Hmm. It looks like you're being pretty selective applying the "Them's the breaks, pal!" argument. You've got a lot of sympathy for some working stiffs but not a whole lot for others...that is, the guys who actually "slave away" writing code or producing music get no protection, but the people who want their products for free do. That's not really a tenable situation.
I'm still waiting for that sort of thing to take off.
The only successful internet businesses I see are aggregators or resellers (e.g. Thinkgeek, Amazon, Threadless). I have heard a few wild success stories, but only a few. So exactly how slowly is the concept of the firm eroding? Are we talking glacial rates, or plate tectonics, here?
Also, your final point had nothing to do with the rest of your post. The rebellion thing is pointless. It is perpetual and there is only the illusion that any generation is doing anything significantly different from the one before it. I'm sorry but I just don't buy your "Oh, but we're different!" pitch.
I was reading a talk by the guy who wrote "The World is Flat" where he's going on about how he heard about some retired empty-nest divorced mom in Appalachia who markets handmade shit on etsy, and how she had the "potential" to be a success in business. But, here's the thing. Everything she was making was only as "innovative" as everyone else. She was making handbags, nothing like a new iPod or heart monitor or economic theory. All the important shit happens at huge, well-funded operations now. The concept of the "firm" is only gaining steam--the days of Marie Curie and Thomas Edison are long gone.
Basically it's like all the worst things Marx predicted are coming true.
Sure. But he wasn't "preparing" to share the files in any sense but the same as that a man with a loaded weapon pointed at your head is "preparing" to shoot. His preparation phase was when he ripped the CDs and dumped the files in the shared directory.
Your second point is valid and I'm not arguing it (I think this is the thrust of EFF's argument), quite the contrary. But to equate what this guy did with "thoughtcrime" as if all he did was think about sharing music shows a profound lack of understanding. Anyone espousing such a viewpoint should re-read 1984. I have several copies I can loan out.
Yah, and the sticky part is that, in the spirit of the law, he was committing conspiracy; but I don't think there's a law against "conspiracy to commit copyright infringement."
Of course, the spirit of the relationship between us consumers and the media outlets should be one that includes fair use. If it did then maybe people wouldn't want to dick them over so much.
This isn't the same as "contemplating" a crime. The laws that govern the use of force by, e.g., law enforcement personnel and the military, in most (if not all) nations recognize the idea of "intent." There are clear markers for judging whether or not a reasonable person intends to do something hostile.
If you think all day of how you would like to blow up Congress, then you are guilty of nothing that can or should be prosecutable. However, if you think all day of how you would like to blow up Congress, then acquire explosives and study blueprints to find out how to bring the building down...well, now you are actually on the road to making your thoughts a reality. If you are caught before the bomb goes off, you cannot use "This is thoughtcrime!" as an excuse. This is also why we have laws against "attempted murder" or "attempted rape" on the books.
I can't think of a scheme that would allow watermarking to work without pushing things like encrypted music and video files, proprietary players, things like that.
For instance, if you had a header that explained to the player where in the file the watermark bits were, then bit compare wouldn't help--the file would be unplayable without those bits not only cut out but reassembled into something "good." But unless the standard was open, you're back to just iTunes or something.
So, two things occur to me.
One, as you have pointed out, this is just meaningless bullshit based on the technical aspect. Two, the industry bigwigs behind this decision still plan on foisting the same restrictive, obnoxious controls on the media we purchase. They just rebranded it.
This rant has been repeated a brazilian times since the first generation gap.
"We're the young people! We're here! We're not going anywhere! We're gonna be in charge and there's nothing you can do about it!"
Well, ok, but in about 20 years you're going to be the old people, and then there will be another bunch of youngsters telling you the same shit, staying out late, enjoying their sex lives, listening to music you can't stand, etc. And, around the time that they are getting the same treatment from the generation after that--around the time your reproductive parts have dried up and blown away and you can't control your bowels nor remember your name--you will die, probably around the time all of your colleagues from work do.
And then the same thing will happen to everyone: we will all wind up returned to our basic components and recycled by the planet.
So honestly, neither the rant of the youth against the old nor the oppression of the old against the young really interests me at all. All jobs suck. Everyone gets old and dies. I highly doubt either youth nor work is supposed to give us enjoyment. Either there's something more, in which case this is all pointless, or else not, in which case this is all pointless.
No, but y'know where I'd work if I was a scumbag who wanted to go through random hard drives foraging for identity-theft material? A charity that refurbed computers, that's where.
What I do in my private, off-time that they are not paying for is absolutely none of their business
My company pays for most of my health insurance. If my health insurance cost varies with my health, which varies with my personal habits, then they would have the right to at least influence my personal habits. For one employee this would not be a whole lot of money, but my company employs a few hundred thousand individuals. It adds up.
I don't want them to concern themselves with my person habits, so I think the "when they are paying for my time they may tell me what to do" argument is not a good fit. It just means "They can buy the right to violate my privacy," and privacy should generally be inviolable.
Yes. But, they could have then defrauded the charity in question (I wonder how good their security is? If they are like most nonprofits, they get what they pay for, which is very little), effectively using it to launder the stolen money.
I do security consulting and the 4 points you listed are applicable there as well:
1. For every thousand guys with a GIAC Cert, there's one guy who just has a Security+ but stands out because he minored in Poli Sci or something. The guys with the Certs says "What? That doesn't matter to our job! It's just a soft science!" but it impresses hiring managers and HR types, and having some depth to your schooling always helps.
2. For every 1000 guys with a CISSP there's one who stands out because he speaks Farsi or something.
3. Working abroad means you are self-sufficient enough to navigate an alien culture. Means you can act without adult supervision.
4. Having a variety of experiences is huge. When you're an undergrad you should just accept that you're going to eat ramen for four years and get worked like a rented mule so that you can get a good job when you get done.
Bullshit. I work for one of those vendors. It's a fantasy that the military jumps into our ass when we fail to fix an issue.
They jump into EDS's ass, and EDS flails around ineffectually while the vendors bicker. Eventually a massive and meaningless response, usually involving multiple powerpoints and 200-page word documents (it's a trick--pages 10-200 are "data" in a poorly formatted table) puts the slumbering giant back to sleep.
Of the (relatively minor) segment of the population who can discern the difference in audio or video, there is an even smaller portion for whom the difference is worth the extra cost.
So the price will have to come down for people to buy it. If a blu-ray player was only $100 more than a regular DVD player, then I'd already have one. I can easily afford $1000 for a gadget, I just don't want it at that price.
Yes, by this is why cynicism and despair are enemies of democracy as much as corruption. All that has to happen for corrupt governments to remain in power is for people to say "Well, there's nothing that can be done, I'm just going to look out for myself."
Check out the ongoing election process in (e.g.) Morocco. There are tons of encouraging news articles but in the comments everyone says "Eh, our government is corrupt, nothing will change." It becomes a self-fulfilling prophecy.
Hopefully out of China's ~1.3b people there are some with the courage to stand up to widespread corruption. Hopefully we can say the same about America and the rest of the world, too.
You chose one computer to use for playing games, and other people chose a different computer to play games. Somehow this has something to do with their sexual preferences and masculinity...?
Sure, it's the same thing, inasmuch as it's a stupid and reckless act that could get people killed.
However, two points:
1) If millions per day were shining lasers into aircraft cockpits, then it would be hard to enforce that law. If it's just one jackass (or a couple of them) then it's easy. So law enforcement is going to nail them.
2) This was a willful act on the couple's part. Most people tailgate out of carelessness. Malice aforethought = you get the book thrown at you.
When we get so few people tailgating as to make them stand out, and we can demonstrate that they did it on purpose, then we can hose tailgaters. Until then, no.
I get the impression that the demand for the Wii is probably VERY flexible. That is to say, a huge part of the demand is that people think "PS3? $600. Wii? $250." People's perception of Nintendo is that they are the only manufacturer not trying to "gouge" their customers. If they raised the prices they would lose some very valuable street cred.
You are totally right...they should be making money off of the games and accessories, not the console itself. That just makes sense. Needles are cheap...heroin, on the other hand...
If you want to support a network with 100k seats then you don't go to Apple, you go to IBM Global. Even when they sub it out to a cut-rate body shop like EDS, it's still better than Apple.
Apple has some great products. I love the XSAN. I would NEVER deploy the XSAN for any customer. I would rather homebrew a SAN solution, because even if it meant I would lose sleep for the next year, at least the solution would get SOME support.
Ask yourself what kind of stuff you want to tell your grandkids when you're old. Then sign up:P I'm dying to winter down there--just to say I've done it--heck, I'd apply for the janitor job if that's all that was available. They don't seem to have much need for security consultants:\
Slashdot Mirror
Don't you think demonizing your opposition is very illiberal (in the classic sense of the word, not the modern American usage)?
Hmm. It looks like you're being pretty selective applying the "Them's the breaks, pal!" argument. You've got a lot of sympathy for some working stiffs but not a whole lot for others...that is, the guys who actually "slave away" writing code or producing music get no protection, but the people who want their products for free do. That's not really a tenable situation.
I think you need to re-read my post.
It says that he was preparing to share in the same way that a man with a gun pointed at your head is preparing to shoot. Read it again.
I'm still waiting for that sort of thing to take off.
The only successful internet businesses I see are aggregators or resellers (e.g. Thinkgeek, Amazon, Threadless). I have heard a few wild success stories, but only a few. So exactly how slowly is the concept of the firm eroding? Are we talking glacial rates, or plate tectonics, here?
Also, your final point had nothing to do with the rest of your post. The rebellion thing is pointless. It is perpetual and there is only the illusion that any generation is doing anything significantly different from the one before it. I'm sorry but I just don't buy your "Oh, but we're different!" pitch.
I was reading a talk by the guy who wrote "The World is Flat" where he's going on about how he heard about some retired empty-nest divorced mom in Appalachia who markets handmade shit on etsy, and how she had the "potential" to be a success in business. But, here's the thing. Everything she was making was only as "innovative" as everyone else. She was making handbags, nothing like a new iPod or heart monitor or economic theory. All the important shit happens at huge, well-funded operations now. The concept of the "firm" is only gaining steam--the days of Marie Curie and Thomas Edison are long gone.
Basically it's like all the worst things Marx predicted are coming true.
Sure. But he wasn't "preparing" to share the files in any sense but the same as that a man with a loaded weapon pointed at your head is "preparing" to shoot. His preparation phase was when he ripped the CDs and dumped the files in the shared directory.
Your second point is valid and I'm not arguing it (I think this is the thrust of EFF's argument), quite the contrary. But to equate what this guy did with "thoughtcrime" as if all he did was think about sharing music shows a profound lack of understanding. Anyone espousing such a viewpoint should re-read 1984. I have several copies I can loan out.
Yah, and the sticky part is that, in the spirit of the law, he was committing conspiracy; but I don't think there's a law against "conspiracy to commit copyright infringement."
Of course, the spirit of the relationship between us consumers and the media outlets should be one that includes fair use. If it did then maybe people wouldn't want to dick them over so much.
This isn't the same as "contemplating" a crime.
The laws that govern the use of force by, e.g., law enforcement personnel and the military, in most (if not all) nations recognize the idea of "intent." There are clear markers for judging whether or not a reasonable person intends to do something hostile.
If you think all day of how you would like to blow up Congress, then you are guilty of nothing that can or should be prosecutable.
However, if you think all day of how you would like to blow up Congress, then acquire explosives and study blueprints to find out how to bring the building down...well, now you are actually on the road to making your thoughts a reality. If you are caught before the bomb goes off, you cannot use "This is thoughtcrime!" as an excuse. This is also why we have laws against "attempted murder" or "attempted rape" on the books.
I can't think of a scheme that would allow watermarking to work without pushing things like encrypted music and video files, proprietary players, things like that.
For instance, if you had a header that explained to the player where in the file the watermark bits were, then bit compare wouldn't help--the file would be unplayable without those bits not only cut out but reassembled into something "good." But unless the standard was open, you're back to just iTunes or something.
So, two things occur to me.
One, as you have pointed out, this is just meaningless bullshit based on the technical aspect.
Two, the industry bigwigs behind this decision still plan on foisting the same restrictive, obnoxious controls on the media we purchase. They just rebranded it.
This rant has been repeated a brazilian times since the first generation gap.
"We're the young people! We're here! We're not going anywhere! We're gonna be in charge and there's nothing you can do about it!"
Well, ok, but in about 20 years you're going to be the old people, and then there will be another bunch of youngsters telling you the same shit, staying out late, enjoying their sex lives, listening to music you can't stand, etc. And, around the time that they are getting the same treatment from the generation after that--around the time your reproductive parts have dried up and blown away and you can't control your bowels nor remember your name--you will die, probably around the time all of your colleagues from work do.
And then the same thing will happen to everyone: we will all wind up returned to our basic components and recycled by the planet.
So honestly, neither the rant of the youth against the old nor the oppression of the old against the young really interests me at all. All jobs suck. Everyone gets old and dies. I highly doubt either youth nor work is supposed to give us enjoyment. Either there's something more, in which case this is all pointless, or else not, in which case this is all pointless.
No, but y'know where I'd work if I was a scumbag who wanted to go through random hard drives foraging for identity-theft material? A charity that refurbed computers, that's where.
That, or Homeland Security. One of the two.
What I do in my private, off-time that they are not paying for is absolutely none of their business
My company pays for most of my health insurance. If my health insurance cost varies with my health, which varies with my personal habits, then they would have the right to at least influence my personal habits. For one employee this would not be a whole lot of money, but my company employs a few hundred thousand individuals. It adds up.
I don't want them to concern themselves with my person habits, so I think the "when they are paying for my time they may tell me what to do" argument is not a good fit. It just means "They can buy the right to violate my privacy," and privacy should generally be inviolable.
Not well understood? I wouldn't say so. This and similar reactions are covered in (among other works) Goodwin's How the Leopard Changed Its Spots.
I mean, is anything really perfectly understood? Probably not, but I think these are well-characterized.
Yes. But, they could have then defrauded the charity in question (I wonder how good their security is? If they are like most nonprofits, they get what they pay for, which is very little), effectively using it to launder the stolen money.
Excellent post.
I do security consulting and the 4 points you listed are applicable there as well:
1. For every thousand guys with a GIAC Cert, there's one guy who just has a Security+ but stands out because he minored in Poli Sci or something. The guys with the Certs says "What? That doesn't matter to our job! It's just a soft science!" but it impresses hiring managers and HR types, and having some depth to your schooling always helps.
2. For every 1000 guys with a CISSP there's one who stands out because he speaks Farsi or something.
3. Working abroad means you are self-sufficient enough to navigate an alien culture. Means you can act without adult supervision.
4. Having a variety of experiences is huge. When you're an undergrad you should just accept that you're going to eat ramen for four years and get worked like a rented mule so that you can get a good job when you get done.
Yah, but it depends on the criticality of the system.
I know some SPAWAR guys who work on GCCS. Something breaks, they're on the next plane. This is really not the case with any IT21 system.
In fact, I would suggest that there is such a radical difference between these kinds of systems that they don't even belong in the same conversation.
Bullshit. I work for one of those vendors. It's a fantasy that the military jumps into our ass when we fail to fix an issue.
They jump into EDS's ass, and EDS flails around ineffectually while the vendors bicker. Eventually a massive and meaningless response, usually involving multiple powerpoints and 200-page word documents (it's a trick--pages 10-200 are "data" in a poorly formatted table) puts the slumbering giant back to sleep.
For this, I get a bonus.
There is a word for this: capitalism.
Of the (relatively minor) segment of the population who can discern the difference in audio or video, there is an even smaller portion for whom the difference is worth the extra cost.
So the price will have to come down for people to buy it. If a blu-ray player was only $100 more than a regular DVD player, then I'd already have one. I can easily afford $1000 for a gadget, I just don't want it at that price.
Yes, by this is why cynicism and despair are enemies of democracy as much as corruption. All that has to happen for corrupt governments to remain in power is for people to say "Well, there's nothing that can be done, I'm just going to look out for myself."
Check out the ongoing election process in (e.g.) Morocco. There are tons of encouraging news articles but in the comments everyone says "Eh, our government is corrupt, nothing will change." It becomes a self-fulfilling prophecy.
Hopefully out of China's ~1.3b people there are some with the courage to stand up to widespread corruption. Hopefully we can say the same about America and the rest of the world, too.
I actually like XM as an alternative to terrestrial ClearChannel stations.
You chose one computer to use for playing games, and other people chose a different computer to play games. Somehow this has something to do with their sexual preferences and masculinity...?
Are you sure you don't own a PS3?
Sure, it's the same thing, inasmuch as it's a stupid and reckless act that could get people killed.
However, two points:
1) If millions per day were shining lasers into aircraft cockpits, then it would be hard to enforce that law. If it's just one jackass (or a couple of them) then it's easy. So law enforcement is going to nail them.
2) This was a willful act on the couple's part. Most people tailgate out of carelessness. Malice aforethought = you get the book thrown at you.
When we get so few people tailgating as to make them stand out, and we can demonstrate that they did it on purpose, then we can hose tailgaters. Until then, no.
I get the impression that the demand for the Wii is probably VERY flexible. That is to say, a huge part of the demand is that people think "PS3? $600. Wii? $250." People's perception of Nintendo is that they are the only manufacturer not trying to "gouge" their customers. If they raised the prices they would lose some very valuable street cred.
You are totally right...they should be making money off of the games and accessories, not the console itself. That just makes sense. Needles are cheap...heroin, on the other hand...
Apple's enterprise support is awful.
If you want to support a network with 100k seats then you don't go to Apple, you go to IBM Global. Even when they sub it out to a cut-rate body shop like EDS, it's still better than Apple.
Apple has some great products. I love the XSAN. I would NEVER deploy the XSAN for any customer. I would rather homebrew a SAN solution, because even if it meant I would lose sleep for the next year, at least the solution would get SOME support.
Hey, you might dig this. Quite a few interesting conversations on this topic.
It was linked from Pandagon.
McMurdo Station is always hiring.
:P :\
Ask yourself what kind of stuff you want to tell your grandkids when you're old. Then sign up
I'm dying to winter down there--just to say I've done it--heck, I'd apply for the janitor job if that's all that was available. They don't seem to have much need for security consultants