avatar image

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?

Login with username, password and session length
  • Thursday December 7, 2023, 6:14 pm
  • Proudly celebrating 15+ years online.
  • Donate now to become a lifetime supporting member of the site and get a non-expiring license key for all of our programs.
  • donate

Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.

Messages - eleman [ switch to compact view ]

Pages: prev1 2 3 4 [5] 6 7 8 9 10 ... 17next
The big news today is the move to regulate the internet as a utility.

Apparently, no, it isn't so.

A good comment from the comments, that I agree with:

The overall message in this post is one that FCC official Gigi Sohn has urged "friendly bloggers"to echo; the same story appears on TechDirt and Public Knowledge. Here's a clue: if you impose universal service taxes, pole attachment rates, and price controls on interconnection (setting the price to zero is price control), you're in utility territory. Call it what it is.

They're just trying to head off opposition by saying, "no, no... we're not trying to classify it as a utility.  No matter what it looks like!"

Ohh... The quacks like a duck test... You may be right. I didn't look from that angle.

What could be the pros and cons of a utility treatment then? Most of the stuff I read on the matter is from techdirt, so I suspect I have a one-sided view.

The big news today is the move to regulate the internet as a utility.

Apparently, no, it isn't so.

Buy a new phone with a large enough screen. In 5+ inch screens the on screen keyboard is a bearable burden. Won't match a physical keyboard, but bearable. You can use bluetooth keyboards if that's a road you like to take.

The apps thingie: They are connected to your account, and not your phone. So you have a google account (for android phones) or apple account (if you have problems storing large amounts of money, so you have to dispose of it quickly), or microsoft account (if you are into crippled ecosystems), and all software belongs to it, not the phone.

Try to get a phone with a high battery capacity/screen size ratio, so that you won't run out of battery in the afternoon. When that phone gets old, get a new phone, and transfer all your apps to the new one.

Living Room / Re: Who gets sued next? VLC media player? Mozilla?
« on: January 31, 2015, 02:18 AM »
This isn't the first time for that tactic. Some people are suing a gun manufacturer. Exact same logic (or lack thereof) applied there.

Guns have just one purpose though. I believe blog software is a tad different.

Yeah, suing gun companies for specific murders is also stupid, but the analogy isn't that strong.

Guns can be used only for killing/injuring people. I haven't heard of anyone using a revolver to generate power. (Yeah I know the line "you have guns to deter others, not to actually use them." and I know the second amendment's advertised raison d'etre. But I don't believe everything I hear).

Blog software also has one purpose, but it is not crime related (at least assuming we have freedom of expression). The link between blog software and piracy is not as direct as the link between gun and murder.

But again, suing gun companies for murders is stupid.

Capitalism is the astounding belief that the most wickedest of men will do the most wickedest of things for the greatest good of everyone. [John Maynard Keynes]

General Software Discussion / Re: Removing images when printing?
« on: January 28, 2015, 05:04 AM »
There's this iprint thingie, but I'm not sure if it would allow you remove images. Haven't used it for a while.

Living Room / Re: Donating to EFF
« on: January 27, 2015, 09:28 AM »
Well, this is related:

  • Starting January 27th, you can transfer your .com, .net, .biz, .org or .info domain to Namecheap for only $3.98 (plus $0.18 ICANN fee where applicable), using coupon code NC15MYDD
  • When you transfer, they'll add another year to your domain free. Any shared hosting package (Value, Professional or Ultimate) will be 50% off when you use coupon code MYDDHOST15
  • For every domain transferred or hosting plan purchased, up to 10,000, Namecheap will donate $0.50 to EFF. The donation amount goes up to $1.00 per domain/hosting plan if they exceed 10,000. And if they exceed 20,000 domains transferred/hosting plans purchased, Namecheap will donate $1.50 for each product purchased.

This should help.

Living Room / Re: ideas that will change society
« on: January 12, 2015, 10:52 PM »

tell me please ideas that can change society!


Doing your homeworks/assignments on your own, perhaps?

Living Room / Re: Donating to EFF
« on: January 10, 2015, 05:29 AM »
When I see a stamp, I assume that someone paid good money for it, which could have been put to good use.

I don't see how EFF would get free postage, in a form that could not be used for another purpose, assuming US government isn't into donating stamps.

Living Room / Re: Donating to EFF
« on: January 10, 2015, 05:22 AM »
How do you know they didn't get those stamps donated to them so they could do this for people?

The stamp is not an actual stamp, but an imprint stating the price as well.

Yes, but how do you know those costs are not being covered by a Third Party?

Common things occur commonly, uncommon things do not. When you hear hoofbeats, don't think of zebras.

Living Room / Re: Donating to EFF
« on: January 10, 2015, 04:21 AM »
How do you know they didn't get those stamps donated to them so they could do this for people?

The stamp is not an actual stamp, but an imprint stating the price as well.

I wonder what John Von Neumann would think about it.

Living Room / Re: Donating to EFF
« on: January 08, 2015, 09:43 AM »
yeah, I too appreciate their cause. Maybe next time I'll specifically note that I don't need any letter.

Living Room / Donating to EFF
« on: January 08, 2015, 09:24 AM »
Recently, I got some good business, and earned more than my usual fare. OK I thought, a good time to donate here and there. One of the donations I made was 5 (five, the one with Lincoln) dollars to EFF (Electronic Frontier Thingie). And today I got a (transatlantic) letter from them, thanking me for my generosity (since when 5 bucks is called generous?). Anyway... The stamp on the letter cost $1.15. Think of the time and effort spent to send the letter as well...

I'm not sure I'll donate to EFF anymore. It's kind of them to send a dead tree thank you letter, but really... for 5 bucks, I feel like it's really wasteful.

btw, before anyone asks; I didn't ask for a letter for tax purposes.

Living Room / Re: which phone?
« on: December 10, 2014, 02:55 PM »
You may want to check out this.

You'll have to update your other post, Nokia have just released Here android into a more open beta, (used to have to download from Nokia).

Awesomissimo. Yeah, I'll use it in Italy. :)

Living Room / Re: which phone?
« on: December 10, 2014, 10:17 AM »
You may want to check out this.

Living Room / Re: Spoilers Are Fun !!
« on: December 09, 2014, 11:52 AM »
my info:  Windows Vista   Home Premium-SP2   Intel Core 2 Duo CPU    T6400 @ 2.00GHz    4GB RAM    64-bit        Windows Internet Explorer 9

Any suggestions are welcome.   :)

Actually anything would be welcome after that :)

Living Room / Re: Thoughts on "Piracy".
« on: November 28, 2014, 08:22 AM »
It will probably first require a major shift in attitude on the part of the creators and consumers. That and some management of expectations by both sides before anything lasting gets accomplished on that front. Right now both sides feel hurt and angry and are constantly doubling down and getting more and more ridiculous with their claims and arguments.

I couldn't describe the existing picture better.

Living Room / Re: Thoughts on "Piracy".
« on: November 28, 2014, 07:40 AM »
Question: How do you break the current framework without sacrificing the creators in the process? The interest groups and corps are the last to get hurt in this sort of battle. The people that make the product are the first to get put on the block or thrown to the wolves. This isn't meant as a comeback. I really am curious how that might be accomplished with minimal casualties to the creatives.

Well, that's the one I have yet to figure out a good answer for.

The best I have so far is to go back to the creative compensation system which was in place before the royalty system (i.e. how Spinoza, Mozart or Shakespeare paid their bills). But it's not practical for immediate application, and would disrupt the economic system to an extent to cause unbearable hardship to millions. And you would never see products such as Pixar movies in the lone-wolf creative system I preach. So it would take away certain things we are used to and like.

Therefore, I'm always all ears for better solutions. But making creations "property" is not the way to go from my political perspective. I can say that.

What would you suggest to reform the existing intellectual creativity compensation regime, if you think we have to?

Living Room / Re: Thoughts on "Piracy".
« on: November 28, 2014, 06:48 AM »
Today IP is abused to skew the distribution of wealth. Its primary purpose is to make commodities out of thoughts and ideas, so that capital can buy them, and subsequently sell them to consumers at a substantial profit. The "compensating artists" point is no longer relevant, for most, albeit not all, of them earn their living by appearing on events and shows, rather than through royalties.

From this thoroughly political perspective, my conscience is free with respect to downloading things released by billion dollar firms.
For shareware released directly by the programmer, however, I check out the trial version. If I like it, I write to the programmer and tell them $39.99 is a lot of money here in Turkey, and I'd be really happy if they would give me a discount. They often do. Regardless of the discount, in the end I buy the software.

So, to answer your question:
I'd not act against the will of an ordinary natural person who thinks he/she is better off charging for the software. I'd pay for it, or not use it.
The legal persons with the clout (and the will) to shape the laws through lobbying, regulatory capture etc. are fair game to screw however. Because they screw me anytime they get the chance to do so.
But in practice, (nowadays) I rarely bother to pirate their products as well, for I have free alternatives. Why bother cracking ms office, when libre would do?

Living Room / Re: Thoughts on "Piracy".
« on: November 28, 2014, 05:58 AM »
^Apologies. I added a question to my previous post but hit the save key by mistake before I got it in. I' d be interested in your answer.

This will sound like avoiding the question, but I never saw myself as one to write commercial software. So I may be ignorant of some aspects of life as a commercial software programmer.

I could write free (as in beer, as well as as in FSF) software if I were good at it (and I'm not). Perhaps I could ask for a donation if users liked it.

The closest personal comparison I can see myself in with respect to your question is this: I have a blog. If someone took something I wrote, and published it without due reference, and even charged for my articles... I probably wouldn't mind. But as I said, I'm not making a normative judgment here. I'm not in a position to impose my ethics to others. And god forbid if I ever be in a position to impose. That would be unethical :P

Living Room / Re: Thoughts on "Piracy".
« on: November 28, 2014, 05:33 AM »
Nope. I'm not creating anything for me. Writers may write. Or they may not. It's at their discretion. I'm not entitled to anything. I can't demand them to write.

If they want their ideas to be adopted by wider masses, it's in their best interest to write. But if they don't, that's fine by me as well.

Living Room / Re: Thoughts on "Piracy".
« on: November 28, 2014, 03:25 AM »
What IP does is create the opportunity for "walk-away income" which is saying it allows someone to separate income from hours.

A popular lecturer has only so many hours in a year in which he/he can make money lecturing. And so many venues in which to do it.

Record the seminar on a video, and the money earned is not directly linked to the lecturer's presence. And the venue becomes what is most convenient to the listener. No need to run out somewhere to hear something you want to hear. You can put in on when and where you wish - and listen to it as many times as you want. Big benefit to the listener that's not possible otherwise.

Well, this is a creative rewriting of the history. It is obvious that IP was not invented to let lecturers broadcast over paid youtube channels. You might wanna check this out for a more accurate (methinks) version of the history of copyright.

Put the same information in a book and it has the potential to reach millions and doesn't require sophisticated technology to access it. Big benefit for the less financially well off - or those in less advanced environments - yet still retains the benefits of the recorded seminar.

Publish electronically and the buyer gets all of the above plus the convenience of instant access. Benefit again.

So put them in a book, video, mp3, whatever. Pirates don't hinder your ability to publish. They may hinder publication as a commercial venture, but not publication per se.

Pirate any of the above and the lecturer gets zero for all the additional benefits provided. His/her income opportunities are reduced to what can be made by doing a live presentation. Their income once again becomes tied to physical hours. Furthermore, the pirated copies have the potential to reduce what might have otherwise been a valuable product to a commodity. Why pay for it at all when you can get it for free?

Basically, the creator of intellectual property is once again reduced to swapping hours of lifetime for dollars on a one-to-one basis. Which serves to put an absolute cap on one's earning potential even under the most ideal set of circumstances.

But it gets worse. With the commoditization of IP something else bad happens. Piracy serves to drive out professionals. Because once you can no longer make a living, the only people that can afford to pursue an activity are the wealthy and the amateurs.

Well... you consider writing (and comparable activities) as a source of income, a way to earn living. I consider them an outburst of creativity, some goal in and of itself. Again, historically, writers were not entitled to anything just because they wrote. They received some benefits, often indirectly, such as the theater proceeds Shakespeare received. But he knew from the start that writing alone would not create any rights for him.

Consider Spinoza. He was a great philosopher who laid the foundations of the Enlightenment. He thought, and he wrote. Not to earn a living, but because he felt he had to. Man he was awesome. Yet he knew writing was not something to create a living for him. Instead he worked as an optical lens manufacturer. If working as a full-time lens manufacturer did not prevent laying the foundations of the Enlightenment, I believe today's writers will also do fine working as a nurse, waiter, carpenter, programmer, whatever.

If you look at literature prior to the 20th century, writing was the playground of the wealthy and privileged. And the books reflected the interests and biases of those who wrote them. Books were written by "the establishment" and preached establishment politics and mores. It wasn't until independent publishers started making inexpensive books and pamphlets (and paying authors) that differing viewpoints got more broadly into circulation - sometimes with disruptive ideas that reshaped the societies themselves.

Well... to think of it... It makes sense... Marx wrote what he did to earn royalties didn't he?
Anyway check out publication statistics comparing pre- and post- extended copyright regime.

Pirating IP isn't liberating. It does little more than reduce people that create IP to an hourly wage since it destroys the opportunity for walk-away income. Which on turn puts a cap on creative earnings. Which eventually kills off professionalism and gives the stage to the amateurs and the idle. Because why would anybody with an ounce of brains want to go through all the trouble of being creative when they could just get a job doing something a lot easier. And likely for the same (or more) money?

Again refer to the Spinoza paragraph.
Pirating is a game changer. But not in the way some people think. What it mostly does is switch the formula for who is doing the screwing. It used to be the studios and record labels who were ripping off the talent. Now it's their fans.

Why do you create an entitlement on part of the writers in the first place? They were not entitled to anything in the 17th century, and virtually anything prior to 1920s. Yet they did write. Somewhere in the 20th century, we invented this entitlement idea. And now they constantly feel the fear of being screwed.

What IP ultimately does is to make thoughts commodities, which can be bought by the wealthy, and then used to further their interests.

If I may put words in the mouth of an actor known for 1950s westerns, IP is not the solution to our problems. IP is the problem.
And piracy is a symptom of this problem, an irrelevant and mostly useless practice in my humble opinion.

ed.: typo fixes

Living Room / Re: Thoughts on "Piracy".
« on: November 27, 2014, 05:27 AM »
Piracy is theft, pretty simple and pretty much illegal everywhere - your non-copyright countries included.

Oh no not again the implicit loading.

Piracy = copyright infringement <> theft.
As in piracy <> murder, or piracy <> battery, or piracy <> oral sex.

Different terms have different meanings for a reason. If we are to use just one regardless of differences, there's no need for so many. Think about it, why are there different words for crime, felony, misdemeanor etc.? Because they refer to somewhat similar albeit essentially different concepts.

Theft is a case where the thief deprives the victim, of something.
Copyright infringement does not necessarily lead to deprivation.

Pages: prev1 2 3 4 [5] 6 7 8 9 10 ... 17next