for everybody! That way Nike and Walmart can move their factories back to the US and say that their products are American made.
I don't know. Even if the gov't doesn't get involved with a certain enterprise, they will usually use some authority to protect the ones that do from competition. Either way, our tax money is involved...to me anyway. So, instead of protecting an "outsiders" entrenched interests, I would rather use my tax money to become the entrenched interest. I feel like I have more control over an entity that, on paper at least, is required to represent my(yours) interests. And all this continues to lead me to the issue of near universal access. Freedom to travel and communicate uninhibited is too important to leave just to private enterprises or just to gov't.
If you've ever had to stand in line at the post office near christmas time...
Not sure if it's a problem up there, but I doubt you will see shorter lines at the bank on the 15th and last day of every month(payday for most here). Supermarket check out lines aren't always so short either. How about the line at the airport? On the taxiway? at the pump?(ok, it's been a few years...) In truth, I think the post office is amazing that it works at all. Their record is pretty darn good. To me, that says a lot. As far as it being illegal to compete against them, I don't see them checking every FedEx envelope to see what's inside....yet. But here again, that brings up the issue of exclusivity. I understand your point here. I just want a way for us who don't have a lot of resources under our individual control to pool those resources through our gov't to provide real competition and access to these services. Sounds kinda "commie" doesn't it? I'm sorry, but we do have to live with each other, and in reality we do depend on each other. The lone wolf/every man for himself thing won't work here. So let's make the best of it and actually work with each other to make all of our lives as comfortable as possible.
Even the constitution can be indirectly voted down by the voter. Little by little, that's just what they are doing. It's almost easy to amend it. The ultimate power will always be with them. As long as the goals of the gov't jive with those of the voter(public), they can be assured of maintaining their authority for a very long time. If the voter uses the power they have, they will see the desired result. We elect the people who do the appointing. If we don't like their choice, it's up to us to change the "appointer". There may be a "chain of command", but we are the real commanders. If a big enough percentage of voter don't like the appointed judges or other bureaucrats, I'm sure there is a way to remove them fairly quickly. or at the very least, render them harmless. The first step here is to realize that we do have the ultimate power. The second is to pay attention and use it wisely.
Does not your gov't derive its power and authority from the.....public?? You can vote where you are, right? Gettin' my drift? Pickin' up what I'm puttin' down?
Slashdot Mirror
I think this is an attempt to stir up the masses with references to "censorship."
Exactly. They use things like "protecting personal information" as a rationalization to censor. This is the spin that's being used to get the public to go for it. Censorship is now "protection". It's very similar to, if not exactly like, the "innovation" spin being put on IP law to get the public to go for that. The "reefer madness" is yet another example of getting people to support prohibition. I have to grant that it's very effective, and amazingly easy. Chalk another one up for Ma Nature.
As it is now, "We The People" (about 300 million) are "represented" by only 535 members of Congress.
And 51% of the voters are ok with that. If they were smart, they would buy a Mac.
I don't believe in letting 535 citizens write laws for the other 299,999,465!
But 51% of your neighbors do. They give them the power. And speaking of power, did you see that part where it says that the Xserve consumes just over half the power as a comparable Xeon?
Just trying to get back on topic...
...then nothing in the world is 'wrong' because someone somewhere considers it not to be.
And that would be right. Killing people is wrong, yet we come up with all sorts of reasons to do it anyway. Killing is wrong no matter who does it. Your reasons don't make it any more right. The UK/US/Chinese/European/world's govenments are commiting mass murder right now. Please save the lectures on the "mass murderer living next door" for someone who believe it's any different. I'm not falling for it. We do have a right to disregard a law we disagree with. Prohibition and IP law come to mind here. Some would say we have an obligation to do so. I don't believe in letting 51% of the people write laws for the other 49%. This whole case is nothing more than a publicity stunt anyway. All this noise can only help sales. Apple's only real concern here is that they get the names right.
He didn't ask if they were doing something illegal. He asked if they were doing something wrong. Two very different things.
You're not getting any disagreement from me in that regard. I'm still not sure who the guy should call first, the boss or the police. If he does talk to the boss first, he'll probably need evidence that he brought up the problem if and when the cops show up anyway. The boss could destroy any evidence of illegal activity before the cops arrive. This could leave the admin in a bad position to say the least. Next thing you know, they'll be accusing him of the illegal activity, and the real perps get away. That's why I would take the "silent alarm" approach and call the police and let them take over the investigation to determine if there is criminal activity. If violating copyright is a criminal offense, then that angle is taken care of, also, and the RIAA might send me a box of chocolates for my efforts. BUT, I am against snitching, and I would most likely give up my job before I'd call the police for anything less than cold blooded murder. I have no interest in getting tangled up in the system. My personal interest in leading a peaceful life outweigh the company's interests by a long shot, and the present system is not very conducive to honesty here. So, off I go to a better place.
I simply do not understand why music downloads have not been embraced by the people who own the music.
That's because you're looking at it from a pure and simple business perspective...
Now throw in some human emotion and animal husbandry, and you'll be one step closer to understanding their motivations.
If an admin had reason to believe that his or her network was being used to traffic music illegally, then he has an obligation to tell his employer. (Not the police, because this is a civil matter.)
I'd like to see if they can consider it trafficing if no money changes hands. Actual trafficing might be a criminal offense. Also, there are times it might be better to call the cops, especially if you think your employer is the culprit, and you don't want to end up floating face down in the pool(Seen too many movies). If it turns out there was a criminal offense, it's possible the admin could still get into trouble for not calling the cops first. He would certainly be questioned about it. That said, I would never confront anybody unless they're doing what I personally consider wrong. If we start snitching on everybody for every triviality that's on the books, and not necessarily wrong(not implying that here, just in general), life would become very unpleasent. I would never trust anybody. Didn't the Soviets encourage this kind of thing? It just put everyone into a permanent state of fear of everbody else. Everybody will be spying on you, not just the RIAA. Here again, if you're using somebody else's equipment, don't expect any privacy of any kind. The owner will/should cover his ass, not your's.
All I can say is that you're right on both counts. If we really want to influence the behavior of ISPs, it's up to us to check those contracts carefully. Oh well, you and I both know that doesn't happen, and people complain when they get cut off for violations clearly spelled out on the paper. I would love to see a simple contract that simply says, "this severice at that price", but that aint gonna happen either. Well, it could if enough people asked. I'm starting to care less. The beautiful weather is makeing the internet irrelevent. Time to go out and enjoy it.
The US may be the latgest debtor nation now, but I don't believe that anyone is going to send "Vito" over to bash any kneecaps :)
I'm a compete non-believer in the concept of "dwindling resources". Every single shortage(especially since the "big one", WW2) of any kind has turned out to be nothing more than a disagreement over the price. This includes the "shortage" of alternative sources of energy. A prime example is our preparation for future wars over water. There is no way that I'm going to take any talk of "water shortages" seriously while I'm standing on the beach, looking at all that beautiful crystal clear ocean while it's pouring rain at several millions of gallons per second. The people who believe there is a shortage must believe it's easier just to go in with a gun and steal it from their neighbor. I will will grant that it is more profitable for our present rulers to do things this way. But real, actual shortage? Nah!
Unless the traffic is going through a good VPN, I would guess that the ISPs could identify all the data going through their circuits if they wish. If they were to start checking for music or other material that somebody wants them to check on, the customers would be rightly pissed off about the spying that would be necessary to pull this off. To do this would only confirm people's suspicion that they have no privacy, and that could encourage wide spread encryption use. And the arms race would continue unabated back and forth like a Tom and Jerry cartoon.(the good pre-war and wartime ones. After that, they sucked.) We should maintain the same freedoms we have for the phone, and insure that the ISP is treated and acts as the pipe(in both directions), nothing else. If the law is being broken, call a cop. Go through channels. The procedure is pretty well spelled out. If we can't have vigilante justice, we sure shouldn't give to anybody else. The only code of conduct an ISP(or any business) should be held to is that which enforces honesty and adherence to signed contracts. It's up to us to read and understand said contracts before we sign them. I would hope that nobody tolerates ISP restraints on the type of information they can access.
Those are just a few of the things that come immediately to mind, except that maybe I shouldn't run my own server... Emphasis mine
That's right!
all along!
According to the draft, the duo want ISPs and network operators to 'enforce terms of service that prohibit a subscriber from operating a server...
They're trying to stop all uploading! I love that ruse, "Excessive" bandwidth usage is a good sign of infringement. They want the net to be "client-server". They're the server. You're the client. How sweet. They can feed us all the propa...er...information we should need. That they're trying this doesn't bother me at all. It's to be expected. I'm worried that some dummy is out there believing it. It looks like it's back to solitare for me. Heh, screw that! It's back to the beach!
Some countries have traditions of institutionalized graft.
Got news for you. ALL countries have traditions of institutionalized graft. Some are just more affordable to the general public. Others will only occur in the famous "smoke filled room"...out of sight out of mind.
It makes things impersonal and employees are considered assets rather than people.
Actually, I believe employees are written off as expenses. If they were assets, they would have to declare them as such and pay a property tax on them. As it is, they can deduct the money paid out to them, even though they do pay a payroll tax, which I believe is deducted from the employee's check. Which is a neat way of paying you less than what is stated on the contract. Remeber gang, always negociate your net pay.
The chinese will move their factories to the US, Japan, England, and so on! Our starving and uneducated populations will *want* these jobs...
Let's not forget that the very profitable prison industry will become even more so. This can not be overstated. When greed and poverty fail to motivate people, prison will be the only option left. Nine years for the spammers won't be enough. We'll need to lock people up for "failure to maintain gainful employment". Vagrancy laws will get real teeth, and it will "fix" the homeless problem. The American collapse into a police state looks more likely every year, but few are seeing it.
...even ripping each other off.
Nah, just came from the same post house. It gets to where you can tell who made what. Each place has their style, and it becomes easy to recognize.
At $100,000 for 30 seconds, that 2 or 3 adds up. And terrestrial transmitters eat up the most juice when the picture is black. The bean counters rule.
I am a free man!
What riles me is that so many of my "peers", if you can call them that, have done an about-face with regard to technological development. Primarily because they 'got theirs' and don't want an up-and-coming generation to threaten their position on the ladder with new technologies that they themselves don't want to take the time to master or adapt to.
You hit it right on. I've had similar discussions with him and ususally get the usual "non-responsive" response. This is what happens when when you deal with people who have entrenched interest in the status quo. They will never see the problems that their system is causing. They are incapable or totally unwilling to understand your main point. They will pick up on some grammatical or spelling error to distract and confuse. Or they may pick up on some slight irrelevency in your comments for the same purpose. All sorts of payments methods have been discussed, the live perforance one being the fairest, but he, and others like him refuse to see it and continues to whine that we don't want to pay artists at all. This is very common amongst the drones. They have to spread the FUD to keep the public in their camp.
I don't know what's scarier: That he'd say something like that, or that there's probably a couple hundred million Americans who would nod their heads in "understanding".
I'll make it easy for you. It's the latter...by far. A goon shooting off his mouth is mostly harmless. One person is easy to deal with. His follwers are quite a different story. I don't care about Bush and his buddies. It's the majority that voted for him and re-elected him that are dangerous. The gov't can't take away your freedoms if the voters don't approve. The majority affirmed their approval of the Patriot Act, TSA, etc. in the last election. That is indeed scary. And remember all those students who think that the 1st Amendment goes too far in protecting one's freedom are going to able able to vote soon. I'll bet a repeal is already in the works, just waiting for them.
Blame Congress?? And then re-elect them?? Now I'm confused. What are you saying here? This doesn't make sense. Even the TV weatherman can't get away with being wrong that often and expect to keep their job. Sorry, I can't blame Congress. No siree, bob. We elected them. You know where that puts the ball.
Putting people in prison for trivial offenses(that is what this is. Quit your whining) is definitely good for this business. Who says crime doesn't pay?
Damn you! You beat me to it! Now, all I can say is "I agree!!" and get modded redundant. I guess the submitter isn't a great believer in due process, much less appropriate punishment. Jail for everybody! That way Nike and Walmart can move their factories back to the US and say that their products are American made.
I don't know. Even if the gov't doesn't get involved with a certain enterprise, they will usually use some authority to protect the ones that do from competition. Either way, our tax money is involved...to me anyway. So, instead of protecting an "outsiders" entrenched interests, I would rather use my tax money to become the entrenched interest. I feel like I have more control over an entity that, on paper at least, is required to represent my(yours) interests. And all this continues to lead me to the issue of near universal access. Freedom to travel and communicate uninhibited is too important to leave just to private enterprises or just to gov't.
If you've ever had to stand in line at the post office near christmas time...
Not sure if it's a problem up there, but I doubt you will see shorter lines at the bank on the 15th and last day of every month(payday for most here). Supermarket check out lines aren't always so short either. How about the line at the airport? On the taxiway? at the pump?(ok, it's been a few years...) In truth, I think the post office is amazing that it works at all. Their record is pretty darn good. To me, that says a lot. As far as it being illegal to compete against them, I don't see them checking every FedEx envelope to see what's inside....yet. But here again, that brings up the issue of exclusivity. I understand your point here. I just want a way for us who don't have a lot of resources under our individual control to pool those resources through our gov't to provide real competition and access to these services. Sounds kinda "commie" doesn't it? I'm sorry, but we do have to live with each other, and in reality we do depend on each other. The lone wolf/every man for himself thing won't work here. So let's make the best of it and actually work with each other to make all of our lives as comfortable as possible.
Even the constitution can be indirectly voted down by the voter. Little by little, that's just what they are doing. It's almost easy to amend it. The ultimate power will always be with them. As long as the goals of the gov't jive with those of the voter(public), they can be assured of maintaining their authority for a very long time. If the voter uses the power they have, they will see the desired result. We elect the people who do the appointing. If we don't like their choice, it's up to us to change the "appointer". There may be a "chain of command", but we are the real commanders. If a big enough percentage of voter don't like the appointed judges or other bureaucrats, I'm sure there is a way to remove them fairly quickly. or at the very least, render them harmless. The first step here is to realize that we do have the ultimate power. The second is to pay attention and use it wisely.
Does not your gov't derive its power and authority from the.....public?? You can vote where you are, right? Gettin' my drift? Pickin' up what I'm puttin' down?