Perhaps this is the first time that a major well known artist has released his tracks for remix using Garage Band, but others have done it in the past...
Moby did it on their "Feeling So Real" Remixes Single. At the end of the cd, they included a track titled "remixes parts."
You can, (and I have before), but it's a little more tougher...
You also start to run in to issues such as nationality, and citizenship, and entitlement.
However, personally, I don't think it's unreasonable to be able to find something appealing with 50 states to choose from. I object to the homogenization of America.
My first thought when I got that e-mail was that the feds wanted to know who was downloading Nmap pr0n.
Of course, I'm the one who wrote the script and shot the video, so it's only natural.
I think Fyodor is doing the right thing, and I think the feds are just using standard intimidation tactics... but then again, I've always been about state powers as opposed to federal powers. At least with state powers, you can always choose to move to a different state...
So, buying a second computer to encode the work done on a first computer is a FREE (at least in beer) option? Please.. I'm glad I don't have you working in my tech department, you'd bankrupt me with all your FREE ideas.
I like how you mutter something about zealotry blinding me. I've been encoding windows media format files on my OS X box for over a year now. It's a pain in the ass. It's less than a pain in the ass than dealing with editing on a Mac, then encoding on a Windows box, and then distributing to a bunch of macs.
But you're right, Mr "I used macs until I was 18," which means if you're any older than 21 or 22 it would seem that you have zero experience with OS X... but then again posting a message where you say "I might be opening myself to criticism" to propose a windows solution on a Mac board, and then immediately getting huffy when someone responds, screams troll to me.
My post was meant to get responses from other people who might be encoding windows media format on their OS X boxes, in the hope that maybe they've found some solutions to a few problems that I've been having. Not to attract a troll whose only contribution is "buy another computer."
Windows Media Format production on a Macintosh OS X is a pain in the ass. Does Microsoft offer a free or even pay program to encode Windows Media on Mac OS X? If your answer is yes, mind providing a link? (Yes, I'm aware that they released an SDK a million years ago, but come on, sit down and program an encoder? I'm a Mac Guy - Sheesh!) The only option that I've been able to find is by using Discreet's Media Cleaner version 6.0 for OS X. It's an expensive program, and it's kind of clunky, and it takes forever to convert from the format that I edit in on my Mac to a Windows Media file. I've never been particularly happy with the output, it never quite seems as good as the quicktime or at the output that gets cranked out pretty fast on a P.C. Even so, you have to settle for an older version of windows media...
However, the masses have windows media player installed on their computer by default, and so I've got to keep cranking out the files. But in answer to the original question for this slashdot post, you'd be insane to want to do windows media format in a mac environment when quicktime is quick and easy and works so much better.
Why not, that's sort of what they did with Xbox. Sell the hardware for less than it costs to make because they can afford to take a loss for several years if they feel like it.
You forgot soup kitchens.... never forget soup kitchens... Also, sometimes you can get real lucky and find perfectly good talent going to waste smoking crack in a back alley...
No, really, I'm serious. By the way, did you know that sarcasm isn't listed in the dictionary... look it up!
But yeah, the Cannon XL1S is mighty, I wish I could afford one...
If the Oxford newspaper story were about the Dean of Students doing a million quid cocaine deal out of his house, and the press published pictures taken through their window, then the public would clearly judge that this would be a justified case of breaking the law. This hypothetical case is clearly different from your example of violating one's privacy, in their own home where they have a reasonable expectation of privacy, just because someone wants to see some famous skin.
I submit that not only is your argument a straw man, but it doesn't even relate... I would imagine that you'll probably disagree.
If I had no special protections what so ever as a member of the press, I suppose I'd probably refuse to identify myself, use fake names, and the like too...
I mean, it's got to be a pretty scary thing to report on abuse of authority, and then stand alone before said authority...
The reason why this is important is because of the idea of immediacy. When a person is looking at a headline, they determine whether or not it has any bearing to them. If an article doesn't have any immediacy to them personally or to their interests in general, then it doesn't get read.
There is little technical difference between these two headlines, however from the point of view of an Oxford student, there would be a world of difference. Consider: Headline one: HTTPS provides encryption that HTTP does not. Headline two: Private computer conversations at Oxford easily monitored by anyone.
However, they didn't just log some passwords sent in the clear, according to the article (you did read it, did you not?) they had the ability to view and to some degree controll the pervasive CCTV security network. This is a big deal, for a whole lot of reasons.
You say things about stuff that's been known for years and provable without breaking the law. Known by whom? I would guess this stuff wasn't known by the general public at Oxford, the population that that particular paper is supposed to inform and serve.
If you fail to see why it's important that the press informs the population about security matters in a time of echelon, and increasing government infringements on the rights of ordinary citizens, then you might want to spend a little more time meditating on the phrase that you used, freedom of idiots...
So you're saying that the massive and common daily infrastructure level breeches of privacy is okay, because it's quietly perpetuated by the authorities?
Yeah, they may be nothing more than a rotating staff of inexperienced journalists, but they are still journalists. Sometimes you've got to have that sort of thing to keep the people in power honest. Generally the more permanent and professional gatekeepers of the media have a personal and vested interest in authority, and thus are rendered completely compromised by authority. That's why it's routine that the corporate and government agenda gets rubber stamped on to the front pages of newspapers in both the States, Britain and beyond.
I know nothing... this coming from the guy who places his signature on his "anonymous" post...
Sorry buddy, I submit that it is not the case that, "I know nothing," as you elequently put it.
These people did alert the population, and they did investigate the security compromises before doing so. If some random guy came up to them and said, "Gee, did you know that all those security cameras that can monitor you can be controlled with anyone who has a computer," they're just supposed to run the story without checking facts, in your universe. Or perhaps they are supposed to ask for official comment from the authorities, the same authorities that may be responsible for the poorly implemented system. I wonder what said authority would say, probably something along the lines that everything is fine. So then they just print two quotes, and the masses will accept the voice of authority.
In the case of the video cameras, people tolerate their existance because of the trust and the belief that they are being used to protect them. They believe that only authorities with the training and the consent of the public will be watching them, and that it be done with safety, and hopefully dignity in mind. The idea that they could be so easily compromised should be a huge fucking deal. These journalists may have some tough times ahead, but they got the word out worldwide on this matter. And there's a good chance that it's going to be fixed because of this. I've got a five pound note in my filing cabinet right now that I would be more than happy to mail them if this 500 quid fine sticks to them.
Your rambling about strip searches and housebreaks isn't even worth replying to. In America we have this thing called the second ammendment. I would feel very bad indeed for someone without the backing of the legitimate law enforcement authorities breaking in to my house or attempting to strip search me on the street. How the British would deal with such a thing is their own business...
I find it unfortunate that you place the word press in quotes, and then in parenthesis point out that it's a university paper. The implication here is that somehow a university newspaper is less valid than public or corporate newspapers. Do you consider university radio to be somewhat less valid than public or corporate radio?
You say that you think they have the right to free speech, a statement that I would agree to. You also say that they don't have the right to break the law, to which I would say... depends.
Sometimes a journalist has to take risks.
Few would say that a western journalist in some sort of dictatorship country should be punished if they break that country's laws to take pictures of say torture or execution, in order to bring information to the people that is necessary for the people to make informed decisions and to correct injustice.
The question is, does that example relate to the example of the reporters. I would submit that it does, and I would imagine that you would submit that it does not. At that point we would probably reach an argumentative impass.
However, considering that they were not caught performing the action, and are facing consequences for talkign about something that anyone could do at any time, I do believe that they are in fact being punished for exercising free speech. I would imagine that you would disagree with that statement too, which is fine, because freedom of speech means freedom of speech for everybody, not just those you agree with.
Here's the deal, before you all start burning megabytes on the debate whether or not this people were whitehat or blackhat, or whether it creates a slippery slope that will usher in a horde of script kiddies, there's one thing that you all need to remember:
This was an action of the press.
Let me repeat myself, because it's important.
This was an action of the press.
It is the purpose of the press to keep whoever is in power accountable. In the United States of America, this role was so important that until the mid 1970s* the press was considered to be the fourth branch of government. Now things might be a little different over in the United Kingdom, but the last time I checked, their press sometimes tries to expose and keep in check authority there as well.
This isn't a bunch of kids who hax0r1zed the system, and then cranked out a Cult of the Dead Cow text file, and said, "You g0t p0wn3d - but w5 R da Pr3ss."
These were members of the legitimate press, who in the course of their duties as members of a free press, alerted a population about a situation where the authorities who they trust to provide security have failed in carrying out their responsibilities.
* Okay, maybe that 1970s remark was a little sarcastic, but with all the media consolidation by the same megacorporations who buy and sell the elite of the american government, can you really describe it as the fourth branch of government anymore?
Wow, that's a whole lot of money those guys are making. I guess it really does pay to sue everyone, and buy off lawmakers to pass a whole bunch of insane laws, and basically be a dick.
Meanwhile, I'm a small independent movie producer, I don't back the MPAA, region encoding, or CSS. I am even a big supporter of fair use... and I can't even get a booth at a hacker convention. But don't worry, the guys who advocate downloading my film over buying a copy got a space...
Don't get me wrong, on my website we pretty much encourage people to download our film, because the way things are going, we don't have any other means of distributing it. But I love how everything is about the P2P networks versus the Hollywood Big Boys. You know, there are still independent movie producers out there... we just don't get any attention from anyone. I guess the only way you get noticed anymore is if you make a big scandal about how Disney won't distribute your flick...
Seventh Generation is a line of recycled tissues and whatnot. Take a look at their website. Usually you can find them at organic food stores and the like.
Thanks. Comments like that one help me to feel like I'm not alone. I always tell people that you want your first amendment fights to be in the "fringe" areas like porn... Because when it's in the places where all the "normal good decent" people live, you've got a serious problem, and the games probably already over.
I make porn. That's what I do. I work a 50 to 60 hour week.
I pay my taxes, and make payroll on time.
I comply with the law, while still standing up for my first ammendment rights.
I do my best to screen our tallent to make sure that they can handle doing this type of work. Sometimes when it looks like they don't really want to do this type of work, but they're just down on their luck, I'll buy them dinner and help them consider other options.
I even use 100 percent recycled 2 ply Facial Tissues (The brand is seventh generation, btw) when... testing... the product.
In my morning review of all the sources that I get my news from, I continue to watch the Bush administration and their wacko and corrup cronies continue to wage murder under the guise of war to line their own pockets, while continuing to push these insane and unrepresentative extreme right religious agendas, that were bought and paid for by the religious right.
After that, I go through the considerable frustration of trying to forge business partnerships with other business such as banks, credit card companies, insurance companies, etc, etc, to be able to function in the business world. All the while being discriminated against because the widgets I happen to sell have some naked bits.
I choose between people who often have little interest in supporting my business, but would love to freely copy my work, and the people who want to throw everyone in prison for copying anything, and at the same time throw me in prison for making it.
However I don't let either group of assholes get to me. Instead, I remember that there are more people out there who will choose to support what I'm doing in order to see that I keep doing it.
I don't spam. I don't film anyone who is a minor. I work as hard as the next guy, trying to make the economy recover.
However, until I get arrested, just for exercising my first ammendment right to speech, the speech that I'll be making will be against Bush, Cheyney and Ashcroft.
Why go through all this? Why not just go back to being a database programmer working in a cube somewhere? Because I love what I do. I've built my own company from the ground up, and kept it going. The fundamentalists aren't the only people who believe in what they're doing. They're also not the only people who will stick up for their way of life.
Slashdot Mirror
Or they could do what they did with the IndyMedia Servers hosted in the UK...
Perhaps this is the first time that a major well known artist has released his tracks for remix using Garage Band, but others have done it in the past...
Moby did it on their "Feeling So Real" Remixes Single. At the end of the cd, they included a track titled "remixes parts."
You can, (and I have before), but it's a little more tougher...
You also start to run in to issues such as nationality, and citizenship, and entitlement.
However, personally, I don't think it's unreasonable to be able to find something appealing with 50 states to choose from. I object to the homogenization of America.
My first thought when I got that e-mail was that the feds wanted to know who was downloading Nmap pr0n.
Of course, I'm the one who wrote the script and shot the video, so it's only natural.
I think Fyodor is doing the right thing, and I think the feds are just using standard intimidation tactics... but then again, I've always been about state powers as opposed to federal powers. At least with state powers, you can always choose to move to a different state...
I call those the stickers of doom... I guess that applies in this case too...
So, buying a second computer to encode the work done on a first computer is a FREE (at least in beer) option? Please.. I'm glad I don't have you working in my tech department, you'd bankrupt me with all your FREE ideas.
I like how you mutter something about zealotry blinding me. I've been encoding windows media format files on my OS X box for over a year now. It's a pain in the ass. It's less than a pain in the ass than dealing with editing on a Mac, then encoding on a Windows box, and then distributing to a bunch of macs.
But you're right, Mr "I used macs until I was 18," which means if you're any older than 21 or 22 it would seem that you have zero experience with OS X... but then again posting a message where you say "I might be opening myself to criticism" to propose a windows solution on a Mac board, and then immediately getting huffy when someone responds, screams troll to me.
My post was meant to get responses from other people who might be encoding windows media format on their OS X boxes, in the hope that maybe they've found some solutions to a few problems that I've been having. Not to attract a troll whose only contribution is "buy another computer."
Windows Media Format production on a Macintosh OS X is a pain in the ass. Does Microsoft offer a free or even pay program to encode Windows Media on Mac OS X? If your answer is yes, mind providing a link? (Yes, I'm aware that they released an SDK a million years ago, but come on, sit down and program an encoder? I'm a Mac Guy - Sheesh!) The only option that I've been able to find is by using Discreet's Media Cleaner version 6.0 for OS X. It's an expensive program, and it's kind of clunky, and it takes forever to convert from the format that I edit in on my Mac to a Windows Media file. I've never been particularly happy with the output, it never quite seems as good as the quicktime or at the output that gets cranked out pretty fast on a P.C. Even so, you have to settle for an older version of windows media...
However, the masses have windows media player installed on their computer by default, and so I've got to keep cranking out the files. But in answer to the original question for this slashdot post, you'd be insane to want to do windows media format in a mac environment when quicktime is quick and easy and works so much better.
Why not, that's sort of what they did with Xbox. Sell the hardware for less than it costs to make because they can afford to take a loss for several years if they feel like it.
Defcon isn't going downhill, it's still a great place to buy t-shirts!
Oh, there's something else going on there?
You forgot soup kitchens.... never forget soup kitchens... Also, sometimes you can get real lucky and find perfectly good talent going to waste smoking crack in a back alley...
No, really, I'm serious. By the way, did you know that sarcasm isn't listed in the dictionary... look it up!
But yeah, the Cannon XL1S is mighty, I wish I could afford one...
Once again, the example is not appropriate.
If the Oxford newspaper story were about the Dean of Students doing a million quid cocaine deal out of his house, and the press published pictures taken through their window, then the public would clearly judge that this would be a justified case of breaking the law. This hypothetical case is clearly different from your example of violating one's privacy, in their own home where they have a reasonable expectation of privacy, just because someone wants to see some famous skin.
I submit that not only is your argument a straw man, but it doesn't even relate... I would imagine that you'll probably disagree.
heh, yeah :-) What is it, the Sun's page 3?
Fair enough...
If I had no special protections what so ever as a member of the press, I suppose I'd probably refuse to identify myself, use fake names, and the like too...
I mean, it's got to be a pretty scary thing to report on abuse of authority, and then stand alone before said authority...
The reason why this is important is because of the idea of immediacy. When a person is looking at a headline, they determine whether or not it has any bearing to them. If an article doesn't have any immediacy to them personally or to their interests in general, then it doesn't get read.
There is little technical difference between these two headlines, however from the point of view of an Oxford student, there would be a world of difference. Consider:
Headline one: HTTPS provides encryption that HTTP does not.
Headline two: Private computer conversations at Oxford easily monitored by anyone.
However, they didn't just log some passwords sent in the clear, according to the article (you did read it, did you not?) they had the ability to view and to some degree controll the pervasive CCTV security network. This is a big deal, for a whole lot of reasons.
You say things about stuff that's been known for years and provable without breaking the law. Known by whom? I would guess this stuff wasn't known by the general public at Oxford, the population that that particular paper is supposed to inform and serve.
If you fail to see why it's important that the press informs the population about security matters in a time of echelon, and increasing government infringements on the rights of ordinary citizens, then you might want to spend a little more time meditating on the phrase that you used, freedom of idiots...
So you're saying that the massive and common daily infrastructure level breeches of privacy is okay, because it's quietly perpetuated by the authorities?
Yeah, they may be nothing more than a rotating staff of inexperienced journalists, but they are still journalists. Sometimes you've got to have that sort of thing to keep the people in power honest. Generally the more permanent and professional gatekeepers of the media have a personal and vested interest in authority, and thus are rendered completely compromised by authority. That's why it's routine that the corporate and government agenda gets rubber stamped on to the front pages of newspapers in both the States, Britain and beyond.
Just too many people doing things... properly...
I know nothing... this coming from the guy who places his signature on his "anonymous" post...
Sorry buddy, I submit that it is not the case that, "I know nothing," as you elequently put it.
These people did alert the population, and they did investigate the security compromises before doing so. If some random guy came up to them and said, "Gee, did you know that all those security cameras that can monitor you can be controlled with anyone who has a computer," they're just supposed to run the story without checking facts, in your universe. Or perhaps they are supposed to ask for official comment from the authorities, the same authorities that may be responsible for the poorly implemented system. I wonder what said authority would say, probably something along the lines that everything is fine. So then they just print two quotes, and the masses will accept the voice of authority.
In the case of the video cameras, people tolerate their existance because of the trust and the belief that they are being used to protect them. They believe that only authorities with the training and the consent of the public will be watching them, and that it be done with safety, and hopefully dignity in mind. The idea that they could be so easily compromised should be a huge fucking deal. These journalists may have some tough times ahead, but they got the word out worldwide on this matter. And there's a good chance that it's going to be fixed because of this. I've got a five pound note in my filing cabinet right now that I would be more than happy to mail them if this 500 quid fine sticks to them.
Your rambling about strip searches and housebreaks isn't even worth replying to. In America we have this thing called the second ammendment. I would feel very bad indeed for someone without the backing of the legitimate law enforcement authorities breaking in to my house or attempting to strip search me on the street. How the British would deal with such a thing is their own business...
I find it unfortunate that you place the word press in quotes, and then in parenthesis point out that it's a university paper. The implication here is that somehow a university newspaper is less valid than public or corporate newspapers. Do you consider university radio to be somewhat less valid than public or corporate radio?
You say that you think they have the right to free speech, a statement that I would agree to. You also say that they don't have the right to break the law, to which I would say... depends.
Sometimes a journalist has to take risks.
Few would say that a western journalist in some sort of dictatorship country should be punished if they break that country's laws to take pictures of say torture or execution, in order to bring information to the people that is necessary for the people to make informed decisions and to correct injustice.
The question is, does that example relate to the example of the reporters. I would submit that it does, and I would imagine that you would submit that it does not. At that point we would probably reach an argumentative impass.
However, considering that they were not caught performing the action, and are facing consequences for talkign about something that anyone could do at any time, I do believe that they are in fact being punished for exercising free speech. I would imagine that you would disagree with that statement too, which is fine, because freedom of speech means freedom of speech for everybody, not just those you agree with.
Here's the deal, before you all start burning megabytes on the debate whether or not this people were whitehat or blackhat, or whether it creates a slippery slope that will usher in a horde of script kiddies, there's one thing that you all need to remember:
This was an action of the press.
Let me repeat myself, because it's important.
This was an action of the press.
It is the purpose of the press to keep whoever is in power accountable. In the United States of America, this role was so important that until the mid 1970s* the press was considered to be the fourth branch of government. Now things might be a little different over in the United Kingdom, but the last time I checked, their press sometimes tries to expose and keep in check authority there as well.
This isn't a bunch of kids who hax0r1zed the system, and then cranked out a Cult of the Dead Cow text file, and said, "You g0t p0wn3d - but w5 R da Pr3ss."
These were members of the legitimate press, who in the course of their duties as members of a free press, alerted a population about a situation where the authorities who they trust to provide security have failed in carrying out their responsibilities.
* Okay, maybe that 1970s remark was a little sarcastic, but with all the media consolidation by the same megacorporations who buy and sell the elite of the american government, can you really describe it as the fourth branch of government anymore?
Meanwhile, I'm a small independent movie producer, I don't back the MPAA, region encoding, or CSS. I am even a big supporter of fair use... and I can't even get a booth at a hacker convention. But don't worry, the guys who advocate downloading my film over buying a copy got a space...
Don't get me wrong, on my website we pretty much encourage people to download our film, because the way things are going, we don't have any other means of distributing it. But I love how everything is about the P2P networks versus the Hollywood Big Boys. You know, there are still independent movie producers out there... we just don't get any attention from anyone. I guess the only way you get noticed anymore is if you make a big scandal about how Disney won't distribute your flick...
I think I'll go see if the MPAA is hiring...
$> emerge system
2 Days! :-)
(But it was worth it, probably the coolest linux install I've ever done)
Hell, that sounds like just about every game of WarCraft III that I have on battlenet...
Getting an apartment, finding a job, integrating with society, that might be a little more difficult...
Seventh Generation is a line of recycled tissues and whatnot. Take a look at their website. Usually you can find them at organic food stores and the like.
Thanks. Comments like that one help me to feel like I'm not alone. I always tell people that you want your first amendment fights to be in the "fringe" areas like porn... Because when it's in the places where all the "normal good decent" people live, you've got a serious problem, and the games probably already over.
I pay my taxes, and make payroll on time.
I comply with the law, while still standing up for my first ammendment rights.
I do my best to screen our tallent to make sure that they can handle doing this type of work. Sometimes when it looks like they don't really want to do this type of work, but they're just down on their luck, I'll buy them dinner and help them consider other options.
I even use 100 percent recycled 2 ply Facial Tissues (The brand is seventh generation, btw) when... testing... the product.
In my morning review of all the sources that I get my news from, I continue to watch the Bush administration and their wacko and corrup cronies continue to wage murder under the guise of war to line their own pockets, while continuing to push these insane and unrepresentative extreme right religious agendas, that were bought and paid for by the religious right.
After that, I go through the considerable frustration of trying to forge business partnerships with other business such as banks, credit card companies, insurance companies, etc, etc, to be able to function in the business world. All the while being discriminated against because the widgets I happen to sell have some naked bits.
I choose between people who often have little interest in supporting my business, but would love to freely copy my work, and the people who want to throw everyone in prison for copying anything, and at the same time throw me in prison for making it.
However I don't let either group of assholes get to me. Instead, I remember that there are more people out there who will choose to support what I'm doing in order to see that I keep doing it.
I don't spam. I don't film anyone who is a minor. I work as hard as the next guy, trying to make the economy recover.
However, until I get arrested, just for exercising my first ammendment right to speech, the speech that I'll be making will be against Bush, Cheyney and Ashcroft.
Why go through all this? Why not just go back to being a database programmer working in a cube somewhere? Because I love what I do. I've built my own company from the ground up, and kept it going. The fundamentalists aren't the only people who believe in what they're doing. They're also not the only people who will stick up for their way of life.