For the RIAA, yes. For me, I just want to listen to my legally purchased music collection without having to bring $1,000+ worth of CDs to my office. Unfortunately making life easier for me makes making money harder for the RIAA, and thus our goals are in conflict.
too many people, katz included, are viewing music as a commodity. and yes, that's the way it's been fed to people, but at the same time, there's a reason why artists create albums. well-crafted songs are one thing, but an album represents a hour-ish long attempt to create a coherent/cohesive mood and statement.
Oh, hogwash. If this was the main issue, then the money side of things wouldn't matter. But really, most of them are more interested in living in mansions, driving expensive cars, and boinking supermodels. Can't blame 'em for that...
perhaps the fsf could hire a lawyer to sue nvidia for copyright violation and with ralphs permission the settlement money would go to the fsf to fund further open source development.
There's a big reason this shouldn't be done; do it once for a company that makes an honest mistake, and a lot of companies will simply stop writing Linux drivers. Writing the drivers probably isn't a big enough money-maker to balance out the cost of possible lawsuits if we get sue-happy.
No they aren't. They are trying to stop theft, which we have had laws against for thousands of years.
But what is Napster? It's a program that allows anyone to set up a downloadable archive of files and basically publish a directory of that archive. How is that fundamentally different from the Web? The web certainly has been used for distributing illegal mp3 files. Yet has anyone gone after Netscape for distributing a browser? How about the search engines? It's the program users who are breaking the law, not Napster. When does rampant illegal activity by users make the creator of a program liable?
Well, I suppose if you took an Orthodox Jew or Eastern Orthodox Catholic, and converted them to Reformed or Reconstructionist Judaism or Protestantism, you could be said to have unorthodoxed them...
Unfortunately, my understanding of the DMCA is that making a mp3 of a CD you own is still illegal.
Actually, the DMCA (among other things) sets the conditions for distributing and marketing devices specifically intended for copying digital music in digital form. It does not explicitly remove fair use rights, which has at times been interpreted to include format conversion. So it's a bit of a gray area, and thus the RIAA's attempt to block sales of the Rio failed, and plenty of companies sell MP3 encoders. (Yeah, you could use those on little Johnny's piano recital, I suppose...)
A reasonable reading of the constitional clause that allows Congress to pass laws re: intellectual property would allow any court to rule that home creation and use of MP3s was in fact legal.
Just a guess, but I bet that you would find the same percentage of crazies that you would find in the general populace... but nobody ever does any metrics like that, since you get more attention just saying "D&D is from the devil!"
Being geekly gamers, on the first gaming day of each year we used to roll 6 d10s to determine whether that year we would become mass-murderers, devil-worshippers, etc. Not sure of the exact rolls for most stuff, although I think getting 3 sixes made one a devil worshipper.
Or maybe it's just that stupid people live in polluted areas because they don't know any better or don't care.
Umm, the article mentions the effects of Chernobyl on places as far away as Scotland. Where exactly can you live that will avoid all the stupidity of other people?
What might get me to buy a HDTV is if it were also capable of handling computer resolutions. If you can do 720p and 1080i, it shouldn't be that much more difficult to handle 1280x1024, 1600x1200, etc. If my big-screen TV can also be a big-screen computer display, then I have a use for it right now, and I can wait for the broadcasts.
People flocked to the i-opener because it was cheap. At $99 or even $200 it's a bargain. But at a more realistic price of perhaps $600, the market dries up again.
Perhaps, but instead of giving a few Netpliances away, perhaps they should look at selling the "advanced" units at or near cost (perhaps via a rebate, so only one cheapie per person), so they'll get free open source hackers working on it. There's still definitely a market for the cheapie machine as originally tasked.
It had Riker flying the Enterprise with a joystick. "Computer, activate manual steering column!" Like the enterprise has ailerons and flaps. That was the most retarded thing I've ever seen, at least that I can remember right now.
Yeah, we all know the really good players use a mouse and a keyboard...:-)
This exists. It's all computer graphics, and was showing up around here (Maryland) at 8 in the morning. Apparently 40 episodes were done, check out www.imdb.com for more info.
Now, ideally, they can make up the ways that their information is spread, and they finally have control under their own terms.
But they *do* have that option via various techniques. It's just that the default for the web was meant to be "link to whatever you are able to". Putting the onus on the linker of making sure he has permission to link goes against the grain of the web.
Now as I understand it, web servers can determine where the request came from, but it is possible to forge that information. I think that forgery is rather more questionable. Did the court decision touch on this?
Note that the elves apparently did not know where the Ents were (and the Ents didn't know where the Entwives were), so incorporating them in a battle they weren't aware of wasn't an option.
Cavalry would have had a hell of a time getting over the Misty Mountains.
The hobbits were remarkably resistant to the Ring's effects. Bilbo and Sam were the only beings who ever voluntarily gave it up, and Bilbo nearly couldn't. (And Frodo largely snatched it from Sam.) Saruman was corrupted by the thought of it and planned to capture it and challenge Sauron. Borimir was also corrupted by the thought of it, and tried to take it by force.
Yet another story about "Your Rights Online" which, translated into/. speak, is "My Right To Not Pay For Anything", which admittedly isn' quite as snappy.
How the frell does cphack allow anyone to steal anything?
Re:This is not the point at all ...
on
More on LinDVD
·
· Score: 1
And just what the HELL do you think you're going to get out of doing [video editing] on a MPEG2 stream? It's so pointless it's not even worth considering.
Now wait a moment. MPEG-2 has all the information I need to turn a sequence of compressed frames into multiple images. (Possibly fields, is MPEG-2 stuff inherently interlaced like a TV signal?) Those images, when I'm manipulating them, are going to be uncompressed, I'm not editing the raw MPEG-2 data stream, at least not if I'm modifying individual frames. I don't see that I would do that much different if I was using MJPEG.
WTF do you think all the low-end boards (that need video compression) use MJPEG?
Because it doesn't require as much processing power? (Although it does require a lot of disk space...)
No, see the problem is that as the ads proliferate, sellers of 'free' services think that the quality of their product can go into the shitpot.
I think that even isn't as big a problem as the problem you refer to later -- that the ads become the default, and you can't avoid them. With the exception of premium channels, C-SPAN, and AMC, ads are almost impossible to avoid on television. And even the premium channels show movies with product tie-ins. Even PBS has gradually allowed "sponsors" more and more advertising, despite still begging for dollars.
It's pretty obvious this rampant marketing does have an effect on us and our values. While I actually have a higher opinion of our society than most (we're less racist, less religiously intolerant, and in general more egalitarian than just about any society ever), we are certainly rather materialistic. And the rampant marketing isn't helping.
companies even go into business with misspelled company names; latest is Conversent
Ah, but as Humpty Dumpty would tell you, that's a portmanteau word, a combination of Converse and sent. Clearly they are in the business of delivering sneakers by mail order.
Though not as user grumpy a company as Heuris, they extract a fair amount of cash out of you to encode using it.
But what about decoders? They're free for Sorenson; is Sorenson keeping the internal format secret? Seems like allowing an open source decoder wouldn't hurt Sorenson, although I suppose they could be worried about people making an encoder as well if they had the file specs. Still, I can't imagine people who would buy a professional encoder would use an "underground" version.
The oil pipeline one (#6?) had no evidence to support its hypothesis, which invalidates it in my mind. The weirdest thing is #10 being #10, seems it should be higher.
Meanwhile, don't any of these stories exist anywhere on the web? Not a web link to be found...
Slashdot Mirror
the main issue here is theft...
For the RIAA, yes. For me, I just want to listen to my legally purchased music collection without having to bring $1,000+ worth of CDs to my office. Unfortunately making life easier for me makes making money harder for the RIAA, and thus our goals are in conflict.
too many people, katz included, are viewing music as a commodity. and yes, that's the way it's been fed to people, but at the same time, there's a reason why artists create albums. well-crafted songs are one thing, but an album represents a hour-ish long attempt to create a coherent/cohesive mood and statement.
Oh, hogwash. If this was the main issue, then the money side of things wouldn't matter. But really, most of them are more interested in living in mansions, driving expensive cars, and boinking supermodels. Can't blame 'em for that...
perhaps the fsf could hire a lawyer to sue nvidia for copyright violation and with ralphs permission the settlement money would go to the fsf to fund further open source development.
There's a big reason this shouldn't be done; do it once for a company that makes an honest mistake, and a lot of companies will simply stop writing Linux drivers. Writing the drivers probably isn't a big enough money-maker to balance out the cost of possible lawsuits if we get sue-happy.
No they aren't. They are trying to stop theft, which we have had laws against for thousands of years.
But what is Napster? It's a program that allows anyone to set up a downloadable archive of files and basically publish a directory of that archive. How is that fundamentally different from the Web? The web certainly has been used for distributing illegal mp3 files. Yet has anyone gone after Netscape for distributing a browser? How about the search engines? It's the program users who are breaking the law, not Napster. When does rampant illegal activity by users make the creator of a program liable?
Oops. Since when was unorthodoxed a verb?
Well, I suppose if you took an Orthodox Jew or Eastern Orthodox Catholic, and converted them to Reformed or Reconstructionist Judaism or Protestantism, you could be said to have unorthodoxed them...
Many content creators simply can't perform.
Probably too many drugs, or perhaps "Brewer's Droop"?
"Sir, it provokes, and unprovokes: it provokes
the desire, but it takes away the performance."
--MacBeth
Unfortunately, my understanding of the DMCA is that making a mp3 of a CD you own is still illegal.
Actually, the DMCA (among other things) sets the conditions for distributing and marketing devices specifically intended for copying digital music in digital form. It does not explicitly remove fair use rights, which has at times been interpreted to include format conversion. So it's a bit of a gray area, and thus the RIAA's attempt to block sales of the Rio failed, and plenty of companies sell MP3 encoders. (Yeah, you could use those on little Johnny's piano recital, I suppose...)
A reasonable reading of the constitional clause that allows Congress to pass laws re: intellectual property would allow any court to rule that home creation and use of MP3s was in fact legal.
Just a guess, but I bet that you would find the same percentage of crazies that you would find in the general populace... but nobody ever does any metrics like that, since you get more attention just saying "D&D is from the devil!"
Being geekly gamers, on the first gaming day of each year we used to roll 6 d10s to determine whether that year we would become mass-murderers, devil-worshippers, etc. Not sure of the exact rolls for most stuff, although I think getting 3 sixes made one a devil worshipper.
Or maybe it's just that stupid people live in polluted areas because they don't know any better or don't care.
Umm, the article mentions the effects of Chernobyl on places as far away as Scotland. Where exactly can you live that will avoid all the stupidity of other people?
What might get me to buy a HDTV is if it were also capable of handling computer resolutions. If you can do 720p and 1080i, it shouldn't be that much more difficult to handle 1280x1024, 1600x1200, etc. If my big-screen TV can also be a big-screen computer display, then I have a use for it right now, and I can wait for the broadcasts.
Money is almost always the wrong motivation for doing anything.
Perhaps, but I doubt anyone would clean public restrooms for any other reason...
Remote keyboard: Anyone making a wireless keyboard which connects to a standard keyboard port? I haven't been shopping, so don't know.
Logitech makes a couple of nice ones. There's no point that being an issue for Netpliance, however, people who want a wireless desktop can get it.
Then pray tell how does an intelligent person get a copy of it?
In general I don't agree with these guys, but in this case I think the answer is: a used bookstore?
People flocked to the i-opener because it was cheap. At $99 or even $200 it's a bargain. But at a more realistic price of perhaps $600, the market dries up again.
Perhaps, but instead of giving a few Netpliances away, perhaps they should look at selling the "advanced" units at or near cost (perhaps via a rebate, so only one cheapie per person), so they'll get free open source hackers working on it. There's still definitely a market for the cheapie machine as originally tasked.
It had Riker flying the Enterprise with a joystick. "Computer, activate manual steering column!" Like the enterprise has ailerons and flaps. That was the most retarded thing I've ever seen, at least that I can remember right now.
:-)
Yeah, we all know the really good players use a mouse and a keyboard...
OK, how about Starship Troopers: The Series.
This exists. It's all computer graphics, and was showing up around here (Maryland) at 8 in the morning. Apparently 40 episodes were done, check out www.imdb.com for more info.
I dont want to speak for anyone, but it sounds like a lot of hubub over nothing. We can get the pics from the internet.
:-)
You can do that for sex, but the effect is not quite the same.
Hmm, given that I'm talking to the Slashdot crowd, perhaps a better analogy is playing Quake versus seeing some screenshots?
Now, ideally, they can make up the ways that their information is spread, and they finally have control under their own terms.
But they *do* have that option via various techniques. It's just that the default for the web was meant to be "link to whatever you are able to". Putting the onus on the linker of making sure he has permission to link goes against the grain of the web.
Now as I understand it, web servers can determine where the request came from, but it is possible to forge that information. I think that forgery is rather more questionable. Did the court decision touch on this?
Note that the elves apparently did not know where the Ents were (and the Ents didn't know where the Entwives were), so incorporating them in a battle they weren't aware of wasn't an option.
Cavalry would have had a hell of a time getting over the Misty Mountains.
The hobbits were remarkably resistant to the Ring's effects. Bilbo and Sam were the only beings who ever voluntarily gave it up, and Bilbo nearly couldn't. (And Frodo largely snatched it from Sam.) Saruman was corrupted by the thought of it and planned to capture it and challenge Sauron. Borimir was also corrupted by the thought of it, and tried to take it by force.
Bell's Second Law strikes again...
Yet another story about "Your Rights Online" which, translated into /. speak, is "My Right To Not Pay For Anything", which admittedly isn' quite as snappy.
How the frell does cphack allow anyone to steal anything?
And just what the HELL do you think you're going to get out of doing [video editing] on a MPEG2 stream? It's so pointless it's not even worth considering.
Now wait a moment. MPEG-2 has all the information I need to turn a sequence of compressed frames into multiple images. (Possibly fields, is MPEG-2 stuff inherently interlaced like a TV signal?) Those images, when I'm manipulating them, are going to be uncompressed, I'm not editing the raw MPEG-2 data stream, at least not if I'm modifying individual frames. I don't see that I would do that much different if I was using MJPEG.
WTF do you think all the low-end boards (that need video compression) use MJPEG?
Because it doesn't require as much processing power? (Although it does require a lot of disk space...)
No, see the problem is that as the ads proliferate, sellers of 'free' services think that the quality of their product can go into the shitpot.
I think that even isn't as big a problem as the problem you refer to later -- that the ads become the default, and you can't avoid them. With the exception of premium channels, C-SPAN, and AMC, ads are almost impossible to avoid on television. And even the premium channels show movies with product tie-ins. Even PBS has gradually allowed "sponsors" more and more advertising, despite still begging for dollars.
It's pretty obvious this rampant marketing does have an effect on us and our values. While I actually have a higher opinion of our society than most (we're less racist, less religiously intolerant, and in general more egalitarian than just about any society ever), we are certainly rather materialistic. And the rampant marketing isn't helping.
companies even go into business with misspelled company names; latest is Conversent
Ah, but as Humpty Dumpty would tell you, that's a portmanteau word, a combination of Converse and sent. Clearly they are in the business of delivering sneakers by mail order.
Though not as user grumpy a company as Heuris, they extract a fair amount of cash out of you to encode using it.
But what about decoders? They're free for Sorenson; is Sorenson keeping the internal format secret? Seems like allowing an open source decoder wouldn't hurt Sorenson, although I suppose they could be worried about people making an encoder as well if they had the file specs. Still, I can't imagine people who would buy a professional encoder would use an "underground" version.
This one wasn't censored, it's fiction.
The oil pipeline one (#6?) had no evidence to support its hypothesis, which invalidates it in my mind. The weirdest thing is #10 being #10, seems it should be higher.
Meanwhile, don't any of these stories exist anywhere on the web? Not a web link to be found...