I think those who will really profit from this is not movie, tv or music producers, I think it is software companies.........
........Those are the ones that will cash in big from reduced piracy, and I think Microsoft is laughing all the way to the bank when they think about it.
Do you really believe that there are that many companies / individuals out there, that would be forced to buy a genuine copy of said software ?
If not, then that angle is a waste of time for the likes of MS, and their investment in all this DRM development is lost too.
Still, maybe the media will get the hint that piracy actually isn't costing these firms billions in lost revenue at all...
Cutting the cost of the processors from $250/each to $100/each saves you $300 off a $6,000 system.
Well just ran that through Dell's site, and you must have some beastie discounts !
The basic machine (with dual processors) is priced at $5641, but note, the processors are not dual core. To upgrade to 2 dual core cpus costs $1800 extra.
Hardly 8% (actually around 24%) and definately not $250/each:p
I didn't RTFA, and I don't have to. This guy is regurgitating the same old crap and FUD to a selected audience of middle managers and pseudo-technophiles, whose only interest is in spreading the latest gossip at the next board meeting.
Why I use open source has nothing to do with levels of support, number of bugs, percieved speed compared to windows, etc. I believe in free speech, and I liken programming to speech, hence it should be free (as in speech). The only way it can be free in that way is to have the code open for the rest of us to have a look, and change if neccessary. I don't give a flying sheep about *nix "trying to take over the desktop". It works for me, and I prefer it to windows, mainly because I can make it do what I want, without resorting to buying third party software for stupidly insignificant functions. I hope linux doesn't become the predominant desktop for pc users, because all the "no sense - no feeling" users will expect everything done for them, and that is directly at odds with the idea of a *nix OS.
Let's face it, most of the/. community are, if not actual scientists, scientifically minded. We are the top 5% intellectually, and we like to tinker. If there are others out there who like the idea of tinkering with the OS, then they will learn it for themselves. Remember, you can lead a horse to water, but you can't make it drink.
As long as they (govt.) don't legislate "free" software out of existence, then I'm happy to be in the minority.
There is allegedly at least a 50% discount for the ebook as against the printed version, although the price of $22.50 means there is a nad less than a 50% discount from the full $44.99.
I guess publishers don't have to know maths, or they are just tight. That whole half cent makes their statement a lie..
When I tried to play a track, I got the following -
U.S. Only
We're sorry. We have detected that you are outside of the United States. This service is currently only available to residents within the United States.
Pity, as I am running FF 1.5 on FC3, and it would have been a nice test. The Realplayer plugin has always worked fine in firefox, so I was hoping it would be ok.
So, Brown's been doing popular things wherever possible. He was very big on the whole debt-cancellation move during the summer, for instance. He's trying to look as good as possible to voters. He's not likely to endorse law changes along the lines of 'hey, people I'd like to have vote for me at the next election: you're not allowed to copy CDs to your iPods!'
And while we are all chatting about this subject, the European Parliament are about to pass draconian anti-privacy laws against all forms of electronic communications.
While these laws have been mooted for some time, it seems that 13 December 2005 is the crunch date, and the UK are pushing for it !
From the FFII newsletter -
PRESS RELEASE FFII -- [ Europe / ICT / Information Society ]
EU introducing "Big Brother" anti-privacy law, warns FFII
5 December 2005 (Brussels, Belgium) The EU is passing a "Big Brother"
law to track every electronic communication, warns the FFII, an
international information rights group based in Munich.
"Imagine a world in which the state follows everything you do. A
world where computers watch every step you make. A world in which
privacy is dead and the machines can track down every dissident in
minutes. A world ruled by unelected agencies, working hand-in-hand
with powerful commercial interests. A world in which citizens have no
rights except to consume. Science fiction? The Age of the Machines?
No, this is Europe, coming to you in 2006."
So warns Pieter Hintjens, president of the FFII. He says, "the EU is
about to pass a directive to track every communication you make. This
law makes the old Soviet spy states look like amateurs."
He continues "This law goes against our European traditions of civil
liberty. It appears to break Article 8 of the European Convention on
Human Rights. It will destroy small ISPs and raise prices. To
enforce it, the EU will have to shut or monitor every cybercafe, web
mail access, and wifi hotspot. Such a regime would be more
authoritarian even than China. Even the US, after 9/11, does not have
such oppressive laws. The EU does not need this law: it is a bad law,
pushed through without respect for the democratic process."
Erik Josefsson of the FFII says: "We are entering into an era of 'I
don't have time' legislation. With the expanded competence of the
Commission (see consequences of the ECJ Judgement September 13, case
c-176/03 Commission v. Council), the underarmed and weakened
Parliament stands no chance to do its job properly. The 'sausage
machine' is far too easy to abuse."
The Big Brother "data retention directive" makes Internet and
telephony providers record "communications traffic data" for up to
several years. These huge amounts of detailed personal data can be
easily leaked, stolen, and abused. The forces - mainly the UK
government - pushing the Big Brother law claim it will prevent
terrorism. The FFII does not accept this simplistic argument. The
real targets, it appears, are ordinary citizens, going about their
daily business.
The FFII president points out, "almost everyone carries a mobile
phone. With this law, your mobile phone and web browser becomes Big
Brother's way of watching you. You will never be alone again. If you
do not like this idea, contact your MEP today, urgently, and explain
why it worries you. On 13 December 2005, personal privacy becomes
history."
Let Guido remind you of the nomination criteria: a story has to be pinched from an original blog source, either verbatim or in essence, and no credit / payment given to the original source. This qualifies as plagiarism.
It also qualifies as copyright violation. This is PRECICELY what copyright is for.
Under the Berne convention and laws implementing it, such postings are born copyrighted, notice or no. Verbatim lifting of the entire text, or the bulk of it, is not fair use.
And while a net posting is intended to be read, it's intended to be read on the original site and in its original context. Posting may imply consent for the copying necessary for viewing, network cacheing, linking, and probably indexing and archiving. But it doesn't imply permission to copy it into a commercial (or even non-commercial) news medium without either payment or credit.
When the intent is just to get the news out and such copying would thus be welcomed, the author can explicitly waive his rights or grant additional permissions under stated terms by a footnote license or declaration. (Indeed, such grants are common - Public Domain, open document, quote-with-credit, etc.) In the absense of such a grant, copyright applies full force.
Such an author may receive only small or intangible benefit from his posting in its original place. Such benefits might be reputation, increased public influence, or in increase in traffic to a web site driving advertising revenue or advancing some other purpose of the site. But that doesn't mean copying his material does little damage. If the item is newsworthy and sufficiently well-formed for publication, it is as potentially saleable to news outlets as similar output from a person who makes his living as a reporter. This revenue is denied the author if the publisher simply copies the text without payment - or a reporter passes it off as his own work, receiving his paycheck while the author gets nothing.
Under copyright it is the author's right to demand whatever payment he wants and refuse permission unless agreement is reached. And if a publisher copies his work without permission, it is his right to sue for the damages - including the price he might have reasonably negotiated - and for a statutory minimum if he can't prove a higher amount is due.
Lots of people have been taking this very seriously, well media studies students are taking this seriously.
I should hope the publishers are taking this seriously, too. They're the ones with their necks on the legal block. Every winner of this award (and every nominee) is a potential loser of a big lawsuit. And if the first one isn't open-and-shut, once it's one the rest will be.
The irony, of course, is that it's the same media corporations that make such a screech about "piracy" of their entertainment content that operate the publications where this infringement is taking place. If they don't want to be hoist on their own petard they need to do some serious housecleaning among their own operations.
= = = = =
And before the peanut gallery opens up with some snide comments claiming hypocracy on the part of slashdot posters, let me point out a few things:
1) I'm not stating a personal opinion about what's RIGHT in the above. I'm just pointing out my understanding of the CURRENT LAW. (Note: IANAL.)
2) The posters on this forum, and the members of movements commonly associated with it, are individuals with varying opinions. And there are multiple groups with differing consensus opinions hanging out here as well. Different posters with different opinions do not make the forum hypocritical.
3) "Intellectual Property" (government limitations on ideas, their expression, and their use) is not a unified all-or-nothing issue. There are a host of component parts. (Examples: Copyright versus patent. Length of protection. Extent of protection (what constitutes "fair use"). What is covered (software, "look-and-feel", public performance, N-note-sequences, .
I've witnessed a gang of kids being herded in to a Police van after being arrested for dropping concrete blocks on to a busy motorway. You've never seen a more angry bunch; they were livid that the Police had put an end to their little game. Their complaints alternated between "You can't do this!" and, comically, "I've got rights!". Sadly, despite attempting to murder a number of motorists, they were probably released with a caution.
Exactly !
And there are moves afoot to raise the age of criminal responsibilty too ! I can't imagine anyone over the age of 10 not knowing that chucking a rock through a shop window is wrong, likewise murder, theft etc etc.(ie criminal offences)
Yet, of course they do have rights and so we have to treat them like children even though they disrespect the law and us simultaneously.
There are still attempts to ban parents smacking their children. Firstly, obviously I wouldn't condone beating a child to any degree. That's why it's called smacking. Used judiciously at a fairly early age (say 5 or 6 ), it can prevent a lot of later problems. Also, because the kids are young, (a) you don't have to smack very hard at all, it's all mental effect and (b) the child associates the action and punishment in a much simpler way, no simmering anger to take out on someone else later.
An example I would give for useful smacking is when for instance, you find the kid has partially worked loose an electrical plug and is sticking things in the gap. A surprise attack (laugh, it's funny) and quick smack would scare them silly, and that's what I would want. Together with an explanation of why you did it of course.
Being young and impressionable, hopefully the kid would associate electrical sockets with being hurt and very surprised. A lot less painful than doing it the hard way, and when they are old enough to understand why its a dumb thing to do, they will have forgotten the original smack anyway. Seems a sensible approach to me.
Basically, if the kid does something that scares me silly, and I see it happening, then they should learn right then, while they are doing it. Giving them a telling off later, just spreads the bad feelings around when it's no longer fresh and relevant. They should only be in fear of punishment if they are doing something wrong, not their whole lives.
Which brings me back to the original point. Instead of fucking with peoples hearing, why don't they just call the police. The police can get the names and addresses of the kids involved, phone the parents, and inform them that they can collect their kids from the police station. Few kids will be able to live with that for too long. Of course we are talking about the UK where the police are far too busy to actually attend such a small incident, even though we pay them to do exactly that.
>>Actually, GOTO is my last name and does not mean "go to." (Nor is it pronounced "go to"; the correct pronunciation of my name is more like "goat-toe.")
...it could be a virus for he human brain. An intelligent alien species could reverse engineer the human brain and try to figure out the right 'buttons' to push to make us engage in various types of behavior. Essentially they'd have to use the fact that the human brain isn't a perfect processing machine. For example there are optical illusions which make us see things that aren't really there at all. Similarly there might be thought illusions that arise the moment we are tricked into thinking about certain things. The 'virus' might look like the most innocuous thing but if it had the right triggers embedded in it then it might make humans perform certain prescribed actions that would look completely irrational to those uninfected.
I recently heard an interview on radio 4 (uk) where some bright sparks are talking about raising the age of criminal responsibility from 7 to either 12 or even 15 !
I think they should raise it to 40. That gives me about 4 months to execute my plan;-)
You'll have to edit out the spaces from the URLs (thanks/. )
It's up to version 0.16.999.019 as of now, but beware of losing any config changes after it has updated. The graphics are cool and fast, even on an onboard agp shared memory setup (64MB).
You can also use gdmflexiserver to jump over to E17 from gnome and back without closing your sessions.
So why is RHEL 3 ES running the 2.4.21-37.EL kernel, as supplied and updated by RH ?
RHEL 4 was released in January 2005 and has a 2.6 kernel. I've been running FC2 and 3 with a 2.6 kernel for around a year longer than that. The stated release schedule for Fedora is 6 months, and the stated release schedule for the RHEL series is 18 months.
Yes they are betas, but the pace is quite slow, as RH want to make sure that all the bugs are gone before they incorporate FC design into the RHEL line. Some stuff never makes it.
In my case I never install / upgrade FC until the newsest one is anounced. Then I upgrade to the secondmost recent - i.e. now I'm running FC3, 5 is announced, so its time to make use of the fc4 dvd I've been testing with and yum it up to date.
Re:So standard electrical plugs destroyed capitali
on
The Demise of IP?
·
· Score: 1
Standards are useful; but yes, they do also stifle creativity and invention.
How does your example of electronic equipment show the stifling of creativity and invention ?
Nothing is stopping you or anyone else from working on getting the standards changed to include your ideas. Besides which, the standards for electrical outlets slightly pre-date the electronics revolution.
By your argument, the electronics filling our homes these days wouldn't have been created because the electrical outlets fed the wrong type of power !
lol
Re:Throw your Microsoft boxes into Boston Harbor!
on
The Demise of IP?
·
· Score: 1
If you walk along the cliff tops with your eyes closed and you fall off, is it the cliffs fault ?
Of course not, sometimes you have to accept responsibility for things that happen to you. So all your examples can be twisted the other way.
I mean, what does the word "provocative" mean ? Why were locks invented ?
Your last comment about the american electorate was closer, in that you recognise that you have to actually make a choice and do something about situations you don't like, not just whine about it later when the bad thing has already happened, and you wish you had done something earlier.
Slashdot Mirror
If not, then that angle is a waste of time for the likes of MS, and their investment in all this DRM development is lost too.
Still, maybe the media will get the hint that piracy actually isn't costing these firms billions in lost revenue at all...
The basic machine (with dual processors) is priced at $5641, but note, the processors are not dual core. To upgrade to 2 dual core cpus costs $1800 extra.
Hardly 8% (actually around 24%) and definately not $250/each :p
sorry
Actually, that's quite an intelligent design ...
Why I use open source has nothing to do with levels of support, number of bugs, percieved speed compared to windows, etc. I believe in free speech, and I liken programming to speech, hence it should be free (as in speech). The only way it can be free in that way is to have the code open for the rest of us to have a look, and change if neccessary. I don't give a flying sheep about *nix "trying to take over the desktop". It works for me, and I prefer it to windows, mainly because I can make it do what I want, without resorting to buying third party software for stupidly insignificant functions. I hope linux doesn't become the predominant desktop for pc users, because all the "no sense - no feeling" users will expect everything done for them, and that is directly at odds with the idea of a *nix OS.
Let's face it, most of the /. community are, if not actual scientists, scientifically minded. We are the top 5% intellectually, and we like to tinker. If there are others out there who like the idea of tinkering with the OS, then they will learn it for themselves. Remember, you can lead a horse to water, but you can't make it drink.
As long as they (govt.) don't legislate "free" software out of existence, then I'm happy to be in the minority.
I would say that windows has the first problem too, for example, not handling line breaks without CR and LF when dealing with text from a unix box.
There is allegedly at least a 50% discount for the ebook as against the printed version, although the price of $22.50 means there is a nad less than a 50% discount from the full $44.99.
I guess publishers don't have to know maths, or they are just tight. That whole half cent makes their statement a lie..
Maybe they meant up to 50% discount.
sorry, that was a bit too much, even if it was incisive. Worth sixpence though.
I don't know where he gets the nerve, really, and to crown it all, there is going to be a dentin his finances.
And there ya go... money really is the root of all evil.
Sorry, there is no way I can get periodontal membrane to fit here.
U.S. Only
We're sorry. We have detected that you are outside of the United States. This service is currently only available to residents within the United States.
Pity, as I am running FF 1.5 on FC3, and it would have been a nice test. The Realplayer plugin has always worked fine in firefox, so I was hoping it would be ok.
And while we are all chatting about this subject, the European Parliament are about to pass draconian anti-privacy laws against all forms of electronic communications.
While these laws have been mooted for some time, it seems that 13 December 2005 is the crunch date, and the UK are pushing for it !
From the FFII newsletter -
irrelevant
It also qualifies as copyright violation. This is PRECICELY what copyright is for.
Under the Berne convention and laws implementing it, such postings are born copyrighted, notice or no. Verbatim lifting of the entire text, or the bulk of it, is not fair use.
And while a net posting is intended to be read, it's intended to be read on the original site and in its original context. Posting may imply consent for the copying necessary for viewing, network cacheing, linking, and probably indexing and archiving. But it doesn't imply permission to copy it into a commercial (or even non-commercial) news medium without either payment or credit.
When the intent is just to get the news out and such copying would thus be welcomed, the author can explicitly waive his rights or grant additional permissions under stated terms by a footnote license or declaration. (Indeed, such grants are common - Public Domain, open document, quote-with-credit, etc.) In the absense of such a grant, copyright applies full force.
Such an author may receive only small or intangible benefit from his posting in its original place. Such benefits might be reputation, increased public influence, or in increase in traffic to a web site driving advertising revenue or advancing some other purpose of the site. But that doesn't mean copying his material does little damage. If the item is newsworthy and sufficiently well-formed for publication, it is as potentially saleable to news outlets as similar output from a person who makes his living as a reporter. This revenue is denied the author if the publisher simply copies the text without payment - or a reporter passes it off as his own work, receiving his paycheck while the author gets nothing.
Under copyright it is the author's right to demand whatever payment he wants and refuse permission unless agreement is reached. And if a publisher copies his work without permission, it is his right to sue for the damages - including the price he might have reasonably negotiated - and for a statutory minimum if he can't prove a higher amount is due.
Lots of people have been taking this very seriously, well media studies students are taking this seriously.
I should hope the publishers are taking this seriously, too. They're the ones with their necks on the legal block. Every winner of this award (and every nominee) is a potential loser of a big lawsuit. And if the first one isn't open-and-shut, once it's one the rest will be.
The irony, of course, is that it's the same media corporations that make such a screech about "piracy" of their entertainment content that operate the publications where this infringement is taking place. If they don't want to be hoist on their own petard they need to do some serious housecleaning among their own operations.
= = = = =
And before the peanut gallery opens up with some snide comments claiming hypocracy on the part of slashdot posters, let me point out a few things:
1) I'm not stating a personal opinion about what's RIGHT in the above. I'm just pointing out my understanding of the CURRENT LAW. (Note: IANAL.)
2) The posters on this forum, and the members of movements commonly associated with it, are individuals with varying opinions. And there are multiple groups with differing consensus opinions hanging out here as well. Different posters with different opinions do not make the forum hypocritical.
3) "Intellectual Property" (government limitations on ideas, their expression, and their use) is not a unified all-or-nothing issue. There are a host of component parts. (Examples: Copyright versus patent. Length of protection. Extent of protection (what constitutes "fair use"). What is covered (software, "look-and-feel", public performance, N-note-sequences, .
The IOC will have to provide the hardware is all.
As usual, "support" means "sponsorship" and "take all the blame when it goes tits up".
It has always seemed to me that burning anything gives you a short term gain and a long term problem.
I don't claim to have the answer, but if it ain't working and we don't have an alternative, surely we must stop doing what we are doing ?
Beware... in old Korea quantum porn fucks YOU !
And there are moves afoot to raise the age of criminal responsibilty too ! I can't imagine anyone over the age of 10 not knowing that chucking a rock through a shop window is wrong, likewise murder, theft etc etc.(ie criminal offences)
Yet, of course they do have rights and so we have to treat them like children even though they disrespect the law and us simultaneously.
There are still attempts to ban parents smacking their children. Firstly, obviously I wouldn't condone beating a child to any degree. That's why it's called smacking. Used judiciously at a fairly early age (say 5 or 6 ), it can prevent a lot of later problems. Also, because the kids are young, (a) you don't have to smack very hard at all, it's all mental effect and (b) the child associates the action and punishment in a much simpler way, no simmering anger to take out on someone else later.
An example I would give for useful smacking is when for instance, you find the kid has partially worked loose an electrical plug and is sticking things in the gap. A surprise attack (laugh, it's funny) and quick smack would scare them silly, and that's what I would want. Together with an explanation of why you did it of course.
Being young and impressionable, hopefully the kid would associate electrical sockets with being hurt and very surprised. A lot less painful than doing it the hard way, and when they are old enough to understand why its a dumb thing to do, they will have forgotten the original smack anyway. Seems a sensible approach to me.
Basically, if the kid does something that scares me silly, and I see it happening, then they should learn right then, while they are doing it. Giving them a telling off later, just spreads the bad feelings around when it's no longer fresh and relevant. They should only be in fear of punishment if they are doing something wrong, not their whole lives.
Which brings me back to the original point. Instead of fucking with peoples hearing, why don't they just call the police. The police can get the names and addresses of the kids involved, phone the parents, and inform them that they can collect their kids from the police station. Few kids will be able to live with that for too long. Of course we are talking about the UK where the police are far too busy to actually attend such a small incident, even though we pay them to do exactly that.
Doh !
Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.7.12) Gecko/20050920 Firefox/1.0.7
Or has he a chinese ancestor called Goat Tse ?
it's called TV
I think they should raise it to 40. That gives me about 4 months to execute my plan ;-)
Just add the following to /etc/yum.conf
You'll have to edit out the spaces from the URLs (thanksIt's up to version 0.16.999.019 as of now, but beware of losing any config changes after it has updated. The graphics are cool and fast, even on an onboard agp shared memory setup (64MB).
You can also use gdmflexiserver to jump over to E17 from gnome and back without closing your sessions.
RHEL 4 was released in January 2005 and has a 2.6 kernel. I've been running FC2 and 3 with a 2.6 kernel for around a year longer than that.
The stated release schedule for Fedora is 6 months, and the stated release schedule for the RHEL series is 18 months.
Yes they are betas, but the pace is quite slow, as RH want to make sure that all the bugs are gone before they incorporate FC design into the RHEL line. Some stuff never makes it.
In my case I never install / upgrade FC until the newsest one is anounced. Then I upgrade to the secondmost recent - i.e. now I'm running FC3, 5 is announced, so its time to make use of the fc4 dvd I've been testing with and yum it up to date.
Nothing is stopping you or anyone else from working on getting the standards changed to include your ideas. Besides which, the standards for electrical outlets slightly pre-date the electronics revolution.
By your argument, the electronics filling our homes these days wouldn't have been created because the electrical outlets fed the wrong type of power !
lol
Of course not, sometimes you have to accept responsibility for things that happen to you. So all your examples can be twisted the other way.
I mean, what does the word "provocative" mean ? Why were locks invented ?
Your last comment about the american electorate was closer, in that you recognise that you have to actually make a choice and do something about situations you don't like, not just whine about it later when the bad thing has already happened, and you wish you had done something earlier.