Is there an appropriate Slashdot meme for just such an occasion as Cmdr Taco's announcement of these important, new Achievement awards?
Is there a reliable official guide to traditional Slashdot memes to which one can refer? I believe I've seen a hardcover version, but its cost was prohibitive, so a paperback would be preferable.
If I had any character at all, I would spend less time on Slashdot. That would be an "achievement" to eclipse all the others. But, alas, I am enlisted in the service of Cmdr Taco and the other Slashdot overlords, and unable to break those ties.
I was thinking more about those artists (signed or unsigned) that are wanting their work spread far and wide for free, to get the exposure and bring people to their shows/websites.
That's who I'm thinking of as well. If you're going to use the software, use it for these up and coming artists, not for those who collaborate with the Big 4 record labels.
Why are all the comments about sharing torrents of copyrighted work?
Use this to share torrents of non-**IA affiliated artists.
Facebook claims to have 175 million active users. 175 million people sharing torrents of indies, music recommended by your friends, is the best advertising these artist could hope for.
It is also the record industries worst nightmare. Music they have no control over being shared (legally!) on a scale they cannot match.
It has been stated many times on/. that the lawsuits were about control. This is your chance to take that control away. Don't screw it up sharing Britney and Metallica. Share indie, get your friends to share indie, fuck the **IA.
Excellent point. As I said in the article, "I just hope people do not use this feature to download copyrighted materials which are not authorized to be downloaded, or at least not materials copyrighted to litigation-happy RIAA Big 4 record labels." However, I should caution you that, although I am unaware of any indie labels, even those affiliated with the RIAA and hence not exactly 'indie', suing end users like the Big 4 have, there is no guarantee that they won't start doing it. I believe some of them are already starting to go after web sites.
I'm sure a good lawyer could argue that a checksum might fit in there, but it seems like a stretch. A checksum certainly doesn't represent the original work in any meaningful form to a human (or for that matter, a computer - with something like MD5, you can't recreate the original work from the checksum).
Im not so sure that's entirely true.
The.torrent encloses a MD5sum for each chunk. Chunk sizes differ, but on a 700MB aXXo-dvdRIP would be 1MB chunks. So, we have ~700 MD5 chunks that describe a pack of files. We also know the sizes of these files.
The big question is if there's other coordinations of bit patters that would exactly match the file sizes, file names, and each MD5sum. I'm well aware of the Birthday Paradox, but I would like to see a mathematical analysis of "The Chances". I have an inkling that following those specific criteria would only describe one file pack : the movie torrent.
And I also argue that you cannot re-create a source material from a series of MD5 sums...We know the structure of the file and we know the header, so it's a game of making the appropriate header and structural information, and brute forcing the frame data. And be aware, that each 1MB section has a new MD5sum.
Truly Ray, you have risen from the ranks of the technical illiterate and become one of us.
Because of this, my brother, your view of the world will never be the same again.
I'm so very, very sorry.
(lights candle, holds a minute's respectful silence)
I for one welcome the stern but fatherly leadership of Cmdr Taco and our Slashdot overlords.
With all due respect, you live in an imaginary world of how things should be, while I unfortunately have to live in the world that is. For a description of reality, go here.
I'll bet you wouldn't. Not if you were the defendant and had to spend a couple of hundred thousand dollars to show the Judge how frivolous it is. Do you know how many completely frivolous and nonsensical things the RIAA lawyers say every day in court, and get away with?
For as awesome as NewYorkCountryLawyer is with technical/legal issues, I think he didn't do precisely what you did yourself. Its the same for me, it takes me to the torrent page instead of the.torrent download. All it is is a specially crafted URL that instructs facebook to ask for your login, (or sample your cookies/authenticated sessions) and post the link to your profile. Nothing more.
Thank you very much. Now we have a record of your visit. Now we can later claim that you are a copyright infringer, even though we have no evidence of your actually having infringed any copyrights, just as we did in our p2p file sharing cases.
Are there any laws that protect Facebook from illegal content that a user might post?
I don't think it's Facebook that would get sued. As a general rule the RIAA prefers to pick on the people who have no ability to fight back, which in this case would be the Facebook customers. Also Facebook would likely have a DMCA defense, which would not be available to the customers themselves.
Slashdot Mirror
It's only hard for people like us, who are addicted to this site.... For some people it might be pretty easy :)
Yes we of the weak willed, subservient class of drones and laborers. I for one welcome the daily supervision of the Slashdot Overlords.
Keep fighting the good fight.
Do you mean fighting the RIAA?
Or do you mean my personal struggle to break the addiction that keeps me tethered to Cmdr Taco and his cult?
I paid someone $2600 for his 2-digit UID, but he never delivered the transfer documents.
Is there an appropriate Slashdot meme for just such an occasion as Cmdr Taco's announcement of these important, new Achievement awards?
Is there a reliable official guide to traditional Slashdot memes to which one can refer? I believe I've seen a hardcover version, but its cost was prohibitive, so a paperback would be preferable.
If I had any character at all, I would spend less time on Slashdot. That would be an "achievement" to eclipse all the others. But, alas, I am enlisted in the service of Cmdr Taco and the other Slashdot overlords, and unable to break those ties.
I was thinking more about those artists (signed or unsigned) that are wanting their work spread far and wide for free, to get the exposure and bring people to their shows/websites.
That's who I'm thinking of as well. If you're going to use the software, use it for these up and coming artists, not for those who collaborate with the Big 4 record labels.
Why are all the comments about sharing torrents of copyrighted work? /. that the lawsuits were about control. This is your chance to take that control away. Don't screw it up sharing Britney and Metallica. Share indie, get your friends to share indie, fuck the **IA.
Use this to share torrents of non-**IA affiliated artists.
Facebook claims to have 175 million active users. 175 million people sharing torrents of indies, music recommended by your friends, is the best advertising these artist could hope for.
It is also the record industries worst nightmare. Music they have no control over being shared (legally!) on a scale they cannot match.
It has been stated many times on
Excellent point. As I said in the article, "I just hope people do not use this feature to download copyrighted materials which are not authorized to be downloaded, or at least not materials copyrighted to litigation-happy RIAA Big 4 record labels." However, I should caution you that, although I am unaware of any indie labels, even those affiliated with the RIAA and hence not exactly 'indie', suing end users like the Big 4 have, there is no guarantee that they won't start doing it. I believe some of them are already starting to go after web sites.
I'm sure a good lawyer could argue that a checksum might fit in there, but it seems like a stretch. A checksum certainly doesn't represent the original work in any meaningful form to a human (or for that matter, a computer - with something like MD5, you can't recreate the original work from the checksum).
Im not so sure that's entirely true. The .torrent encloses a MD5sum for each chunk. Chunk sizes differ, but on a 700MB aXXo-dvdRIP would be 1MB chunks. So, we have ~700 MD5 chunks that describe a pack of files. We also know the sizes of these files.
The big question is if there's other coordinations of bit patters that would exactly match the file sizes, file names, and each MD5sum. I'm well aware of the Birthday Paradox, but I would like to see a mathematical analysis of "The Chances". I have an inkling that following those specific criteria would only describe one file pack : the movie torrent.
And I also argue that you cannot re-create a source material from a series of MD5 sums...We know the structure of the file and we know the header, so it's a game of making the appropriate header and structural information, and brute forcing the frame data. And be aware, that each 1MB section has a new MD5sum.
OK. We'll just leave it up to the jury to decide.
Unless, maybe, there is an organization who is out there putting out junk files so that we are not completely sure of what we are downloading...
You mean like these guys.
I give up. I'm gonna take my toys and go home now... Let's just shut down the fucking 'net.
We were hoping you'd say that.
Sincerely yours,
-Your 'friends' at the RIAA
you meant fowl, right? :P
It was a play on words.
You must be new here.
Truly Ray, you have risen from the ranks of the technical illiterate and become one of us. Because of this, my brother, your view of the world will never be the same again. I'm so very, very sorry. (lights candle, holds a minute's respectful silence)
I for one welcome the stern but fatherly leadership of Cmdr Taco and our Slashdot overlords.
Another thought I've had, what if this is all part of the RIAA's strategy of going after BitTorrent?
1. Until now, out of 40,000 cases, not a single one has involved BitTorrent.
2. Every single case has involved Gnutella (e.g. LimeWire) or FastTrack (e.g. Kazaa).
3. Maybe this is the RIAA's way of finding a method of creating some new BitTorrent users, and catching them using Facebook's data.
I could have sworn the parent's comment referred to the "NewYorkPoultryLawyer."
An understandable mistake, since my RIAA adversaries are chickens and turkeys, and their methods foul.
good work NYCL
Thanks, pha3r0. Now here's the question I'm kind of afraid to ask, for fear of being laughed out of the room:
Is it paranoid of me to wonder whether The Pirate Bay is actually an agent provocateur, working with, not against, the record companies?
I believe this is a trap not to catch sophisticated file sharers but the less sophisticated people who wouldn't be using BitTorrent at all.
With all due respect, you live in an imaginary world of how things should be, while I unfortunately have to live in the world that is. For a description of reality, go here.
That kind of argument would get thrown out of court, and if that was the basis of their case, they'd likely be on the hook for a juicy counter suit.
You must be new here.
I'd love to see that argument show up in court.
I'll bet you wouldn't. Not if you were the defendant and had to spend a couple of hundred thousand dollars to show the Judge how frivolous it is. Do you know how many completely frivolous and nonsensical things the RIAA lawyers say every day in court, and get away with?
He ain't sayin' nuttin'.
So he is saying something?
No he ain't.
For as awesome as NewYorkCountryLawyer is with technical/legal issues, I think he didn't do precisely what you did yourself. Its the same for me, it takes me to the torrent page instead of the .torrent download. All it is is a specially crafted URL that instructs facebook to ask for your login, (or sample your cookies/authenticated sessions) and post the link to your profile. Nothing more.
Thank you very much. Now we have a record of your visit. Now we can later claim that you are a copyright infringer, even though we have no evidence of your actually having infringed any copyrights, just as we did in our p2p file sharing cases.
Your cooperation is indeed appreciated.
Sincerely yours,
-Your grateful RIAA Overlords
Are there any laws that protect Facebook from illegal content that a user might post?
I don't think it's Facebook that would get sued. As a general rule the RIAA prefers to pick on the people who have no ability to fight back, which in this case would be the Facebook customers. Also Facebook would likely have a DMCA defense, which would not be available to the customers themselves.
I highly doubt that it is illegal to......
Famous last words.
they have been losing money from their lawsuits last time i checked
Yes but is it possible you are giving them credit for something they do not actually possess? The ability to learn.
If you're going to encourage people to screw someone over, screw over someone who can't defend themselves!
Precisely. That is the core belief of the RIAA's clone army.