That is correct... I forgot these. Anyway my point was that it is a global mess from a standartization point of view....but it is still the safest way of getting from one point to another (wich is illogical).
That's the same functionality as in GSM and UMTS phones: You call, tells that device is stolen and wich IMEI-no. it has and it is then globally disabled.
You can easily get gravity... just look in Arthur C. Clarke's 2001 (either film or book) how you do it, it is btw. the only SF film wich shows how to make artificial gravity without any fictional gravity device. Centrifugal force do work in space too, it may not be practical but it can be done.
I'm not smoking anything... you have eaten some bad mushrooms.;-) That is called inflation and the only reason you can't see/feel it (in this case) is because it is a high-volume, low-cost product. If your government did the same with the money everyone would scream because the prices would double in matter of days. What you think is "I make a copy and then I've got $2" but in reality those two copies are together worth what you paid for one, so each of them is worth 50 cents. They are worth what you paid, not what you can get because you don't have any real influence on what you can get... else you would be making money out of nothing, wich seems quite cool... and quite impoosible.
--
This sig. is a copy of a real cool sig... wich i do not remember.
The only reason you don't want to protect your music is because you do not lose it... If it was a CD, DVD, tape or an iPod (the whole iPod) you would protect it. You do btw. lose something, everytime a copy is made of something you paid for you lose 50% of the rest of what you paid... after ten copies the track you paid $1 for is worth 10 cents. Your response, however, show us that you do not care about other peoples property... and THAT is the whole problem.
--
I do not like DRM...
You can't use DVD's in a CD-player either and You can't use CD's in your tape deck. I didn't say it was backward compatible. I said it would be transparent in use.
--
Yes, I still do hate DRM.
That's not in the scope... everything can be cracked, just give me the time and the technology and I get you somone that can crack it. You need to remove the reason for cracking it, if it always works then there are no reason for cracking it. DVD-Jon didn't crack CSS because it was there, he cracked it because he couldn't see his films where he wanted and on what he wanted... if you look at all these cracks they are made just because of that, it is not because "I want share my films/music with the whole world". In my post I've tried to ADRESS ALL POSSIBLE AND LEGAL difficulties with DRM (with success) and people are still arguing against it. That's seems to me more like people are interested in just beeing able to make and distribute illegal copies... that is very interesting.;-)
Technically when your car is stolen it is a case between the thiev and the police... ...so you do in fact not care about the fact that someone has stolen the music you have paid for ?...and that is just because you got a working copy of it... if we now were talking about a physical CD (or the whole iPod) then you would care, wouldn't you ?
Yes, DRM is wrong but so is your attitude... just because you didn't lose anything doesn't mean that you shouldn't care about it... and btw. strictly speaking you did lose 50% of what you paid for that music. The DRM problem is in fact two separate problems... one is about what one can do with something (s)he bought (everything except redistributing copies, wich is illegal in allmost all countries)... and the other is how to protect it from beeing stolen. As long as the protection makes it difficult to use it, then it is wrong... I can live with the fact that I need to buy something to have it... ...and all the DRM schemes used do not adress any of these problems... and are in fact only ment for controlling how we can use the media, because that is the only thing the record labels (and Microsoft) cares about. That is btw. called censorship.
It could be as simple as dual key encryption. The player should in fact be as simple as possible... my points are: make it as simple and cheap for the end user as possible then there will be no point in trying to crack it.
Nothing... however if the DRM is transparent for you then you are just doing the same as if you were breaking into your own car just because you don't want to use the key you've got in your hand.
That is correct... and ? Your car got a dongle too... the key, so does your home. You use a card for your bank, that's a dongle too. Correctly implemented it is a very secure and very flexible solution. I'm no DRM fan... I just listed some minimum requiremnts... and a possible solution....and it's not perfect.
That would be optimal... I'm not pro-DRM, I just described the minimum requirements for an implementation wich could be successful. I also listed some technical problems...
DRM woul be a acceptable solution if (and only if):
the consumer have the right to buy as many copies of the media, at raw media cost, when (s)he bought the right to see it (then you don't need to copy it). The content owner must however always and forever be able to ship new media if you media dies, after X years they may choose to lift the copy protection.
the DRM was truly transparent and platform independent (also on open platforms like Linux and xBSD).
the DRM didn't require a connection to the content owner.
If you now look at this, it is quite simple to achive... most people are just too blind to see the solution.
The solution is a USB like device with personal key allowing wiewing and copying as long as the key device is present, copies made this way have to require the key too unless the media is uncopyable (that could be a MP3 player with no digital output capability).
Now... there are several problems in it... your key device need to have the capacity to hold indefinite number of keys... AND there have to be a central copy of it so you can get a new one if it fails (wich may be against the law at least in some countries). Next problem are gifts... you can't buy the physical media... you have to buy a gift certificate (because the key have to be updated too, unless there also is an online key distribution service wich is multiplatform).
---
This idea is now in public. You may or may not use it. The license is GPL ver. 3....oh shit;-)
I know... and Microsoft got an "Open" XML "standard". Noone forbids you to call your company for anything with international in the name and declare that it works with standartization.
ECMA was never a standartization organization, it is a "best practice association"... please do not confuse an international standartization organisation with an association of some manufacturers. ECMA is however very valuable in areas where no standard exist...
"It's their machine, and they shouldn't be forced into using something they're not comfortable with." Now, you may just tell us:
why they are forced to use Windows (oh yes, they are)
why they are forced to upgrade their familiar OS when they buy a new PC (license is non-transferable)
why do we always assume they are comfortable with Windows (even when they never used a particular version before)
When people ask me what they should use I tell them "Use Linux", when they then say "but I ment wich Windows", I tell them that if they don't know wich Windows to use they can't say that they can't use Linux... No, I don't have many friends... but I do have good friends... and there are both Windows, Mac and Linux users among them.
--
I left Windows 3 years ago with the intention of returning after one year...
so your logic is: a OS that do have a command line is totally crap... Well, just FYI, Microsoft and Apple both been there and tried that... and guess what... they do now have more powerfull commandlines than they've got ever before. You can use a Linux system without needing the access to the command line, just like Windows or Mac.
--
I left Windows 3 years ago with the intention of returning after one year...
...in our reality we can't measure success in kG of gold left by users... installed base may be a way of measuring but how do you get that info (and no, that is not the same as "how many downloads") ? A winner is simply a project with a satisfied userbase of significant size. ...and no, that doesn't make Windows a success... just ask any Windows user if they would accept a car, TV set or washing machine wich behaved like their Windows and you'll get the answer "You are not serious, are you ?".
--
I left Windows 3 years ago with the intention of returning after one year...
Oh yes, it can. You can fight it with your money (not buying DRM'ed stuff) and you can fight it with politics. If enough people don't buy the companies will abandon it. Politically we can make OUR CHOSEN REPRESENTATIVES pass laws against DRM and TCPA, none of these should ever be managed by corporatins, I would feel more safe if NSA did the TCPA part. The ironic part is that our chosen representatives don't see the dangers wich lies in both DRM and TCPA for the democracy...
DRM & TCPA: new high tech way to implement totalitarian methods, such as censorship and propaganda, on a global scale in the hands of greedy corporations. Dr. Joseph Göbbels would just love those people: "Mein Fürher, with the new DRM & TCPA technology we can manage information at peoples own homes, they will never be able to get or send any other information than the truth we provide.".
I don't really think that anyone is really interested in.NET, Mono is good to have in the same way wine is good to have but as soon as you kill the last WinBox in your company you don't need any of them anymore. As I see it.NET is a good way for profit maximizing for sw. compnies: developers can make their job quicker and the companies are selling the product more expensive (Pay $$$, this is new technology)... and the final product is not any better and is not easily portable (mostly because it is heavily relying on components wich are part of the OS).
--
the truth is the truth... even when you doesn't like it.
I didn't count Macs and Linux' because they'll be targeted when lusers start to switch over in greater numbers. The human factor is important in this so when clicking idiots move to other platforms we will be getting bots and a bot may run in user space. It is easier to fix but that doesn't matter for bot's day to day operation, a spambot fx. does only need outgoing IRC and outgoing SMTP, noone will notice it if it is not sending 100+ mails a minute.
--
Disclaimer: No, I do not do bots. Information above is common knowledge.
That would mean that 75% of computers would not be infected, ergo that 75% of users finally got the clue of protecting... I'll think I'll spoil your illusion... 50% of those 75% are behind corporate firewalls wich do not allow any traffic other than specified, another 15% are on government networks around the world wich also are behind that kind of firewalls. Are you scared now ?
Slashdot Mirror
That is correct... I forgot these. Anyway my point was that it is a global mess from a standartization point of view. ...but it is still the safest way of getting from one point to another (wich is illogical).
That's the same functionality as in GSM and UMTS phones: You call, tells that device is stolen and wich IMEI-no. it has and it is then globally disabled.
You can easily get gravity... just look in Arthur C. Clarke's 2001 (either film or book) how you do it, it is btw. the only SF film wich shows how to make artificial gravity without any fictional gravity device. Centrifugal force do work in space too, it may not be practical but it can be done.
I'm not smoking anything... you have eaten some bad mushrooms. ;-)
That is called inflation and the only reason you can't see/feel it (in this case) is because it is a high-volume, low-cost product.
If your government did the same with the money everyone would scream because the prices would double in matter of days.
What you think is "I make a copy and then I've got $2" but in reality those two copies are together worth what you paid for one, so each of them is worth 50 cents. They are worth what you paid, not what you can get because you don't have any real influence on what you can get... else you would be making money out of nothing, wich seems quite cool... and quite impoosible.
--
This sig. is a copy of a real cool sig... wich i do not remember.
The only reason you don't want to protect your music is because you do not lose it... If it was a CD, DVD, tape or an iPod (the whole iPod) you would protect it. You do btw. lose something, everytime a copy is made of something you paid for you lose 50% of the rest of what you paid... after ten copies the track you paid $1 for is worth 10 cents.
Your response, however, show us that you do not care about other peoples property... and THAT is the whole problem.
--
I do not like DRM...
You can't use DVD's in a CD-player either and You can't use CD's in your tape deck. I didn't say it was backward compatible. I said it would be transparent in use.
--
Yes, I still do hate DRM.
That's not in the scope... everything can be cracked, just give me the time and the technology and I get you somone that can crack it. ;-)
You need to remove the reason for cracking it, if it always works then there are no reason for cracking it. DVD-Jon didn't crack CSS because it was there, he cracked it because he couldn't see his films where he wanted and on what he wanted... if you look at all these cracks they are made just because of that, it is not because "I want share my films/music with the whole world".
In my post I've tried to ADRESS ALL POSSIBLE AND LEGAL difficulties with DRM (with success) and people are still arguing against it. That's seems to me more like people are interested in just beeing able to make and distribute illegal copies... that is very interesting.
Technically when your car is stolen it is a case between the thiev and the police... ...and that is just because you got a working copy of it... if we now were talking about a physical CD (or the whole iPod) then you would care, wouldn't you ?
...so you do in fact not care about the fact that someone has stolen the music you have paid for ?
Yes, DRM is wrong but so is your attitude... just because you didn't lose anything doesn't mean that you shouldn't care about it... and btw. strictly speaking you did lose 50% of what you paid for that music.
The DRM problem is in fact two separate problems... one is about what one can do with something (s)he bought (everything except redistributing copies, wich is illegal in allmost all countries)... and the other is how to protect it from beeing stolen. As long as the protection makes it difficult to use it, then it is wrong...
I can live with the fact that I need to buy something to have it...
...and all the DRM schemes used do not adress any of these problems... and are in fact only ment for controlling how we can use the media, because that is the only thing the record labels (and Microsoft) cares about. That is btw. called censorship.
It could be as simple as dual key encryption. The player should in fact be as simple as possible... my points are: make it as simple and cheap for the end user as possible then there will be no point in trying to crack it.
Nothing... however if the DRM is transparent for you then you are just doing the same as if you were breaking into your own car just because you don't want to use the key you've got in your hand.
That is correct... and ? Your car got a dongle too... the key, so does your home. You use a card for your bank, that's a dongle too. ...and it's not perfect.
Correctly implemented it is a very secure and very flexible solution.
I'm no DRM fan... I just listed some minimum requiremnts... and a possible solution.
That would be optimal... I'm not pro-DRM, I just described the minimum requirements for an implementation wich could be successful. I also listed some technical problems...
- the consumer have the right to buy as many copies of the media, at raw media cost, when (s)he bought the right to see it (then you don't need to copy it). The content owner must however always and forever be able to ship new media if you media dies, after X years they may choose to lift the copy protection.
- the DRM was truly transparent and platform independent (also on open platforms like Linux and xBSD).
- the DRM didn't require a connection to the content owner.
If you now look at this, it is quite simple to achive... most people are just too blind to see the solution. The solution is a USB like device with personal key allowing wiewing and copying as long as the key device is present, copies made this way have to require the key too unless the media is uncopyable (that could be a MP3 player with no digital output capability).Now... there are several problems in it... your key device need to have the capacity to hold indefinite number of keys... AND there have to be a central copy of it so you can get a new one if it fails (wich may be against the law at least in some countries). Next problem are gifts... you can't buy the physical media... you have to buy a gift certificate (because the key have to be updated too, unless there also is an online key distribution service wich is multiplatform).
---
This idea is now in public. You may or may not use it. The license is GPL ver. 3.
I know... and Microsoft got an "Open" XML "standard". Noone forbids you to call your company for anything with international in the name and declare that it works with standartization.
ECMA was never a standartization organization, it is a "best practice association"...
please do not confuse an international standartization organisation with an association of some manufacturers. ECMA is however very valuable in areas where no standard exist...
Now, you may just tell us:
- why they are forced to use Windows (oh yes, they are)
- why they are forced to upgrade their familiar OS when they buy a new PC (license is non-transferable)
- why do we always assume they are comfortable with Windows (even when they never used a particular version before)
When people ask me what they should use I tell them "Use Linux", when they then say "but I ment wich Windows", I tell them that if they don't know wich Windows to use they can't say that they can't use Linux...No, I don't have many friends... but I do have good friends... and there are both Windows, Mac and Linux users among them.
--
I left Windows 3 years ago with the intention of returning after one year...
so your logic is: a OS that do have a command line is totally crap...
Well, just FYI, Microsoft and Apple both been there and tried that... and guess what... they do now have more powerfull commandlines than they've got ever before.
You can use a Linux system without needing the access to the command line, just like Windows or Mac.
--
I left Windows 3 years ago with the intention of returning after one year...
...in our reality we can't measure success in kG of gold left by users... installed base may be a way of measuring but how do you get that info (and no, that is not the same as "how many downloads") ?
A winner is simply a project with a satisfied userbase of significant size.
...and no, that doesn't make Windows a success... just ask any Windows user if they would accept a car, TV set or washing machine wich behaved like their Windows and you'll get the answer "You are not serious, are you ?".
--
I left Windows 3 years ago with the intention of returning after one year...
He can't do... He got the same problem as IRS: it just can't handle calculations on so big numbers.
Oh yes, it can. You can fight it with your money (not buying DRM'ed stuff) and you can fight it with politics. If enough people don't buy the companies will abandon it. Politically we can make OUR CHOSEN REPRESENTATIVES pass laws against DRM and TCPA, none of these should ever be managed by corporatins, I would feel more safe if NSA did the TCPA part. The ironic part is that our chosen representatives don't see the dangers wich lies in both DRM and TCPA for the democracy...
DRM & TCPA: new high tech way to implement totalitarian methods, such as censorship and propaganda, on a global scale in the hands of greedy corporations.
Dr. Joseph Göbbels would just love those people: "Mein Fürher, with the new DRM & TCPA technology we can manage information at peoples own homes, they will never be able to get or send any other information than the truth we provide.".
...a great practical joke if Google took those pictures a couple of days earlier than announced ?
I don't really think that anyone is really interested in .NET, Mono is good to have in the same way wine is good to have but as soon as you kill the last WinBox in your company you don't need any of them anymore. .NET is a good way for profit maximizing for sw. compnies: developers can make their job quicker and the companies are selling the product more expensive (Pay $$$, this is new technology)... and the final product is not any better and is not easily portable (mostly because it is heavily relying on components wich are part of the OS).
As I see it
--
the truth is the truth... even when you doesn't like it.
I didn't count Macs and Linux' because they'll be targeted when lusers start to switch over in greater numbers. The human factor is important in this so when clicking idiots move to other platforms we will be getting bots and a bot may run in user space. It is easier to fix but that doesn't matter for bot's day to day operation, a spambot fx. does only need outgoing IRC and outgoing SMTP, noone will notice it if it is not sending 100+ mails a minute.
--
Disclaimer: No, I do not do bots. Information above is common knowledge.
That would mean that 75% of computers would not be infected, ergo that 75% of users finally got the clue of protecting... I'll think I'll spoil your illusion... 50% of those 75% are behind corporate firewalls wich do not allow any traffic other than specified, another 15% are on government networks around the world wich also are behind that kind of firewalls.
Are you scared now ?