Well, not to sound like a troll, but this is another "open" solution by Sun Microsystems. Yes, Sun has a history of providing quality hardware and software as well as being a large supporter of OSS, but their ideals of Free software tends to lean towards the non-copyleft version of free.
I don't know, but by the sounds of their FAQ and other information, it seems like you may have to license something (or get approved, I don't know). Maybe it only applies to proprietary software or something, but if this makes it so that a developer can't make some sort of DeDReaM (I'd call it awaKe or something), then the OMC is not open. Open means that you're able to do whatever the fuck you want with it as long as you aren't violating some sort of law.
15. What do you mean by "open source"?
A: The term "open source" simply means that source code is made available to others in the community under specific use and license terms. There will be a well defined process for anyone to join and participate in developing the specifications, along with a well defined process for publishing and revising those specifications.
If someone can clarify this, I'd be very grateful.
Well, I have to rebut this with some knowledge I've gained from my almost 52 year old father.
1) You actually got physical media
True
2) The media even came with little booklets with song lyrics (and it wasn't illegal)
It wasn't always like that. There were magazines you could subscribe to in order to get lyrics for songs. Later on, booklets containing lyrics were included in albums.
3) Price was about the same price or cheaper than what you get from iTMS, Nap$ster, etc.
The RIAA wasn't as stupid back then, and there is the problem of constant economic inflation around here.
4) You could play the stuff practically ANYWHERE
Once again, not so true until later on with things like cassettes. Turntables were big, but most audiophiles already have larger systems than what used to be the norm.
5) Sound quality was great- even better than the downloaded stuff
Everything was done via analog, and there was no real way of reducing the quality of an analog recording.
6) You could sell the media (LEGALLY!) to a friend, store, or whatever when you were done with it.
You can still sell CDs, but the main FUD regarding this nowadays is the fact that you can easily create your own back-up and simply resell the CD, thusly charging you next to nothing for the album itself. At least, that's what the RIAA wants you (and Congress) to think.
7) Nobody ever got sued for any of this
I'm going to guess that there were less lawyers in those days.
Knowing Google's love of Python, the DRM decryptor will probably be written in Python to allow for maximum portability. So, uh, I think it shouldn't take much effort (if any) to "crack" their decryption.
I don't think DVDs had any sort of encryption when they were first sold to consumers. It was an afterthought, and that's why both CDs and most DVDs are very open to being copied. The main issue was that it is so much easier to copy data digitally than it was via analog methods. Oh well...
I'd rather spend the $300 on a feature-packed player than spend $300 on an iPod, and then an additional $200+ on accessories just to even come close to those offered by its competitors. The iPod would be fine if it cost ~$100, but instead it is overpriced, mainly due to the massive amount of marketing.
My favourite thing to do with an iPod: sell it on eBay and buy myself something worth the $300+ like an iAUDIO. Most of my music is in Vorbis and FLAC; thanks, Apple, for providing minimal audio format support on, well, everything you make.
Yeah, software used to always be open source for the most part. If you were buying something for your fucking expensive mainframe, you better be able to tinker around with the software running on it. It wasn't until sometime after the beginnings of Unix did proprietary software become more popular.
99%? 1997 called; they want their browser statistics back.
Besides, it's Microsoft's fault for the WMF format, allowing this exploit to be used, not patching it quickly, and many other problems regarding MSIE. If they aren't liable for the WMFs, nobody but the users who post them are.
I think that the DRM concept isn't necessarily the problem. The problem lies in its current implementations.
The DRM concept is the problem. DRM is impossible and downright absurd. You know the old quote, "if you can see or hear it, it can be copied." DRM is a complete waste of time, money, and effort to create an artificial scarcity in a digital product. People will pay for an unencumbered product, but at the moment, "piracy" is the only way to go when it comes to getting unencumbered video content.
It's sad how "piracy" is the only "legitimate" way of getting quality content. If piracy charged money for the content which then went to the original creators, it'd be a great business model, but the content providers don't want to work for the consumer...
This is where "pirated" video content shows its most major benefits over the typical delivery medium chosen by the gods: international distribution. These content providers are still stuck in the twentieth century blindly assuming that there is no way to physically deliver content to all parts of the globe simultaneously. That may have been true a few years ago, but there has been this new-fangled "Internet" becoming more and more popular, and many have already found the low cost and ease of publishing anything online is definitely a Good Thing.
Region blocking is an artificial barrier created to keep content producers within their old, outdated business model. It may have been something that used to work, but now there's no excuse for content providers to restrict their content to certain parts of the globe when one can easily publish it on the internet. Which would you rather have: wait for a new DVD release to come to your country after a few months of its original publishing in its home country, then get a DRM'd copy of the media with forced advertisements that doesn't allow itself to be played in any DVD player but ones that respect its draconian DRM measures (not to mention outrageous costs in some cases), OR would you rather acquire a full digital copy of the content you want (for free even, but if the content providers used this method, people would pay for it) at your convenience as soon as it is initially released, also allowing you to use your digital copy of the media however you wish (e.g. burn it to a DVD or VCD, stream it using a media center type of computer). The obvious answer would be to follow the high seas as you get a far better deal (even if you paid the same for pirated content as you would for the original content), yet the copyright holders have absolutely no idea on how this works. Even Apple continues to blatantly embrace the old distribution methods with a bit of marketing to at least give people a taste of what the superior business model can be like.
Or more insidious, your boss tells you you need to vote for candidate A. In order to obtain your next paycheck, you must show your receipt that you voted for candidate A.
I would have to assume that GNU didn't have this problem at least considering RMS made GCC from scratch. Of course, then it would be a question of trusting RMS, but we usually do.
Slashdot Mirror
I don't know, but by the sounds of their FAQ and other information, it seems like you may have to license something (or get approved, I don't know). Maybe it only applies to proprietary software or something, but if this makes it so that a developer can't make some sort of DeDReaM (I'd call it awaKe or something), then the OMC is not open. Open means that you're able to do whatever the fuck you want with it as long as you aren't violating some sort of law.
If someone can clarify this, I'd be very grateful.
Well, I have to rebut this with some knowledge I've gained from my almost 52 year old father.
True
It wasn't always like that. There were magazines you could subscribe to in order to get lyrics for songs. Later on, booklets containing lyrics were included in albums.
The RIAA wasn't as stupid back then, and there is the problem of constant economic inflation around here.
Once again, not so true until later on with things like cassettes. Turntables were big, but most audiophiles already have larger systems than what used to be the norm.
Everything was done via analog, and there was no real way of reducing the quality of an analog recording.
You can still sell CDs, but the main FUD regarding this nowadays is the fact that you can easily create your own back-up and simply resell the CD, thusly charging you next to nothing for the album itself. At least, that's what the RIAA wants you (and Congress) to think.
I'm going to guess that there were less lawyers in those days.
Knowing Google's love of Python, the DRM decryptor will probably be written in Python to allow for maximum portability. So, uh, I think it shouldn't take much effort (if any) to "crack" their decryption.
*crosses fingers*
Something tells me that it'd be easier to do this on linux considering you can just cat /dev/input/mice stream to get the mouse data.
You gotta stop watching porn on your 50" HDTV unless you want to see massive balls...
I don't think DVDs had any sort of encryption when they were first sold to consumers. It was an afterthought, and that's why both CDs and most DVDs are very open to being copied. The main issue was that it is so much easier to copy data digitally than it was via analog methods. Oh well...
I'd rather spend the $300 on a feature-packed player than spend $300 on an iPod, and then an additional $200+ on accessories just to even come close to those offered by its competitors. The iPod would be fine if it cost ~$100, but instead it is overpriced, mainly due to the massive amount of marketing.
My favourite thing to do with an iPod: sell it on eBay and buy myself something worth the $300+ like an iAUDIO. Most of my music is in Vorbis and FLAC; thanks, Apple, for providing minimal audio format support on, well, everything you make.
Yeah, software used to always be open source for the most part. If you were buying something for your fucking expensive mainframe, you better be able to tinker around with the software running on it. It wasn't until sometime after the beginnings of Unix did proprietary software become more popular.
Unless you're talking about OSX86, Mac users can't exactly use WINE yet...
99%? 1997 called; they want their browser statistics back.
Besides, it's Microsoft's fault for the WMF format, allowing this exploit to be used, not patching it quickly, and many other problems regarding MSIE. If they aren't liable for the WMFs, nobody but the users who post them are.
I think that the DRM concept isn't necessarily the problem. The problem lies in its current implementations.
The DRM concept is the problem. DRM is impossible and downright absurd. You know the old quote, "if you can see or hear it, it can be copied." DRM is a complete waste of time, money, and effort to create an artificial scarcity in a digital product. People will pay for an unencumbered product, but at the moment, "piracy" is the only way to go when it comes to getting unencumbered video content.
It's sad how "piracy" is the only "legitimate" way of getting quality content. If piracy charged money for the content which then went to the original creators, it'd be a great business model, but the content providers don't want to work for the consumer...
This is where "pirated" video content shows its most major benefits over the typical delivery medium chosen by the gods: international distribution. These content providers are still stuck in the twentieth century blindly assuming that there is no way to physically deliver content to all parts of the globe simultaneously. That may have been true a few years ago, but there has been this new-fangled "Internet" becoming more and more popular, and many have already found the low cost and ease of publishing anything online is definitely a Good Thing.
Region blocking is an artificial barrier created to keep content producers within their old, outdated business model. It may have been something that used to work, but now there's no excuse for content providers to restrict their content to certain parts of the globe when one can easily publish it on the internet. Which would you rather have: wait for a new DVD release to come to your country after a few months of its original publishing in its home country, then get a DRM'd copy of the media with forced advertisements that doesn't allow itself to be played in any DVD player but ones that respect its draconian DRM measures (not to mention outrageous costs in some cases), OR would you rather acquire a full digital copy of the content you want (for free even, but if the content providers used this method, people would pay for it) at your convenience as soon as it is initially released, also allowing you to use your digital copy of the media however you wish (e.g. burn it to a DVD or VCD, stream it using a media center type of computer). The obvious answer would be to follow the high seas as you get a far better deal (even if you paid the same for pirated content as you would for the original content), yet the copyright holders have absolutely no idea on how this works. Even Apple continues to blatantly embrace the old distribution methods with a bit of marketing to at least give people a taste of what the superior business model can be like.
I would have to assume that GNU didn't have this problem at least considering RMS made GCC from scratch. Of course, then it would be a question of trusting RMS, but we usually do.
I was just doing what the Debian manpages told me! :(
By the way, I did leave this on (but with true and wget swapped so that when they got slashdotted, I would stop), but I don't know how it turned out.
Or you just put `while wget -qO /dev/null --no-cache --no-cookies http://grokster.com/ ; do true; done;` into the console, run it, and wait a while.
Well, they aren't using register_globals as far as I can tell. :(
They're trying to push IPv6 so that your IP might mean something!
Also, take a look at the validator results for the site.
If you were using FLAC, you'd have filled up at least one 80 GB harddrive with legitimate CDs. Or that's just me.
I'm not anti-GNOME, but I'm pro-KDE. GNOME has potential, but they're undergoing some unfavourable transitions right now.
Coral Cache
Nice to see that they're checking the X-Forwarded-For header...