"... they have to hide the money they are keeping (stealing) from the artists somehow..."
Actually, they'd just be expanding on this buisiness model. Here's an excellent example of how they ALREADY rip off the poor slobs that they convince to sign, written by a music industry insider. http://www.negativland.com/albini.html
"Separation of Church and State is and must remain a solid wall."
The problem here seems to be to many people that the separation clause (and many other constitutional issues and rights) have been interpreted by the judicial system according to whatever the current political/personal biases of the particular judges at the time are, as well as 'legislating by judicial decree' instead of being limited to interpreting the constitution. This effectively negates/pre-empts the legislative branches' powers. This skews the balance between the branches of government, as well as bypassing the process put into place by the founders to alter the constitution. The founders, as far as I've been able to tell, wanted freedom OF religion, not freedom FROM religion. If enough people felt that a change is needed, then passing a constitutional amendment would succeed. That was how the founders designed it. These days though, all that needs to be done is get the judicial branch packed with judges who share a certain philosophy to effectively rewrite the constitution without checks and balances, or the consent of the governed.
Re:It becomes YOUR problem as soon as
on
RFID MasterCard
·
· Score: 1
"Yeah, I'll really tell an underpaid call centre drone when my house will be unoccupied for weeks because I'm out of the country."
No worries, unless airline rates from India have taken an unannounced plunge!
"My cable service allows me 5 IP addresses, they have the right to cut me off after I've hooked up 5 computers with their IP addresses."
Not sure who your provider is, but Comcast apparently does *not* allow more than *one* dynamic IP address per cable modem (Motorola SB4200 here). I received a friendly little note from them about my second computer hooked up thru a hub (I know, I know, use a router, but I was hoping to avoid the cost). I've been using this setup for about a year and a half, have talked to support techs about various problems over that time, they've pinged/otherwise checked my modem/connection remotely in the course of resolving my issues, and I've never had any Comcast people tell me I *couldn't* have another box connected, until now. Here's the e-mail I received a couple days ago. It *does* state in option '3.' that I *am* allowed to use a router/NAT, so apparently they want to charge per dynamic IP assigned.
Dear Comcast High-Speed Internet Customer:
If you are accessing the Internet with more than one device (for example, two computers) simultaneously, please be sure to read this entire letter. It contains important information about changes being made to your Comcast High-Speed Internet account.
We hope you are enjoying your 100% Pure BroadbandTM Comcast High-Speed Internet service. During a recent review we identified what could be a discrepancy in our records for your account. Comcast provides one dynamically assigned IP (Internet Protocol) address for each residential Comcast High-Speed Internet account.
An IP address allows Comcast to recognize your cable modem and provide Internet connectivity. Each computer or device you wish to have connected to the internet requires an external IP address, unless you have a router or the Comcast Home Networking package. Your email address(es) will not be impacted and you are still entitled to receive up to a maximum of seven email addresses for free.
Our records indicate that you may be using more than one dynamic IP address with your Comcast High-Speed Internet account. If you only connect one personal computer to your cable modem at a time, you don't need to take any further action other than adhering to steps 4 a-d listed below.
If you know you are using more than one dynamic IP address by connecting more than one computer or other device to your cable modem simultaneously and want to continue to do so, please call us to discuss a number of options for connecting more than one personal computer or device to the Internet at the same time. If we do not hear from you before May 18, 2004, then, in accordance with our current terms of service and applicable policies, Comcast will remove any additional IP addresses that are not being paid for with your Comcast High-Speed Internet account.
Please choose the appropriate option below depending on what you would like to do. Call 1-888-262-6300 (select menu option #2 for Internet, then option #3 for technical assistance) to:
1. Purchase additional IP address(es) for your Comcast High-Speed Internet account. Please note that if we do not hear from you by May 18, 2004, we will remove any additional IP addresses associated with your account. We are sending you this letter now, well in advance of May 18, 2004, in order to give you ample time to decide what you would like to do.
2. Learn more about Comcast Home Networking, which allows you to connect up to 5 computers or devices to the Internet wirelessly, at speeds even faster than standard Comcast High-Speed Internet - up to 4Mbps/384Kbps.* Visit http://homenetworking.comcast.net to learn more about Comcast Home Networking.
3. Purchase your own router from a retail location and connect it yourself, which will allow you to have multiple devices connected to the Internet, but still use only one IP address. Please note that Comcast does not provide technical support or installation assistance for routers purchased from retail stores.
"I've tried IRC a couple of time but have to admit I don't know how to use it properly. I've tried about five different IRC clients and still am completely lost when I try and do anything. Maybe if I wait long enough it will be replaced by something that doesn't confuse me.:)"
Here's an excellent (IMHO) multi-platform IRC client, with an easy-to-navigate GUI that automates a majority of common '/*' commands to button clicks or pull-down menus, and has decent security. http://www.xchat.org/download/
Here's an excellent quick reference of commands, etc. http://www.newircusers.com/ircmds.html
P.S. I am not associated in any way with either of those posted entities, just a happy user. HTH:)
"If Microsoft ships with those specs as a baseline, 2/3rds of their business customers will say now. If Microsoft demands they switch or lose support, they'll end up switching to Linux (which by then will have made significant inroads as a business desktop OS)."
Unless Microsoft knows something we don't..like congress passing legislation to "protect buisiness, infrastructure, and 'the children'" by mandating TCPA/Longhorn adoption, and lockout of legacy OSs' from internet connectivity (TCPA-enabled Cisco routers, anyone?). If the current trend towards complete ownership of congresscritters by $BIGCORPS remains unabated, this shouldn't be too far a stretch, seeing as how the DMCA would have been thought to be tin-foil-hat material just a few short years ago.
"When is some company that gets screwed by the incompetence of the Patent Office going to sue them for the damages they cause?"
IANAL, and I'm not entirely certain, but I believe that the government must give you permission to sue them. With all the money being given to members of congress by entities with an interest in keeping the current status quo regarding patents intact, why would they have any interest in giving anyone permission to threaten their cash-cow?
As an artist/musician myself, I won't *ever* sign with a label. That being said, I know a number of my fellow musicians/friends who *did* sign with a label, and I can safely say they don't give a rip if you buy the music they created for the labels from Russia, Ethiopia, or simply d/l it from a P2P or steal it off the damned shelf at your local record store! Unless your sales put you near the top, as an artist signed with a label, you make next to *nothing* from sales. You actually make *much* more from the damned T-shirt sales at your shows than you do from record sales if you're signed with a label! Have no fear, if you're worried about how much money you're taking out of the mouths of starving artists/musicians by screwing the RIAA/labels don't. You aren't. The RIAA/labels beat you to that decades ago.
Granted, the DMCA would prevent (legally) decryption of a T.C.-produced/encrypted document, but being able to crack the encryption itself would present large obstacles (think custom-built PCs and a 'cleanroom' (eg: not connected to the net or any other PCs/networks) environment, not to mention the skills/time needed to crack intentionally difficult hashes). T.C. itself would enable the creator/perpetrator to simply send a 'delete' command on that document(s), and every T.C. computer connected to the 'net would happily incinerate all incidences it would *ever* find, as long as the delete command from the document owner still resided on the T.C. authentication servers. It would also be conceivable that a record of each document occurence, along with the PCs'/owners' identity, along with the trail it took to get there could be extracted. That, in my mind, makes the DMCA almost moot in that scenario, in a practical sense, and also scares the beejeezus out of me.
"Actually they are more interested in keeping music off the internet in order to prevent bands from going independant, the internet makes them far less important than they once were."
I have to agree here. The RIAA/MPAA/Big Labels *are* terrified that bands/artists/content producers will, in the near future, simply no longer *need* them. They are simply seeing the writing on the wall, and trying to restrict/halt/regulate *all* content distribution that isn't under industry control now, while they still have enough power/money/control to matter. *That* is why they are willing to alienate large sections of their customer base, use questionable legal practices, borderline vigilantism, and anything else they can dream up. The copyright infringement reasons they give are largely a red herring, to distract from the true goal, making (and keeping) themselves as the *only* practical means of distribution on a wide scale, enabling them to screw both the content producers *and* the content consumers. Sadly, all too many people only see the smoke and mirrors "piracy/theft/copyright infringement" strawmen thrown up to cover the attempt at content distribution monopoly being perpetrated here.
Running an Intel D845EBG2 mobo+P4/Intel chipset with ac97/i810 onboard audio. Mandrake 9.1 and 9.2 (haven't tried Mandrake 10 yet) both found it right away, mixer settings were operable, sound worked/sounded fine (for what it is) from first boot. Maybe you should give Mandrake a try, Dogg. Hope that helps.:)
Speaking as a musician, the track record for stolen instruments has been horrendous at airports. As to why they had no recourse, I believe that he was speaking in a practical sense, with nothing to do with country of origin. First, that the musician(s) had a receipt to prove that instrument was actually in securities' possesion. Second, having the proof/receipt, then having to proceed through the U.S. legal system which is notoriously slow. Highly likely that their visa would expire before a court date would even be set, let alone adjudicated and resolved (and not counting possible appeals). Third, even *if* all these problems were resolved and a favorable ruling obtained, the likely monetary compensation would be only a fraction of the instruments' real worth (think about the difference between what a '59 Fender Stratocaster is really worth on the vintage instrument market as opposed to what the original selling price was in 1959, and which price they would be tempted to pay). If you *are* a musician that *must* use the airlines to transport their instrument(s), I would *highly* recommend seeking out an insurance policy to cover it, and to also, if possible, plan to have an alternate instrument available in case of loss/theft.
And another MLK Jr. quote from my post in the previous/. PlayFair article..
"I became convinced that noncooperation with evil is as much a moral obligation as is cooperation with good. No other person has been more eloquent and passionate in getting this idea across than Henry David Thoreau. As a result of his writings and personal witness, we are the heirs of a legacy of creative protest." - Martin Luther King, Jr, from his Autobiography, Chapter 2.
Not sure how the iTunes/RIAA contract reads, but it may be the case that iTunes must set prices across the entire catalog, and can't set one price for an RIAA track and another for an independent. Just guessing here, as I have never even been to the iTunes site, or own an iPod, or plan to do either one. But it _would_ be keeping in character for the RIAA/Big Labels.
"This is why I support the idea of taking the Internet away from ICANN, and placing it under UN juristiction."
And why in Gods' Name do you think by any stretch of the imagination that the U.N. would do anything to stop things like Gator, when the U.N. is as corrupt as it is? If they're willing to let children in Iraq starve to line their and a horrific dictators' pockets, while simultaneously attacking the U.S.'s sanctions as the reason for those children starving, how is the UN to be trusted with controlling the internet? Would you like to see some brutal communist regime head that UN internet committee like the UN's Human Rights committee is? Better yet, lets' just put China or N. Korea in charge. At least you'd know where you stand. Sheesh!
Heh..maybe Mr. They'll Nuke-Their-Own-People should get himself a bomb shelter, with a self-sealing cap, just to keep the radiation and black-helicopter baddies out. I'd be happy to weld the seal personally:-P.
Unfortunately, lobbying is, these days, a matter of who can pay the most money *cough/bribes and payoffs/cough*. The politicians have become so corrupt that "the will of the people" is today a sick joke. I don't buy music anymore and that hurts, because I'm a musician and I love music, be it created by me or someone else. Nor will I sign with a big label. I refuse to buy into the game. Neither do I fileshare, steal, pirate, or however you want to define it. The DMCA, however, is an unjust law brought about by corruption, as is what has happened to copyright. Many people earlier in U.S. history also broke unjust laws passed by the state, such as sitting at the front of the bus, or drinking from the wrong water fountain if you weren't the right skin color. Mugging someone, and breaking an unjust, corrupt law are not equivalent. As a matter of fact, breaking an unjust, corrupt law could be argued to be the duty of a good citizen when the state refuses to address the wrong done.
"I became convinced that noncooperation with evil is as much a moral obligation as is cooperation with good. No other person has been more eloquent and passionate in getting this idea across than Henry David Thoreau. As a result of his writings and personal witness, we are the heirs of a legacy of creative protest." - Martin Luther King, Jr, from his Autobiography, Chapter 2.
I agree with much of your post, very thoughtful, with these exceptions. (I used to work for Harris Semiconductor Gov. Systems Div. in the late-'70s, and have had some experience w/ military freq.-hopping, jamming, and spread-spectrum communications equipment.)
"Frequency hopping radios are much harder to detect, nevermind jam. "
True for detection/reception, but not jamming, if the jammer is a simple brute-force wide-band (say, 1-1000 Mhz) RF noise generator. Caveat here being the wider the range, the more powerful a jammers' output amp needs to be to generate enough signal strength across its' operational bandwidth to be useful, so there are practical limits.
"I don't think that taking down their radios is going to paralize them in small actions, but in large coordinated actions, such as stopping a hostage situation or a 9/11 incident it can paralize the forces"
I disagree here. In a tactical situation, such as a house/building entry/raid, not being able to communicate to your partner(s) coming in the back door that a/some bad guy(s) is/are waiting to blow his head off is a serious problem. Same with traffic stops and hot pursuits. If a criminal can prevent the officer from radioing in a plate #/vehicle description the officer and the criminal are suddenly on an even field, aside from the officers' better training, which may not always be the case (criminals who are former military/law enforcement, or terrorists with guerilla methods/tactics training).
I've been waiting to hear about a 21st-century drug dealer using jamming technology to block law-enforcement communications. Heck, with a relatively small investment in parts, just about any one *could* build a broadband RF jammer, and have it remotely controlled, or even activated automatically (say, if a door is kicked in). That could be a nightmare for law enforcement. Imagine, a strike team kicks in the door at a crack house, only to have all their radios become totally unusable, and faced with an adversary that knows this ahead of time and is prepared to take advantage of the confusion resulting. Or, alternatively, a narcotics trafficker or other criminal whose vehicle is equipped w/ a jammer. He gets pulled over, and then attacks the officer, since the officer suddenly has no contact with dispatch or other units. This could be a very _bad_ thing, since the major advantage that law-enforcement has over criminals is the ability to call for help.
Hmm..other than the fact we're talking about 'prettying-up' the OS that's supposed to launch 'Trusted Computing/NGSCB', and that the UI that's under discussion *won't* be in the 'official' release, I wonder if it will be possible to skin the dialog box that will pop up when you attempt an operation not allowed by T.C./NGSCB saying, "I'm sorry, Dave, I can't let you do that."?
I'm running an Nvidia Geforce 2 MX/MX400 64Mb, on MDK 9.2, Intel P4 2.0Ghz 256MbDDR D845EBG2 Intel mobo. My Nvidia driver is NVIDIA-Linux-x86-1.0-5336-pkg1.run. I use mplayer and totem to play DVDs. So far, I've not had any problems as described. I will say I run some PLF (Penguin Liberation Front) packages and libs, not sure if that would have any effect, tho I tend to think not. Not sure *why* I'm not having trouble, but certainly not asking for any:-P, just glad everything works! (Also grateful to PLF for making it possible to actually use what I paid for on the O.S. of my choice.)
I originally chose Debian as my very first linux OS install about 2 years ago. I liked the idea of a comepletely open-source, free OS. Still do. I'm a retired (medical disability) electronics tech, self-taught, except for a high-school vocational electronics class. Worked on everything from guitar amps to avionics systems in private/corporate jets. If it runs on electricity, I've probably had a job either designing it, building it, or fixing it. I'm not a software expert, but I'll put my basic troubleshooting skills and intuitive "feel" for machinery and equipment of any kind up against anyone, so I'm not technically illiterate by any means. I RTFM'ed my butt off, and got through the install. However, after being treated like a retarded child and ridiculed for asking a question that may have been obvious to a long-time Debian user, but wasn't covered well in the docs or man pages, I decided that the Debian community was just too elitist for me. It's sad, because I still think that Debian is technically an excellent distro, but I just refuse to be a party to the attitudes I found in the Debian community, and feel that by using Debian, I would be supporting the continuation of such elitist attitudes. I now use Mandrake and Gentoo, and have started teaching myself to code (still just a babe here, yet) and plan to eventually contribute to the above distros. The difference in attitudes is night-and-day. Debian lost a user, and a potential contributor/developer. The Debian community and developers have the right to conduct themselves and run things any way they want to. I have the right to pass them by. There are simply too many other excellent distros out there, with friendly, helpful people that are happy to share their knowledge and experience with newcomers without any elitism.
Slashdot Mirror
Possibly with an RFID tag in your license plate?
" ... they have to hide the money they are keeping (stealing) from the artists somehow..."
Actually, they'd just be expanding on this buisiness model. Here's an excellent example of how they ALREADY rip off the poor slobs that they convince to sign, written by a music industry insider. http://www.negativland.com/albini.html
"Separation of Church and State is and must remain a solid wall."
The problem here seems to be to many people that the separation clause (and many other constitutional issues and rights) have been interpreted by the judicial system according to whatever the current political/personal biases of the particular judges at the time are, as well as 'legislating by judicial decree' instead of being limited to interpreting the constitution. This effectively negates/pre-empts the legislative branches' powers. This skews the balance between the branches of government, as well as bypassing the process put into place by the founders to alter the constitution. The founders, as far as I've been able to tell, wanted freedom OF religion, not freedom FROM religion. If enough people felt that a change is needed, then passing a constitutional amendment would succeed. That was how the founders designed it. These days though, all that needs to be done is get the judicial branch packed with judges who share a certain philosophy to effectively rewrite the constitution without checks and balances, or the consent of the governed.
"Yeah, I'll really tell an underpaid call centre drone when my house will be unoccupied for weeks because I'm out of the country."
No worries, unless airline rates from India have taken an unannounced plunge!
"My cable service allows me 5 IP addresses, they have the right to cut me off after I've hooked up 5 computers with their IP addresses."
Not sure who your provider is, but Comcast apparently does *not* allow more than *one* dynamic IP address per cable modem (Motorola SB4200 here). I received a friendly little note from them about my second computer hooked up thru a hub (I know, I know, use a router, but I was hoping to avoid the cost). I've been using this setup for about a year and a half, have talked to support techs about various problems over that time, they've pinged/otherwise checked my modem/connection remotely in the course of resolving my issues, and I've never had any Comcast people tell me I *couldn't* have another box connected, until now. Here's the e-mail I received a couple days ago. It *does* state in option '3.' that I *am* allowed to use a router/NAT, so apparently they want to charge per dynamic IP assigned.
Dear Comcast High-Speed Internet Customer:
If you are accessing the Internet with more than one device (for example, two computers) simultaneously, please be sure to read this entire letter. It contains important information about changes being made to your Comcast High-Speed Internet account.
We hope you are enjoying your 100% Pure BroadbandTM Comcast High-Speed Internet service. During a recent review we identified what could be a discrepancy in our records for your account. Comcast provides one dynamically assigned IP (Internet Protocol) address for each residential Comcast High-Speed Internet account.
An IP address allows Comcast to recognize your cable modem and provide Internet connectivity. Each computer or device you wish to have connected to the internet requires an external IP address, unless you have a router or the Comcast Home Networking package. Your email address(es) will not be impacted and you are still entitled to receive up to a maximum of seven email addresses for free.
Our records indicate that you may be using more than one dynamic IP address with your Comcast High-Speed Internet account. If you only connect one personal computer to your cable modem at a time, you don't need to take any further action other than adhering to steps 4 a-d listed below.
If you know you are using more than one dynamic IP address by connecting more than one computer or other device to your cable modem simultaneously and want to continue to do so, please call us to discuss a number of options for connecting more than one personal computer or device to the Internet at the same time. If we do not hear from you before May 18, 2004, then, in accordance with our current terms of service and applicable policies, Comcast will remove any additional IP addresses that are not being paid for with your Comcast High-Speed Internet account.
Please choose the appropriate option below depending on what you would like to do. Call 1-888-262-6300 (select menu option #2 for Internet, then option #3 for technical assistance) to:
1. Purchase additional IP address(es) for your Comcast High-Speed Internet account. Please note that if we do not hear from you by May 18, 2004, we will remove any additional IP addresses associated with your account. We are sending you this letter now, well in advance of May 18, 2004, in order to give you ample time to decide what you would like to do.
2. Learn more about Comcast Home Networking, which allows you to connect up to 5 computers or devices to the Internet wirelessly, at speeds even faster than standard Comcast High-Speed Internet - up to 4Mbps/384Kbps.* Visit http://homenetworking.comcast.net to learn more about Comcast Home Networking.
3. Purchase your own router from a retail location and connect it yourself, which will allow you to have multiple devices connected to the Internet, but still use only one IP address. Please note that Comcast does not provide technical support or installation assistance for routers purchased from retail stores.
OR
4. Only connect one device to you
" Don't believe IRC is evil? Just try logging on with an even remotely female-sounding nick sometime."
:-P
You mean like the thousands of bald, fat, middle-aged men who do?
"I've tried IRC a couple of time but have to admit I don't know how to use it properly. I've tried about five different IRC clients and still am completely lost when I try and do anything. Maybe if I wait long enough it will be replaced by something that doesn't confuse me. :)"
:)
Here's an excellent (IMHO) multi-platform IRC client, with an easy-to-navigate GUI that automates a majority of common '/*' commands to button clicks or pull-down menus, and has decent security. http://www.xchat.org/download/
Here's an excellent quick reference of commands, etc. http://www.newircusers.com/ircmds.html
P.S. I am not associated in any way with either of those posted entities, just a happy user.
HTH
"If Microsoft ships with those specs as a baseline, 2/3rds of their business customers will say now. If Microsoft demands they switch or lose support, they'll end up switching to Linux (which by then will have made significant inroads as a business desktop OS)."
Unless Microsoft knows something we don't..like congress passing legislation to "protect buisiness, infrastructure, and 'the children'" by mandating TCPA/Longhorn adoption, and lockout of legacy OSs' from internet connectivity (TCPA-enabled Cisco routers, anyone?). If the current trend towards complete ownership of congresscritters by $BIGCORPS remains unabated, this shouldn't be too far a stretch, seeing as how the DMCA would have been thought to be tin-foil-hat material just a few short years ago.
"When is some company that gets screwed by the incompetence of the Patent Office going to sue them for the damages they cause?"
IANAL, and I'm not entirely certain, but I believe that the government must give you permission to sue them. With all the money being given to members of congress by entities with an interest in keeping the current status quo regarding patents intact, why would they have any interest in giving anyone permission to threaten their cash-cow?
As an artist/musician myself, I won't *ever* sign with a label. That being said, I know a number of my fellow musicians/friends who *did* sign with a label, and I can safely say they don't give a rip if you buy the music they created for the labels from Russia, Ethiopia, or simply d/l it from a P2P or steal it off the damned shelf at your local record store! Unless your sales put you near the top, as an artist signed with a label, you make next to *nothing* from sales. You actually make *much* more from the damned T-shirt sales at your shows than you do from record sales if you're signed with a label! Have no fear, if you're worried about how much money you're taking out of the mouths of starving artists/musicians by screwing the RIAA/labels don't. You aren't. The RIAA/labels beat you to that decades ago.
Granted, the DMCA would prevent (legally) decryption of a T.C.-produced/encrypted document, but being able to crack the encryption itself would present large obstacles (think custom-built PCs and a 'cleanroom' (eg: not connected to the net or any other PCs/networks) environment, not to mention the skills/time needed to crack intentionally difficult hashes). T.C. itself would enable the creator/perpetrator to simply send a 'delete' command on that document(s), and every T.C. computer connected to the 'net would happily incinerate all incidences it would *ever* find, as long as the delete command from the document owner still resided on the T.C. authentication servers. It would also be conceivable that a record of each document occurence, along with the PCs'/owners' identity, along with the trail it took to get there could be extracted. That, in my mind, makes the DMCA almost moot in that scenario, in a practical sense, and also scares the beejeezus out of me.
"Actually they are more interested in keeping music off the internet in order to prevent bands from going independant, the internet makes them far less important than they once were."
I have to agree here. The RIAA/MPAA/Big Labels *are* terrified that bands/artists/content producers will, in the near future, simply no longer *need* them. They are simply seeing the writing on the wall, and trying to restrict/halt/regulate *all* content distribution that isn't under industry control now, while they still have enough power/money/control to matter. *That* is why they are willing to alienate large sections of their customer base, use questionable legal practices, borderline vigilantism, and anything else they can dream up. The copyright infringement reasons they give are largely a red herring, to distract from the true goal, making (and keeping) themselves as the *only* practical means of distribution on a wide scale, enabling them to screw both the content producers *and* the content consumers. Sadly, all too many people only see the smoke and mirrors "piracy/theft/copyright infringement" strawmen thrown up to cover the attempt at content distribution monopoly being perpetrated here.
Running an Intel D845EBG2 mobo+P4/Intel chipset with ac97/i810 onboard audio. Mandrake 9.1 and 9.2 (haven't tried Mandrake 10 yet) both found it right away, mixer settings were operable, sound worked/sounded fine (for what it is) from first boot. Maybe you should give Mandrake a try, Dogg. Hope that helps. :)
Speaking as a musician, the track record for stolen instruments has been horrendous at airports. As to why they had no recourse, I believe that he was speaking in a practical sense, with nothing to do with country of origin. First, that the musician(s) had a receipt to prove that instrument was actually in securities' possesion. Second, having the proof/receipt, then having to proceed through the U.S. legal system which is notoriously slow. Highly likely that their visa would expire before a court date would even be set, let alone adjudicated and resolved (and not counting possible appeals). Third, even *if* all these problems were resolved and a favorable ruling obtained, the likely monetary compensation would be only a fraction of the instruments' real worth (think about the difference between what a '59 Fender Stratocaster is really worth on the vintage instrument market as opposed to what the original selling price was in 1959, and which price they would be tempted to pay). If you *are* a musician that *must* use the airlines to transport their instrument(s), I would *highly* recommend seeking out an insurance policy to cover it, and to also, if possible, plan to have an alternate instrument available in case of loss/theft.
And another MLK Jr. quote from my post in the previous /. PlayFair article..
"I became convinced that noncooperation with evil is as much a moral obligation as is cooperation with good. No other person has been more eloquent and passionate in getting this idea across than Henry David Thoreau. As a result of his writings and personal witness, we are the heirs of a legacy of creative protest." - Martin Luther King, Jr, from his Autobiography, Chapter 2.
Just my plugged nickel.
Not sure how the iTunes/RIAA contract reads, but it may be the case that iTunes must set prices across the entire catalog, and can't set one price for an RIAA track and another for an independent. Just guessing here, as I have never even been to the iTunes site, or own an iPod, or plan to do either one. But it _would_ be keeping in character for the RIAA/Big Labels.
"This is why I support the idea of taking the Internet away from ICANN, and placing it under UN juristiction."
And why in Gods' Name do you think by any stretch of the imagination that the U.N. would do anything to stop things like Gator, when the U.N. is as corrupt as it is? If they're willing to let children in Iraq starve to line their and a horrific dictators' pockets, while simultaneously attacking the U.S.'s sanctions as the reason for those children starving, how is the UN to be trusted with controlling the internet? Would you like to see some brutal communist regime head that UN internet committee like the UN's Human Rights committee is? Better yet, lets' just put China or N. Korea in charge. At least you'd know where you stand. Sheesh!
Heh..maybe Mr. They'll Nuke-Their-Own-People should get himself a bomb shelter, with a self-sealing cap, just to keep the radiation and black-helicopter baddies out. I'd be happy to weld the seal personally :-P.
I guess we should just drink the koolaid now, huh?
" Don't like DMCA? Go lobby your congressman."
Unfortunately, lobbying is, these days, a matter of who can pay the most money *cough/bribes and payoffs/cough*.
The politicians have become so corrupt that "the will of the people" is today a sick joke. I don't buy music anymore and that hurts, because I'm a musician and I love music, be it created by me or someone else. Nor will I sign with a big label. I refuse to buy into the game. Neither do I fileshare, steal, pirate, or however you want to define it. The DMCA, however, is an unjust law brought about by corruption, as is what has happened to copyright. Many people earlier in U.S. history also broke unjust laws passed by the state, such as sitting at the front of the bus, or drinking from the wrong water fountain if you weren't the right skin color. Mugging someone, and breaking an unjust, corrupt law are not equivalent. As a matter of fact, breaking an unjust, corrupt law could be argued to be the duty of a good citizen when the state refuses to address the wrong done.
"I became convinced that noncooperation with evil is as much a moral obligation as is cooperation with good. No other person has been more eloquent and passionate in getting this idea across than Henry David Thoreau. As a result of his writings and personal witness, we are the heirs of a legacy of creative protest." - Martin Luther King, Jr, from his Autobiography, Chapter 2.
Just my plugged nickel.
I agree with much of your post, very thoughtful, with these exceptions. (I used to work for Harris Semiconductor Gov. Systems Div. in the late-'70s, and have had some experience w/ military freq.-hopping, jamming, and spread-spectrum communications equipment.)
"Frequency hopping radios are much harder to detect, nevermind jam. "
True for detection/reception, but not jamming, if the jammer is a simple brute-force wide-band (say, 1-1000 Mhz) RF noise generator. Caveat here being the wider the range, the more powerful a jammers' output amp needs to be to generate enough signal strength across its' operational bandwidth to be useful, so there are practical limits.
"I don't think that taking down their radios is going to paralize them in small actions, but in large coordinated actions, such as stopping a hostage situation or a 9/11 incident it can paralize the forces"
I disagree here. In a tactical situation, such as a house/building entry/raid, not being able to communicate to your partner(s) coming in the back door that a/some bad guy(s) is/are waiting to blow his head off is a serious problem. Same with traffic stops and hot pursuits.
If a criminal can prevent the officer from radioing in a plate #/vehicle description the officer and the criminal are suddenly on an even field, aside from the officers' better training, which may not always be the case (criminals who are former military/law enforcement, or terrorists with guerilla methods/tactics training).
I've been waiting to hear about a 21st-century drug dealer using jamming technology to block law-enforcement communications. Heck, with a relatively small investment in parts, just about any one *could* build a broadband RF jammer, and have it remotely controlled, or even activated automatically (say, if a door is kicked in). That could be a nightmare for law enforcement. Imagine, a strike team kicks in the door at a crack house, only to have all their radios become totally unusable, and faced with an adversary that knows this ahead of time and is prepared to take advantage of the confusion resulting. Or, alternatively, a narcotics trafficker or other criminal whose vehicle is equipped w/ a jammer. He gets pulled over, and then attacks the officer, since the officer suddenly has no contact with dispatch or other units. This could be a very _bad_ thing, since the major advantage that law-enforcement has over criminals is the ability to call for help.
Hmm..other than the fact we're talking about 'prettying-up' the OS that's supposed to launch 'Trusted Computing/NGSCB', and that the UI that's under discussion *won't* be in the 'official' release, I wonder if it will be possible to skin the dialog box that will pop up when you attempt an operation not allowed by T.C./NGSCB saying, "I'm sorry, Dave, I can't let you do that."?
I'm running an Nvidia Geforce 2 MX/MX400 64Mb, on MDK 9.2, Intel P4 2.0Ghz 256MbDDR D845EBG2 Intel mobo. My Nvidia driver is NVIDIA-Linux-x86-1.0-5336-pkg1.run. I use mplayer and totem to play DVDs. So far, I've not had any problems as described. I will say I run some PLF (Penguin Liberation Front) packages and libs, not sure if that would have any effect, tho I tend to think not. Not sure *why* I'm not having trouble, but certainly not asking for any :-P, just glad everything works! (Also grateful to PLF for making it possible to actually use what I paid for on the O.S. of my choice.)
I originally chose Debian as my very first linux OS install about 2 years ago. I liked the idea of a comepletely open-source, free OS. Still do. I'm a retired (medical disability) electronics tech, self-taught, except for a high-school vocational electronics class. Worked on everything from guitar amps to avionics systems in private/corporate jets. If it runs on electricity, I've probably had a job either designing it, building it, or fixing it. I'm not a software expert, but I'll put my basic troubleshooting skills and intuitive "feel" for machinery and equipment of any kind up against anyone, so I'm not technically illiterate by any means. I RTFM'ed my butt off, and got through the install. However, after being treated like a retarded child and ridiculed for asking a question that may have been obvious to a long-time Debian user, but wasn't covered well in the docs or man pages, I decided that the Debian community was just too elitist for me. It's sad, because I still think that Debian is technically an excellent distro, but I just refuse to be a party to the attitudes I found in the Debian community, and feel that by using Debian, I would be supporting the continuation of such elitist attitudes. I now use Mandrake and Gentoo, and have started teaching myself to code (still just a babe here, yet) and plan to eventually contribute to the above distros. The difference in attitudes is night-and-day. Debian lost a user, and a potential contributor/developer. The Debian community and developers have the right to conduct themselves and run things any way they want to. I have the right to pass them by. There are simply too many other excellent distros out there, with friendly, helpful people that are happy to share their knowledge and experience with newcomers without any elitism.