If 9 million files are shared, and 3% (270,000) are actual lost sales, you're not done. You have to see whether the 8.7 million other instances of sharing led to any sales and subtract these. If over 3.2% of these lead directly or indirectly to a sale, it's a wash and 1) is disproven. "Piracy" would be a net plus and nothing -- least of all DRM -- would be needed to control it.
So if there was a movie playing at my local theater, the theater never fills up, and I would never buy a ticket anyways is it ok for me to sneak into the theater and enjoy the movie? You guys crack me up.
This is patently false. Millions of content creators are doing exactly that right now. I'm sorry if your personal faves are not among them.
No games are distributed without some kind of "copy protection" which is really no different from DRM...just weaker. Heck, no DVDs are distributed without DRM.
Part one of this is kinda-true, but I've never seen a good independent assessment of what % of "pirations" really represent lost sales. I believe it's around 3%. The other 97% of pirations simply represent users who would not have song X unless it were free, i.e. they represent no lost revenue, only lost potential-to-enjoy-a-song and potential-to-become-a-fan-of-the-song-or-the-artis t-or-both.
It is also pretty demonstrable that DRM is not going to curb piracy much, if at all. DRM schemes only need to be cracked once.
This is a bad argument. I agree that 97% of "pirations" represent users who would not have bought the content anyways. But this doesn't mean that it is ok to let them pirate and enjoy the content. When it is too easy to pirate, people do it. And not just criminals, but everyday people like you and I. If I knew that I would never get caught running red lights, I would do it all the time. When someone copies a CD or DVD, they pretty much know that they will never get caught. Now downloading music nowadays is different...
Ok, point taken. However considering reality, content creators will not distribute media without DRM. This includes game publishers, music publishers, video, etc. Piracy is rampant and DRM is needed to control it.
I don't mind them locking the door at night, but I would object if they handcuffed me to a security guard while I browsed to prevent me from stealing anything.
There are certain classes of jobs that require PhDs. This includes non-academic and academic jobs. Then there are companies that value PhDs for jobs that don't require them (i.e., Google).
No. I agree that some PhDs are morons. However he seems to believe that a PhD is completely worthless and means nothing. This I completely disagree with.
Let me guess, you are in product development? PhDs are not meant to be the guys pushing the products out the door. PhDs are meant to do research and advanced development that won't see the light of day for 5-8 years.
What happens is that there is more demand for product development and that many of the PhDs end up doing it because they have to make a living somehow.
Right, I was confused to because certain instructions are used for both user-mode and privilege mode and they do different things. Someone told me that the Microsoft Virtual Server "emulates" these instructions instead of "translating" them. Yes, useless speculation.
HDD capacity doubles every 12 months. HDD bandwidth easily scales with RAID. Moore's Law says transistors double every 18 months. What more do you want? About the only think I can think of is seek performance.
The data on Fuji Velvia film says that it captures 80 lpm. This is plenty more than 4000dpi. You are dead wrong about the Canon 1Ds and medium format film. Medium format wins on resolution...easily. The Canon MarkII can capture an image with less noise. Here is an executive summary of a very detailed analysis .
Why would I want to take a $10,000 digital sensor on a hike through mountains. My field camera is made out of teak wood and can handle the environment perils that would doom a BetterLight. I've seen the BetterLight products in person....very nice for studio applications, but no way for field work.
I still print my 4x5" B&W negatives optically using a 70-year old enlarger that I picked up at a garage sale for $50. Although I've seen very impressive B&W inkjet prints using special inks, I think my optical prints are sharper. That said, I do color prints digitally with my local lab's LightJet. I've done optical RA-4 prints before, but I think digital color printing offers too many advantages. Plus I like shooting transparency film and making positive-to-positive prints using Cibachrome is expensive and difficult.
A high-quality print is at least 300dpi. To make an 11x14" print at 300dpi requires 11*300*14*300 == 13.86 megapixels. Otherwise you are relying on interpolation to create pixels out of nothing-- works great for some things (portraits), but not so great for others (landscapes).
Diffraction ultimately limits the useful megapixels in digital photography. You cannot replace film/sensor area, and the economics of building large sensors will make them extremely expensive in the forseeable future.
I use a 4x5" large-format film camera. With 20 in^2 of film area and a flatbed scanner capable of 2400dpi, I get 115 megapixels. A drum scan at 4000dpi gives me 320 megapixels if I wanted. And because the sensor is huge, diffraction doesn't hurt me unless I stop down my lens to f45 or f64.
Now many say you can get this quality through stitching dozens of digital captures together....if that is your sort of thing.
You are like a silly academic who argues about the meanings of words. Or my photography friend who claims that a picture taken with a digital camera cannot be called a "photograph"...its impossible by his definition.
Call it stealing, or call it "creating infringing copies". My livlihood depends on getting paid for my work. DRM will help prevent the creation of "infringing copies" that I don't get paid for. Therefore I support DRM, and so do most artists and content creators. I don't care how you explain it or what kinds of twisted concepts you spin it into. If you don't think software developers like myself should get paid for our work, then I suggest you move to a communist country and fvck off for stealing my work.
You can't steal "content". Content is unstealable since it is untangible. You can create copies in a way the law doesn't allow though which is a completely different concept. Stealing is about ownership, while copyright is not. At least get the basics right before you start arguing about it.
How about lets come back to reality. People like me and my wife create content like software and games. Without license servers (for the software my company produces) and things like Macrovision SafeDisc (for PC games), people steal software and games. Software and games is content. Do you believe content should be free? If so, then you are completely out of touch with reality. Do you not believe people steal software and games that have no protection? When people get things for free, the hard work that my wife and I put into creating these products (which is just 0s and 1s...content) does not get rewarded.
Then you are against the concept of a patent. Yes, the U.S. patent system has its flaws but the basic concept is sound and extremely important. How old are you? Do you have any business experience or education?
Slashdot Mirror
Thanks. I got my answer.
If 9 million files are shared, and 3% (270,000) are actual lost sales, you're not done. You have to see whether the 8.7 million other instances of sharing led to any sales and subtract these. If over 3.2% of these lead directly or indirectly to a sale, it's a wash and 1) is disproven. "Piracy" would be a net plus and nothing -- least of all DRM -- would be needed to control it.
So if there was a movie playing at my local theater, the theater never fills up, and I would never buy a ticket anyways is it ok for me to sneak into the theater and enjoy the movie? You guys crack me up.
This is patently false. Millions of content creators are doing exactly that right now. I'm sorry if your personal faves are not among them.
s t-or-both.
It is also pretty demonstrable that DRM is not going to curb piracy much, if at all. DRM schemes only need to be cracked once.
No games are distributed without some kind of "copy protection" which is really no different from DRM...just weaker. Heck, no DVDs are distributed without DRM.
Part one of this is kinda-true, but I've never seen a good independent assessment of what % of "pirations" really represent lost sales. I believe it's around 3%. The other 97% of pirations simply represent users who would not have song X unless it were free, i.e. they represent no lost revenue, only lost potential-to-enjoy-a-song and potential-to-become-a-fan-of-the-song-or-the-arti
This is a bad argument. I agree that 97% of "pirations" represent users who would not have bought the content anyways. But this doesn't mean that it is ok to let them pirate and enjoy the content. When it is too easy to pirate, people do it. And not just criminals, but everyday people like you and I. If I knew that I would never get caught running red lights, I would do it all the time. When someone copies a CD or DVD, they pretty much know that they will never get caught. Now downloading music nowadays is different...
Ok, point taken. However considering reality, content creators will not distribute media without DRM. This includes game publishers, music publishers, video, etc. Piracy is rampant and DRM is needed to control it.
I don't mind them locking the door at night, but I would object if they handcuffed me to a security guard while I browsed to prevent me from stealing anything.
That store wouldn't get much business then, huh?
I *hate* drm, and the distrust of the end user that comes with it.
I'm wondering if you think local businesses should keep their doors unlocked at night? Thanks.
There are certain classes of jobs that require PhDs. This includes non-academic and academic jobs. Then there are companies that value PhDs for jobs that don't require them (i.e., Google).
Notice that the guy who designed your database system has the PhD.
No. I agree that some PhDs are morons. However he seems to believe that a PhD is completely worthless and means nothing. This I completely disagree with.
Let me guess, you are in product development? PhDs are not meant to be the guys pushing the products out the door. PhDs are meant to do research and advanced development that won't see the light of day for 5-8 years.
What happens is that there is more demand for product development and that many of the PhDs end up doing it because they have to make a living somehow.
Right, I was confused to because certain instructions are used for both user-mode and privilege mode and they do different things. Someone told me that the Microsoft Virtual Server "emulates" these instructions instead of "translating" them. Yes, useless speculation.
VMWare does on-the-demand binary translation (BT) to avoid traps. I could be wrong, but I don't think Microsoft Virtual Server does BT.
Sun's UltraSparc T1 has 8 cores, 32 threads. So, will Intel catch up anytime soon?
And my single-threaded program runs 10x slower on a T1 than it does on a P4. I measured this myself.
HDD capacity doubles every 12 months. HDD bandwidth easily scales with RAID. Moore's Law says transistors double every 18 months. What more do you want? About the only think I can think of is seek performance.
There is already a very nice, pannable/zoomable diagram on federal tax dollars.
www.thebudgetgraph.com
The data on Fuji Velvia film says that it captures 80 lpm. This is plenty more than 4000dpi. You are dead wrong about the Canon 1Ds and medium format film. Medium format wins on resolution...easily. The Canon MarkII can capture an image with less noise. Here is an executive summary of a very detailed analysis .
The data on Fuji Velvia films says that it captures 80 lpm. This is plenty more than 4000dpi.
Why would I want to take a $10,000 digital sensor on a hike through mountains. My field camera is made out of teak wood and can handle the environment perils that would doom a BetterLight. I've seen the BetterLight products in person....very nice for studio applications, but no way for field work.
I still print my 4x5" B&W negatives optically using a 70-year old enlarger that I picked up at a garage sale for $50. Although I've seen very impressive B&W inkjet prints using special inks, I think my optical prints are sharper. That said, I do color prints digitally with my local lab's LightJet. I've done optical RA-4 prints before, but I think digital color printing offers too many advantages. Plus I like shooting transparency film and making positive-to-positive prints using Cibachrome is expensive and difficult.
A high-quality print is at least 300dpi. To make an 11x14" print at 300dpi requires 11*300*14*300 == 13.86 megapixels. Otherwise you are relying on interpolation to create pixels out of nothing-- works great for some things (portraits), but not so great for others (landscapes).
Diffraction ultimately limits the useful megapixels in digital photography. You cannot replace film/sensor area, and the economics of building large sensors will make them extremely expensive in the forseeable future.
I use a 4x5" large-format film camera. With 20 in^2 of film area and a flatbed scanner capable of 2400dpi, I get 115 megapixels. A drum scan at 4000dpi gives me 320 megapixels if I wanted. And because the sensor is huge, diffraction doesn't hurt me unless I stop down my lens to f45 or f64.
Now many say you can get this quality through stitching dozens of digital captures together....if that is your sort of thing.
You are like a silly academic who argues about the meanings of words. Or my photography friend who claims that a picture taken with a digital camera cannot be called a "photograph"...its impossible by his definition.
Call it stealing, or call it "creating infringing copies". My livlihood depends on getting paid for my work. DRM will help prevent the creation of "infringing copies" that I don't get paid for. Therefore I support DRM, and so do most artists and content creators. I don't care how you explain it or what kinds of twisted concepts you spin it into. If you don't think software developers like myself should get paid for our work, then I suggest you move to a communist country and fvck off for stealing my work.
You can't steal "content". Content is unstealable since it is untangible. You can create copies in a way the law doesn't allow though which is a completely different concept. Stealing is about ownership, while copyright is not. At least get the basics right before you start arguing about it.
How about lets come back to reality. People like me and my wife create content like software and games. Without license servers (for the software my company produces) and things like Macrovision SafeDisc (for PC games), people steal software and games. Software and games is content. Do you believe content should be free? If so, then you are completely out of touch with reality. Do you not believe people steal software and games that have no protection? When people get things for free, the hard work that my wife and I put into creating these products (which is just 0s and 1s...content) does not get rewarded.
Then you are against the concept of a patent. Yes, the U.S. patent system has its flaws but the basic concept is sound and extremely important. How old are you? Do you have any business experience or education?
Most of your examples deal with basic human rights w.r.t. safety and health. Having the right to download DRM-free movies is not in the same category.