What's the big deal? As soon as Joe Sixpack sees an error message from his CD writer app, telling him he can't write that song to CD, he'll hit the chat rooms, message boards, or search engines looking for a solution, and will likely find Nero Burning ROM or some other burner app whose author is not beholden to any USian music mafiosi.
This is a solution in search of a boycott. Besides, Easy CD Creator sucks anyway. Let them cripple it, it deserves to lose even more market share.
How do we lose if we pay a low, reasonable price for downloadable music?
This isn't about downloadable music, it's about burning music onto CDROM - whatever the source. If you can't figure out how we lose here, then maybe you should sell your computer. It's far too complicated a tool for you.
Do you honestly feel good about yourself when you steal music from artists you like?
No, I feel good only when I steal music from "artists" who suck (which is almost every single one of them). I certainly don't feel bad in any case.
If you do, move to a third world country where that's legal.
This is nothing less than the equivalent of the Boston Tea Party for the DNS.
How ironic that it is Britain and all the other countries that are revolting against the US-dominated ICANN tax authority, for the same reason that the colonists dumped England's tea shipments into the harbor.
Thanks, Rush Limbaugh, for your insightful comments. That's an old saw almost as old as the cliche "liberal media" and just as untrue.
Who was/were the moron(s) that modded this up?
Re:The whole DNS schema is currently broken.
on
IETF vs. ICANN
·
· Score: 1
This has already been done, and it was a total disaster. Wanna see how bad it is? Go try to register an appropriate.US domain for your
location and the type of enterprise you are involved with. If you can even find the right registrar for your particular subdomain, good
luck getting them to respond. Chances are, if there is a live registrar for your subdomain tree, he's a squatter attempting to hold an
entire municipality hostage to his ludicrous fee structure. That's why most cities, towns, counties, states, and other agencies have.COM.NET or.ORG domains.
The browser would not be necessary, however, for using game software with SSL
because such game software itself processes an amount of money charged with users of networked games through a credit card number securely.
So why bother with RBL anymore, especially in light of the recent revelations about the operators abusing their position of trust? It doesn't do the job, and the criteria for inclusion have become highly subjective, even prejudicial.
In contrast, the RSS - while operated under the aegis of the same people that run the RBL - has completely objective criteria for including addresses, which anyone is able to verify if required. It also stops a hell of a lot more email than the RBL.
I've always thought that/. was full of Raving Libertarian Nuts who wanted to privatize environmentalism.
That was your first mistake in this post.
Now, when we most need it, it seems everyone wants government controls on network providers. Our loyal libertarians now want to be able to sue someone for not forwarding their network traffic. What?!
Being libertarian, or even Libertarian, does not mean one believes there is no right to sue for redress of grievances. Providing a justice system for resolving disputes and enforcing verdicts is one of the proper functions of government.
One guy with a Score: 3 complains, "Hey! I paid for the full internet! Who's trying to censor me?"
If you paid for that, and did not receive it because your provider is blocking traffic you wish to transmit or receive, then that is exactly what is happening. You have a legitimate grievance with your ISP. It's called breach of contract. Some would call it fraud. Even
Liberatarians believe fraud should be illegal, and punishable by government enforcement of laws prohibiting deceptive practices.
Why are TV manufacturers going along with this?
on
Digital TV Approaches
·
· Score: 1
They are doing this because they are owned, by and large, by the very media conglomerates that want to push copy controls into the mainstream.
But this doesn't seem to be getting anywhere with hard drives. CPRM seems to be stillborn. That is, until the media conglomerates start buying up hard drive manufacturers. AOL-Time Warner-Seagate, anyone? How about Sony-Fujitsu? At the rate media conglomerates are growing into media juggernauts, with their fingers in every pie, I don't think even IBM's mighty market cap will keep it - or at least its hard drive manufacturing business - safe from a buyout indefinitely.
Vivendi-Universal-IBM, EMI-Maxtor, Fox-Western Digital - scary stuff, but not unrealistic.
Re:Sun does not respect nor fully support Linux
on
Sun Launches JXTA
·
· Score: 1
... their sales to drop 73 percent...
Liar. Net income dropped 73%. There are a ton of reasons why that would be so, even if they sold MORE servers than in the last reporting period and had higher revenue from sales. Ever heard of acquisitions, R&D, that sort of thing?
If you're gonna offer a gratuitous bash, do it right.
Besides, plenty of companies ignore Linux. There isn't a moral imperative to support Linux. And Linus would be the first to agree with me.
Microsofties, Linuxheads - same song, different verse.
$ uname -a
SunOS electabuzz 5.8 Generic sun4u sparc SUNW,Ultra-Enterprise
$ echo '[q]sa[ln0=aln80~Psnlbx]16isb15CB32EF3AF9C0E5D7272 C3AF4F2snlbxq'|dc
176 is unimplemented
176 is unimplemented
176 is unimplemented
176 is unimplemented
176 is unimplemented
176 is unimplemented
176 is unimplemented
176 is unimplemented
176 is unimplemented
176 is unimplemented
176 is unimplemented
176 is unimplemented
176 is unimplemented
176 is unimplemented
176 is unimplemented
176 is unimplemented
176 is unimplemented
176 is unimplemented
176 is unimplemented
176 is unimplemented
176 is unimplemented
176 is unimplemented
176 is unimplemented
176 is unimplemented
176 is unimplemented
176 is unimplemented
176 is unimplemented ...
Dale Todd, Evan's father, said he hooked up with Thompson through research he did on violent video games. He even obtained a copy of "Doom" and played it himself. He was appalled.
Yeah, I totally understand. Dated graphics, 2.5D environment, limited plot depth. DOOM was totally appalling, all right.
DOOM? D-O-O-M???? That game was the tamest of the tame. I am appalled that Todd was such a cheapskate that the PC he provided for his family was so lame that DOOM was all it could run. Who else but the owners of 8-year-old hand-me-down PCs still plays DOOM in the 21st century?
Any attempt to determine the source of a file on Freenet only serves to spread that file around even more.
Law enforcement surveillance is 100 percent counterproductive to law enforcement surveillance purposes. If you are actively trying to determine who is distributing a file, the only thing you'll be able to discover with certainty is that you are the one distributing the file.
Heavens Above is quite the cool site, and I just noticed that they are an Akamai customer, so they are probably fairly resistant to slashdotting.
Another great site for those who are interested in this stuff is Ron Dantowitz's Sky Show. Ron has pioneered some inexpensive methods for getting diffraction-limited images and video from mass-market amateur telescopes and video equipment. You, too, can make a recognizeable movie or snapshot of the shuttle and/or ISS as they pass overhead.
The second point is utterly baffling. Let me get this straight: if you are a dull, plodding
worker who punches a time card, by all means, you should benefit from your labor. However,
if you're talented, gifted, or busted your ass to be able to creating something new, innovative,
and popular... well, jack, you don't get squat for that.
What a load of horse shit. Who the hell is this Hettinger dweeb to decide that if I make a
symphony, that I can't benefit from it monitarily? Because "natural talent" is involved? Does
that mean that since I'm out of shape, I should get paid more to go dig a ditch than someone
who's fit, since it is a lot easier for him? No, the end result is what we judge. In Hettinger's
mind, for the greatest reward, I should find the job I'm least suited to do, and go struggle
with it. Obvious idiocy.
You misunderstood. He said that the effort put into labour does not correlate with the reward obtained for that labor. The guy who is lazy and does only what is required of him, can reap the same or better rewards for his efforts, as the guy who is talented, motivated and works hard. He is merely pointing out the fact that the magnitude of effort expended in labour does not correlate with the magnitude of the reward received. In other words, the argument that artists or inventors deserve a reward in proportion to the effort they expended creating intellectual property does not stand. The market sets the reward they get, amount of effort has nothing to do with it.
So bugger off with that line of thinking, we ain't buying it.
Furthermore, inventor Number One and Inventor Number Two may create the same intellectual property, and even if Number One expended much more effort than Number Two in creating the same invention, Number Two gets the reward because he filed the patent first.
Apparently, so we are told, copyright is restricting the flow of information.
Since when?
Since it was intigated two centuries ago. If only the author has the right to distribute his work, then the flow of information is restricted. How can you say it is not?
People seem to think that once I have created something, you have the right to do what the hell you like with it.
Bull!
But I don't, even under the original implementation of copyright, which is quite liberal compared to the DMCA. I can read your work as many times as I like, I can sell it or give my copy away. I cannot make a copy of it and distribute that copy.
The DMCA tries to permit you to force me to pay you every time I re-read your novel, or listen again to a recording of your song, whether I bought that copy, or heard it on the radio, or encoded it to a conveniently portable format for my digital listening device.
Is this what you're defending?
Once I've created something, surely I am the only person who gets to decide what happens
to it?
No, you are not.
You wouldn't say you have the right to do what you want with cookies I had baked,...
Once you sell those cookies to me, they are no longer yours. I can do with them as I please.
...so why do you think that with my *intellectual* property?
Who says I do? If I buy a copy of your novel, I can, in fact, do whatever I want with it, short of distributing a new copy of it. You should have no right to extract payment from me for each time I read it. The DMCA, however, gives you that right, even though it is practically unenforceable, as Napster has shown.
On one hand, the enthusiastic "early adopters" will simply say that there's no way to predict
where technological progression will take us and that we should simply "play it by ear",
adapting to each problem as it occurs.
We are suffering from apallingly short-sighted allocation policies that were in place 15 years ago.
Stanford recently did the right thing, and gave back an entire Class A netblock, renumbering into the remaining Class B blocks they retained (36.0.0.0/8 was the block they returned to ARIN, in case you're wondering).
Otherparties mentioned in that NWFusion article seem to think they have a God-given right to hoard address space they will never use.
According to the NWFusion article, it is estimated that only 69 million IP addresses are actually in use, out of the 160 million to 1 billion that are practicably useable given the limitations of IPv4 routing protocols.
Slashdot Mirror
This is a solution in search of a boycott. Besides, Easy CD Creator sucks anyway. Let them cripple it, it deserves to lose even more market share.
This isn't about downloadable music, it's about burning music onto CDROM - whatever the source. If you can't figure out how we lose here, then maybe you should sell your computer. It's far too complicated a tool for you.
Do you honestly feel good about yourself when you steal music from artists you like?
No, I feel good only when I steal music from "artists" who suck (which is almost every single one of them). I certainly don't feel bad in any case.
If you do, move to a third world country where that's legal.
I already live in the US.
How ironic that it is Britain and all the other countries that are revolting against the US-dominated ICANN tax authority, for the same reason that the colonists dumped England's tea shipments into the harbor.
Irony can be pretty ironic, don't you think?
The MPAA and Judge Kaplan are full of #2. #1 on them both.
Who was/were the moron(s) that modded this up?
This has already been done, and it was a total disaster. Wanna see how bad it is? Go try to register an appropriate .US domain for your
location and the type of enterprise you are involved with. If you can even find the right registrar for your particular subdomain, good
luck getting them to respond. Chances are, if there is a live registrar for your subdomain tree, he's a squatter attempting to hold an
entire municipality hostage to his ludicrous fee structure. That's why most cities, towns, counties, states, and other agencies have .COM .NET or .ORG domains.
PARSER ERROR! Caught SIGTERM, dumping core.
SPAM has always been canned...
Two empires in decline... what's the problem? Darwin will take care of both of them eventually.
reject=553 Mail from 209.210.138.47 rejected;see http://mail-abuse.org/rbl/
When it receives a connection from a client on the RSS, it logs this reason:
reject=553 Mail from 203.167.121.7 rejected;see http://mail-abuse.org/rss/
Checking my logs for the past three days, I find the following:
# grep '/rbl/' syslog* | wc -l
17
# grep '/rss/' syslog* | wc -l
2018
#
So why bother with RBL anymore, especially in light of the recent revelations about the operators abusing their position of trust? It doesn't do the job, and the criteria for inclusion have become highly subjective, even prejudicial.
In contrast, the RSS - while operated under the aegis of the same people that run the RBL - has completely objective criteria for including addresses, which anyone is able to verify if required. It also stops a hell of a lot more email than the RBL.
That was your first mistake in this post.
Now, when we most need it, it seems everyone wants government controls on network providers. Our loyal libertarians now want to be able to sue someone for not forwarding their network traffic. What?!
Being libertarian, or even Libertarian, does not mean one believes there is no right to sue for redress of grievances. Providing a justice system for resolving disputes and enforcing verdicts is one of the proper functions of government.
One guy with a Score: 3 complains, "Hey! I paid for the full internet! Who's trying to censor me?"
If you paid for that, and did not receive it because your provider is blocking traffic you wish to transmit or receive, then that is exactly what is happening. You have a legitimate grievance with your ISP. It's called breach of contract. Some would call it fraud. Even Liberatarians believe fraud should be illegal, and punishable by government enforcement of laws prohibiting deceptive practices.
But this doesn't seem to be getting anywhere with hard drives. CPRM seems to be stillborn. That is, until the media conglomerates start buying up hard drive manufacturers. AOL-Time Warner-Seagate, anyone? How about Sony-Fujitsu? At the rate media conglomerates are growing into media juggernauts, with their fingers in every pie, I don't think even IBM's mighty market cap will keep it - or at least its hard drive manufacturing business - safe from a buyout indefinitely.
Vivendi-Universal-IBM, EMI-Maxtor, Fox-Western Digital - scary stuff, but not unrealistic.
Aren't you mooks used to this treatment by now?
Liar. Net income dropped 73%. There are a ton of reasons why that would be so, even if they sold MORE servers than in the last reporting period and had higher revenue from sales. Ever heard of acquisitions, R&D, that sort of thing?
If you're gonna offer a gratuitous bash, do it right.
Besides, plenty of companies ignore Linux. There isn't a moral imperative to support Linux. And Linus would be the first to agree with me.
Microsofties, Linuxheads - same song, different verse.
SunOS electabuzz 5.8 Generic sun4u sparc SUNW,Ultra-Enterprise
$ echo '[q]sa[ln0=aln80~Psnlbx]16isb15CB32EF3AF9C0E5D727
176 is unimplemented
176 is unimplemented
176 is unimplemented
176 is unimplemented
176 is unimplemented
176 is unimplemented
176 is unimplemented
176 is unimplemented
176 is unimplemented
176 is unimplemented
176 is unimplemented
176 is unimplemented
176 is unimplemented
176 is unimplemented
176 is unimplemented
176 is unimplemented
176 is unimplemented
176 is unimplemented
176 is unimplemented
176 is unimplemented
176 is unimplemented
176 is unimplemented
176 is unimplemented
176 is unimplemented
176 is unimplemented
176 is unimplemented
176 is unimplemented
Not everyone runs Linux.
Yeah, I totally understand. Dated graphics, 2.5D environment, limited plot depth. DOOM was totally appalling, all right.
DOOM? D-O-O-M???? That game was the tamest of the tame. I am appalled that Todd was such a cheapskate that the PC he provided for his family was so lame that DOOM was all it could run. Who else but the owners of 8-year-old hand-me-down PCs still plays DOOM in the 21st century?
Talk about your digital divide - there it is!
Law enforcement surveillance is 100 percent counterproductive to law enforcement surveillance purposes. If you are actively trying to determine who is distributing a file, the only thing you'll be able to discover with certainty is that you are the one distributing the file.
Another great site for those who are interested in this stuff is Ron Dantowitz's Sky Show. Ron has pioneered some inexpensive methods for getting diffraction-limited images and video from mass-market amateur telescopes and video equipment. You, too, can make a recognizeable movie or snapshot of the shuttle and/or ISS as they pass overhead.
What a load of horse shit. Who the hell is this Hettinger dweeb to decide that if I make a symphony, that I can't benefit from it monitarily? Because "natural talent" is involved? Does that mean that since I'm out of shape, I should get paid more to go dig a ditch than someone who's fit, since it is a lot easier for him? No, the end result is what we judge. In Hettinger's mind, for the greatest reward, I should find the job I'm least suited to do, and go struggle with it. Obvious idiocy.
You misunderstood. He said that the effort put into labour does not correlate with the reward obtained for that labor. The guy who is lazy and does only what is required of him, can reap the same or better rewards for his efforts, as the guy who is talented, motivated and works hard. He is merely pointing out the fact that the magnitude of effort expended in labour does not correlate with the magnitude of the reward received. In other words, the argument that artists or inventors deserve a reward in proportion to the effort they expended creating intellectual property does not stand. The market sets the reward they get, amount of effort has nothing to do with it.
So bugger off with that line of thinking, we ain't buying it.
Furthermore, inventor Number One and Inventor Number Two may create the same intellectual property, and even if Number One expended much more effort than Number Two in creating the same invention, Number Two gets the reward because he filed the patent first.
Get it?
Since when?
Since it was intigated two centuries ago. If only the author has the right to distribute his work, then the flow of information is restricted. How can you say it is not?
People seem to think that once I have created something, you have the right to do what the hell you like with it.
Bull!
But I don't, even under the original implementation of copyright, which is quite liberal compared to the DMCA. I can read your work as many times as I like, I can sell it or give my copy away. I cannot make a copy of it and distribute that copy.
The DMCA tries to permit you to force me to pay you every time I re-read your novel, or listen again to a recording of your song, whether I bought that copy, or heard it on the radio, or encoded it to a conveniently portable format for my digital listening device.
Is this what you're defending?
Once I've created something, surely I am the only person who gets to decide what happens to it?
No, you are not.
You wouldn't say you have the right to do what you want with cookies I had baked,...
Once you sell those cookies to me, they are no longer yours. I can do with them as I please.
Who says I do? If I buy a copy of your novel, I can, in fact, do whatever I want with it, short of distributing a new copy of it. You should have no right to extract payment from me for each time I read it. The DMCA, however, gives you that right, even though it is practically unenforceable, as Napster has shown.
Is this really what you are defending?
It's http://channel.nytimes.com/2001/04/15/weekinreview /15BOXA.html
On the contrary, the early adopters are saying "We got ours, the rest of you can fuck off."
(tongue planted firmly in cheek)
Damn! I let my last moderator status expire yesterday. I'd have modded your post up, you make a very good point.
Stanford recently did the right thing, and gave back an entire Class A netblock, renumbering into the remaining Class B blocks they retained (36.0.0.0/8 was the block they returned to ARIN, in case you're wondering).
Other parties mentioned in that NWFusion article seem to think they have a God-given right to hoard address space they will never use.
According to the NWFusion article, it is estimated that only 69 million IP addresses are actually in use, out of the 160 million to 1 billion that are practicably useable given the limitations of IPv4 routing protocols.
The other class was the action against Capital One, also for gouging their customers in some way. I got a check for $2.09.