I partially agree with what you are trying to say, but not your concluisions. The purpose of government as it concerns business is to set up an environment where business can exist in fair competition and with protection for consumers. Where that does not exist the government should get involved. Basically government should set up the environment for fair and equitable competition.
But I dont see why any of the points listed need in any way to be regulated:
1) Phone locking: Most people dont care and there are legal companies that unlock phones if the service supplier wont supply unlocked phones
2) Over charges: Free market takes care of this. If the companies are colluding together to increase prices then there is legislation in place for this already
3) No plans over 30 days: This is asinine. Why would anyone want this? If you dont want to get a plan over 30 days, then sign up for a pay as you go plan. Personally I dont want to keep renewing my phone every month and typically get the longest plan available (2 years). So your proposed legislation would negatively affect me the consumer (whom you are supposedly trying to protect)
4) Require all services included: Again this is asinine. What possible purpose could this provide? I dont use half the crap on my phone and I dont want to pay for stuff I'll never use.
5) Free receiving calls: Free market covers this. My plan already offers something similar. Shop around and use the power of a free market economy.
Again legislation is not the answer. The government should only be setting up the environment to do business, not telling companies how to run the business. Lets take a couple of your examples:
a) Your car. The government legislates this but it sets minimum standards for quality and safety. It does not for example tell the manufacturers that every car must have the same full set of features to make it easier for the consumer to choose between them. Someone buying a low end car does not want GPS, satellite radio, and traction control which will drive the price up out of their reach.
b) US government standardizing ink cartridges? Come on, why the hell should the governemnt be involved in this? If you're getting milked dry on $50 ink cartridges then you are printing too much or bought a really cheap printer. Thats consumer choice.
Your suggestion of blowing up government just so you can make your phone selections easier just shows that you have no idea what your government is for or what it does.
Legislation is almost NEVER the answer. Why would government outlaw phone locking when
a) most people don't care
b) all it takes is for one supplier to supply unlocked phones (and enough consumers to care and buy them) to get the others to follow (i.e. COMPETITION)
c) a company to offer a service to unlock phones (and I see these legal companies all over the place)
So given the above and that there is nothing illegal being done, why would you want to create even more useless and bloated legislation?
I'd say there is WAY too much legislation in general as it is. Legislation is not the answer - features should become available by having a truly free open market without big government Republican intervention.
I can't see how religious parents would ever tolerate it. It defeats the "my religion can beat up your religion" meme that is central to organized religion.
Do these same parents insist that their chldren be only taught English and no other languages because that is their native tongue?
What about history? Do the parents insist that their child only be taught American history and ignore World history because the Americans can attack and beat up any other individual country?
God demands faith. God does not provide proof, because proof kills faith. If you see something that you think is proof of God's existence, you're wrong. He's ineffable. That means you can't effing figure him out.
I agree with your message but that statement is not quite true..
God does not demand faith without proof - religion does. And religion is merely an invention of man which represents mans best guess as to what God wants. Since what God wants of us is sheer speculation, that explains the multitude of religions in the world.
If man ever came up with proof of Gods existance, I'm sure He would say 'Congratulations! I was wondering when you idiots would finally figure it out and stop killing one another over me'.
I had religion (required) in public school. It was great. But they didn't preach any one religion. They showed how all the religions of the world came about, their origins and similarities and differences in their belief systems. Then we had guest speakers, one each from the major local religions that came in to talk about and answer questions of their beliefs and customs.
I firmly believe that type of religion in schools should be mandatory. It would certainly remove a lot of the predjudices and stereotyping that goes on simply due to fear and lack of understanding.
Subaru cars you can modify the engine code to do what you want. Subaru cannot stop you from doing this but at the same time they can deny warranties.
Check out Cobb accessport and ECUTEK.
But Subaru did not supply the code for you to modify. Some company has reverse engineered the engine management computer and is supplying a mod kit that you can change parameters to. Subaru did not release the source code to their engine management computer.
Someone can easily do something similar to the Tivo by supplying a complete replacement OS and application. There's nothing wrong with that.
Heard of the plug-in Prius? Lots of modified battery code there. Heard of ECU chips on Ebay?
Following road/FCC laws for the "operation" of the purchased item, again, is parallel to copyright.
Yes, and in these instances companies (mainly universities) have reverse engineered the engine management computer or supplied a replacement. No Hybrid auto supplier has released the source sode to their engine management computer.
Someone can easily do this to the Tivo by supplying a complete replacement OS and application. There's nothing wrong with that.
Since it's illegal in most states to add too much tint to your windows, I'd be surprised as hell if it wasn't already illegal to put a machine gun on your car.
What about dismantling the book and using it to light a fire? The physical good is mine. I want to do anything to it. I should be allowed to.
Sure you can. You can also do anything physically with your Tivo, including smashing and burning it too. So what? The analogy referred to the content contained within - the software on the Tivo and the ideas and words in the book.
I can drive my car in my property using my feet only, while drinking, smoking and talking on the cell phone if I want to. The critical part in your sentence is the shared driving space, with shared rules, naturally.
No, you are incorrect. In most states it is illegal to be in a parked car in your driveway (your property) while drunk. Having the engine running while drunk is grounds for arrest as it is likely that you intend to be on a public road. You do not actually have to be on the road to be arrested for DUI. Look it up - and as an aside, you should actually research what you write before saying it. It's not enought for you to just believe it to be true, it actually has to be true.
No. They forfeited that right when they leveraged GPL software. Now they must abide by the GPL.
They did not. Tivo is abidng by the GPL V2 which was in effect when they wrote and distributed the Tivo software. They have done nothing wrong.
GPL is all about granting the end user the right to tinker, take apart and reuse. GPL2 was not so clear on hardware based distribution. GPL3 sets it straight, and fucks TiVo. Tough luck. Play by the book and let people tinker, or write your own software (or pick BSD, for christ's sake).
Tivo is not fucked by GPL V3. They distributed their stuff under V2 and releasing V3 does not change that -except they cannot now use new stuff released under V3. Their existing stuff is still valid and protected. Tivo did play by the rules of GPL V2.
If I own my house, I'm allowed to buy a different central heating system whenever I want; the state only demands that it's installed by a professional and that it's certified to work properly. If a function on that Tivo is worthless and I can get a download of an improved version that someone wrote, but Tivo makes it impossible to install this non-signed binary, then I think it's exactly the same situation as your house analogy: you want to improve your property (to get a lower heating bill) but even though you're formally allowed to do so, the architect buried your heating system under 3 meters of concrete so you wouldn't be able to upgrade it.
I have a programmable digital thermostat. I think that I can write better logic to lower my heating bill but the company wont give me the microcode. Are they evil corporate nazis by preventing me from modifying their stuff? No.
The famous slashdot car analogy: just use the open-source analogy. What would you prefer to buy, a car with the hood welded shut or a car which you can get serviced at any licensed mechanic?
I just bought a gasoline-electric hybrid vehicle. There's practically no servicable parts in the engine, and I cannot take it to just any licenced mechanic since he wouldn't have the first clue as to what to do with it. Also I like the digital display for the fuel economy and the satellite radio, but I think I can do it better. Will they give me the source code so I can modify it myself? No, of course not.
There are now cars on the road that have 100k mile warranties on the engines, with no servicable parts. Its a sealed unit and you have to do nothing but change the oil. This is a good thing, not a bad thing.
To pull that microwave analogy through: should there be a law that explicitly forbids consumers to use the products they bought for any other than the designated purpose (we could call it the "implicit tivoization law" or the "microwaved dog law" for all I care)? Imagine the effect THAT would have on society and innovation.
At my university (true story), a couple of guys took two old microwaves, ripped off the doors, defeated the door safties and reprogrammed them as a transmit - receive pair for digial communication. Worked perfectly but dangerous as hell. Do you think if my neighbour across the street and I set up such a system for communication between our computers that noone would be able to do anything about it?
When I use public areas, yes, there are rules of sharing the public areas I must abide by to make sure it's equitable to everyone sharing the public areas. but the rules are for sharing the roadways not for how to use my car, my property. Ever notice how the driving booklet says "Rules of the Road"? and not "Rules for using your car"?
So if I drive perfectly legally, share the road, and stay within the speed limit, I'm allowed to modify my car by placing a (legal) machine gun on the hood? I think not.
> Tivo has a right to do what they want to their products. If you buy it and attempt to take it apart, well then that's fine and your right, but they also have a right to put mechanisms in place to deny you further service if you do.
And the GPL and the FSF don't?
I never said they didn't. But what Tivo has done was perfectly valid with GPL V2, so why is everyone so bent out of shape?
However, I can modify the car all I want and even resell it with the mods, as long as I don't represent it as from the original manufacturer.
Really? So which modern car actually comes with a source code listings from the manufacturer for the microcontrollers and engine management computers so you can modify it as you like?
And no you cannot modify the car how you like - if you wish to drive it on the road you still have to conform to the local laws regarding what is acceptable.
So you agree as well. The original posters comment that he can do whatever he wants bacause it is his property is completely false.
And Tivo has done what exactly with their restriction? There is nothing that they have done that is not permitted by GPL V2 which they were using with the Linux software. They are not breaking any laws either by not letting you modify their software.
Thank you for proving my point. Pretty much everything you buy has restrictions and guidelines that are specified or implied that prevent you from doing absolutely anything you want with it, as your original post suggested.
Once Tivo has sold it to me, it's not "their product" any more. It's my property, and any "freedoms" regarding it belong to me. As it happens, the particular copyright license in the software that Tivo chose to redistribute may help ensure that Tivo is prevented from interfering with my freedom to use my property as I see fit.
Don't be ridiculous. Just because you bought something doesn't mean you have unlimited rights to do as you wish to it. Would you consider a book that you bought now exclusively yours, then copy it and redistribute it? Of course not.
What about your house? You own your house so does that give you the right to modify your water, gas and electrical hookups to bypass the meters? No.
Your car? Do you have the right to drive your property you bought however you feel like? No - there are rules you must abide by.
Tivo has a right to do what they want to their products. If you buy it and attempt to take it apart, well then that's fine and your right, but they also have a right to put mechanisms in place to deny you further service if you do.
I'm sure they originally thought she was 20 in the picture, and wanted to withhold her teaching certificate for underage drinking.
Well the solution is simple. Adopt a drinking age of 17/18 like here in Canada. She definitely doesn't look 18.
Then when they found out she was 25 in the photo, they changed their story to not wanting anyone who has had alcohol touch their virgin lips to be teaching young children, rather than admitting they were wrong.
Alcohol?? Forget the alcohol. Statistically at least half of the female teachers would be performing oral sex on their husbands / boyfriends. And they are worried about alcohol on their lips?
Millions of people have experienced DRM and are most likely annoyed by it. Ever watched a DVD with unskippable adverts? Or unskippable anything? This is due to the DRM in DVDs. People know what DRM is like, but they don't know what it's called.
That is *NOT* DRM. The fact that you are playing back the DVD shows that the DRM has already done its job and is playing on an autorized player. Not being able to skip certain sections of the DVD is outside the scope of DRM - its just part of the DVD encoding.
What cars do YOU buy that have engine speed limiters? I know of overrev limiters, so you don't blow the engine..but, I don't think I've owned a car that had a speed governor on it.
I'd venture to guess...people that aren't interested in going fast won't be even thinking of buying a car powerful enough to warrant any kind of limitation on it.
Many modern cars have speed limiters built into the engine management computer (look it up - see? you didn't even know it was there). Typical cars have them set to 180km/h, preformance cars have them set to 250km/h. These were put in to placate the insurance industry.
Some of us have the cars that can handle at higher speeds, and know how to use them.
Then maybe media companies will give up this DRM non-sense which does nothing but frustrate consumers and slow the adoption rate of digital media in the mass market.
Why does DRM slow the adoptation of digital media in the mass market? Other than a bunch of hackers and a few holier than thou rights activists, no one in the mass market has ever come across DRM, knows it exists, or even cares that it is present.
For the average user putting his Bluray disc in his player and watching a movie - why does he care that the viewing is being goverend by DRM or not? It doesn't affect his enjoyment or ability to watch the movie at all.
It's very much like engine speed limiters on cars - only a few nutjobs who want to break the law by going that fast know its there and try to remove it. No one else cares.
Interesting. Mainly in that I'm Anglican (close to Catholic) and I know a lot of Catholics (including my ex wife and her family), and I've never met someone in those denominations that bought into the young earth creationism, or thought that the church preached it (but no problems believing that God created the universe)
Always surprises me when I meet one as I still have a hard time believing they actually bought into that story.
Slashdot Mirror
I partially agree with what you are trying to say, but not your concluisions. The purpose of government as it concerns business is to set up an environment where business can exist in fair competition and with protection for consumers. Where that does not exist the government should get involved. Basically government should set up the environment for fair and equitable competition.
But I dont see why any of the points listed need in any way to be regulated:
1) Phone locking: Most people dont care and there are legal companies that unlock phones if the service supplier wont supply unlocked phones
2) Over charges: Free market takes care of this. If the companies are colluding together to increase prices then there is legislation in place for this already
3) No plans over 30 days: This is asinine. Why would anyone want this? If you dont want to get a plan over 30 days, then sign up for a pay as you go plan. Personally I dont want to keep renewing my phone every month and typically get the longest plan available (2 years). So your proposed legislation would negatively affect me the consumer (whom you are supposedly trying to protect)
4) Require all services included: Again this is asinine. What possible purpose could this provide? I dont use half the crap on my phone and I dont want to pay for stuff I'll never use.
5) Free receiving calls: Free market covers this. My plan already offers something similar. Shop around and use the power of a free market economy.
Again legislation is not the answer. The government should only be setting up the environment to do business, not telling companies how to run the business. Lets take a couple of your examples:
a) Your car. The government legislates this but it sets minimum standards for quality and safety. It does not for example tell the manufacturers that every car must have the same full set of features to make it easier for the consumer to choose between them. Someone buying a low end car does not want GPS, satellite radio, and traction control which will drive the price up out of their reach.
b) US government standardizing ink cartridges? Come on, why the hell should the governemnt be involved in this? If you're getting milked dry on $50 ink cartridges then you are printing too much or bought a really cheap printer. Thats consumer choice.
Your suggestion of blowing up government just so you can make your phone selections easier just shows that you have no idea what your government is for or what it does.
Legislation is almost NEVER the answer. Why would government outlaw phone locking when
a) most people don't care
b) all it takes is for one supplier to supply unlocked phones (and enough consumers to care and buy them) to get the others to follow (i.e. COMPETITION)
c) a company to offer a service to unlock phones (and I see these legal companies all over the place) So given the above and that there is nothing illegal being done, why would you want to create even more useless and bloated legislation?
I'd say there is WAY too much legislation in general as it is. Legislation is not the answer - features should become available by having a truly free open market without big government Republican intervention.
Do these same parents insist that their chldren be only taught English and no other languages because that is their native tongue?
What about history? Do the parents insist that their child only be taught American history and ignore World history because the Americans can attack and beat up any other individual country?
If, for arguments sake, believing in the Norse Gods results in that child being a better member of society, then wouldn't that be a good thing?
1980s, Newfoundland, Canada. Don't know if it still is in the curriculum though, nor if other provinces have it.
I agree with your message but that statement is not quite true..
God does not demand faith without proof - religion does. And religion is merely an invention of man which represents mans best guess as to what God wants. Since what God wants of us is sheer speculation, that explains the multitude of religions in the world.
If man ever came up with proof of Gods existance, I'm sure He would say 'Congratulations! I was wondering when you idiots would finally figure it out and stop killing one another over me'.
I had religion (required) in public school. It was great. But they didn't preach any one religion. They showed how all the religions of the world came about, their origins and similarities and differences in their belief systems. Then we had guest speakers, one each from the major local religions that came in to talk about and answer questions of their beliefs and customs.
I firmly believe that type of religion in schools should be mandatory. It would certainly remove a lot of the predjudices and stereotyping that goes on simply due to fear and lack of understanding.
But Subaru did not supply the code for you to modify. Some company has reverse engineered the engine management computer and is supplying a mod kit that you can change parameters to. Subaru did not release the source code to their engine management computer.
Someone can easily do something similar to the Tivo by supplying a complete replacement OS and application. There's nothing wrong with that.
Yes, and in these instances companies (mainly universities) have reverse engineered the engine management computer or supplied a replacement. No Hybrid auto supplier has released the source sode to their engine management computer.
Someone can easily do this to the Tivo by supplying a complete replacement OS and application. There's nothing wrong with that.
Since it's illegal in most states to add too much tint to your windows, I'd be surprised as hell if it wasn't already illegal to put a machine gun on your car.
I have a programmable digital thermostat. I think that I can write better logic to lower my heating bill but the company wont give me the microcode. Are they evil corporate nazis by preventing me from modifying their stuff? No.
I just bought a gasoline-electric hybrid vehicle. There's practically no servicable parts in the engine, and I cannot take it to just any licenced mechanic since he wouldn't have the first clue as to what to do with it. Also I like the digital display for the fuel economy and the satellite radio, but I think I can do it better. Will they give me the source code so I can modify it myself? No, of course not.
There are now cars on the road that have 100k mile warranties on the engines, with no servicable parts. Its a sealed unit and you have to do nothing but change the oil. This is a good thing, not a bad thing.
At my university (true story), a couple of guys took two old microwaves, ripped off the doors, defeated the door safties and reprogrammed them as a transmit - receive pair for digial communication. Worked perfectly but dangerous as hell. Do you think if my neighbour across the street and I set up such a system for communication between our computers that noone would be able to do anything about it?So if I drive perfectly legally, share the road, and stay within the speed limit, I'm allowed to modify my car by placing a (legal) machine gun on the hood? I think not.
I never said they didn't. But what Tivo has done was perfectly valid with GPL V2, so why is everyone so bent out of shape?
Really? So which modern car actually comes with a source code listings from the manufacturer for the microcontrollers and engine management computers so you can modify it as you like?
And no you cannot modify the car how you like - if you wish to drive it on the road you still have to conform to the local laws regarding what is acceptable.
What Tivo did was within their rights according to the GPL V2. So whats the problem?
So you agree as well. The original posters comment that he can do whatever he wants bacause it is his property is completely false.
And Tivo has done what exactly with their restriction? There is nothing that they have done that is not permitted by GPL V2 which they were using with the Linux software. They are not breaking any laws either by not letting you modify their software.
Thank you for proving my point. Pretty much everything you buy has restrictions and guidelines that are specified or implied that prevent you from doing absolutely anything you want with it, as your original post suggested.
Don't be ridiculous. Just because you bought something doesn't mean you have unlimited rights to do as you wish to it. Would you consider a book that you bought now exclusively yours, then copy it and redistribute it? Of course not.
What about your house? You own your house so does that give you the right to modify your water, gas and electrical hookups to bypass the meters? No.
Your car? Do you have the right to drive your property you bought however you feel like? No - there are rules you must abide by.
Tivo has a right to do what they want to their products. If you buy it and attempt to take it apart, well then that's fine and your right, but they also have a right to put mechanisms in place to deny you further service if you do.
What's not to love about a drunk purple alien with a martini glass stuck to its head??
Well the solution is simple. Adopt a drinking age of 17/18 like here in Canada. She definitely doesn't look 18.
Alcohol?? Forget the alcohol. Statistically at least half of the female teachers would be performing oral sex on their husbands / boyfriends. And they are worried about alcohol on their lips?
That is *NOT* DRM. The fact that you are playing back the DVD shows that the DRM has already done its job and is playing on an autorized player. Not being able to skip certain sections of the DVD is outside the scope of DRM - its just part of the DVD encoding.
Many modern cars have speed limiters built into the engine management computer (look it up - see? you didn't even know it was there). Typical cars have them set to 180km/h, preformance cars have them set to 250km/h. These were put in to placate the insurance industry.
Ha!
Why does DRM slow the adoptation of digital media in the mass market? Other than a bunch of hackers and a few holier than thou rights activists, no one in the mass market has ever come across DRM, knows it exists, or even cares that it is present.
For the average user putting his Bluray disc in his player and watching a movie - why does he care that the viewing is being goverend by DRM or not? It doesn't affect his enjoyment or ability to watch the movie at all.
It's very much like engine speed limiters on cars - only a few nutjobs who want to break the law by going that fast know its there and try to remove it. No one else cares.
Interesting. Mainly in that I'm Anglican (close to Catholic) and I know a lot of Catholics (including my ex wife and her family), and I've never met someone in those denominations that bought into the young earth creationism, or thought that the church preached it (but no problems believing that God created the universe)
Always surprises me when I meet one as I still have a hard time believing they actually bought into that story.