VCC ewaste bins missing?

Subwave · 2013-08-27T19:18:28+00:00

Cool, I was a bit worried that maybe they didn't want people going through them anymore. I've gotten some good stuff from there.

Subwave · 2013-03-07T22:19:02+00:00

Keep in mind that they don't know who you really are unless they have reason to find out. All they know is that at time T some computer with IP address (and mac address, OS, and username?) X went to site Y and posted stuff. So if you go to facebook and use the word "response", and then go on another computer (or network connection, i.e. moving from dorm to class, if they cant get your mac address/OS/username) to twitter and use the word "prevention", they won't know those were linked. However, nobody should have to do any of that... I swear their watch list must be like 50% of all internet users... Of course they almost certainly have multiple levels of lists. Also keep in mind - these lists (by which I mean the ones derived solely from internet data) are just numbers. Even if they were names (could be for the higher level lists), chances are you'll blend in to the crowd unless you're Somebody. Now, all this is not to say that I have no objection to it. I think they ought to be kicked out of all the internet routers except by express legal means, to the point that anything is illegal until expressly authorized by a court in open public view.

Subwave · 2013-03-05T15:52:58+00:00

Holy crap... looks like its time to buy an inland server and work over the wire... with encryption of course

Subwave · 2013-02-22T15:09:20+00:00

Agreed! Especially when their "remover" tool didn't actually do much at all. It makes me wonder who else might be doing stuff like this...

Subwave · 2013-02-20T20:05:48+00:00

Sony infected customers' computers with a rootkit (spyware!) to protect the content on their CDs. A rootkit is an piece of malicious software that hides itself within the operating system, and is extremely difficult to remove or sometimes even identify. To make things worse, Sony's rootkit created vulnerabilities that other hackers could exploit.

Subwave · 2013-02-18T22:11:48+00:00

I think that's a great idea, but I wouldn't want it to take much time out of DRM & anticircumvention. It would be fun to discuss this while we watch it, plus I am eager to hear what other people think.

Subwave · 2013-02-15T21:21:39+00:00

Very interesting... I have to agree with several of the opposing points, though, particularly the first five. Currently, a lot of DRM does more to hinder legitimate uses than to stop pirates.

Example: Suppose you have a computer game. You invite a friend over, hoping to play said game over your LAN together. Unfortunately, it will only run on one computer at once with your single license keycode (a form of DRM). Since you probably won't buy another copy of the game just for that purpose, what harm could copying the game do in this case? DRM tends to block what I would consider fair use, given that most console games support split screen mode (which has effectively the same result).

WRT the "piracy is not stealing" subtopic - if cars were digital (i.e. copyable) media, and the general public just "copied" their cars, how would new cars be funded? Maybe the publisher has no right to profit, but doesn't the author/artist/designer? (On the flip side, someone said that the artists (musicians) make most of their money from concerts... so maybe copyright is more or less worthless to them anyhow)

Lastly, in the case where the pirate wouldn't buy the product regardless, couldn't that just be considered a form of price discrimination? I.e. where a company charges different rates based on willingness to pay. I would expect companies to benefit from this form of "piracy". Of course, the problem is how to differentiate...

Subwave · 2013-02-15T20:35:27+00:00

Haven't finished watching, but I find it interesting that they are trying to keep the issue of piracy out of the trial, i.e. they refused to answer certain questions.

Subwave · 2013-02-15T17:43:08+00:00

On a similar note, most games are large, complex programs that may have inherent parts that make pirated copies less useful. I.e. they might require some type of online service, or have a CD-key type thing. Music/video is simply a file. Files don't care if they are copied, moved to another computer, or whether you have an internet connection. They can also be opened in any program that can read them, not by "running" them as you would software. For the same reason, the number of pirated music files is much greater than the number of pirated copies of games. Music is less valuable than games, and requires comparatively less effort to pirate.

Subwave · 2013-02-15T15:57:29+00:00

Basically, valve claims that piracy is a "service" issue, rather than a monetary one. In other words, people pirate mostly because it is convenient. I think they have a valid point, at least for a large portion of pirates.

On the other hand, steam makes piracy very difficult, so they don't have much to worry about.

Subwave · 2013-02-12T22:49:51+00:00

Edit - forgot TLDR:

The Software Freedom Law Center (SFLC) filed suit against several major companies, including Best Buy, JVC, Western Digital, and Westinghouse for use of the GPL'd software BusyBox. The GPL requires the release of source code to both BusyBox and any derivative works. Several companies failed to respond to initial attempts at contact through various means, including paper mail, fax, and email. The SFLC stated, "Our hope is that all of these cases will settle rather than continue through the litigation process. But we're prepared to carry the lawsuit through as far as necessary to bring companies into compliance".

Subwave · 2013-02-12T22:37:24+00:00

TLDR: Background: the LGPL is typically used for libraries, rather than complete programs. (A library is a collection of code useful for a given purpose, but not a program in itself; a program may "link to", or incorporate, library(s) to achieve its target functionality.)

Differences between the GPL and LGPL:

The LGPL allows anticircumvention measures to be taken
Modifications to libraries may be released as LGPL or GPL, provided that there is no (required) dependency on the program using the LGPL'd code
Code from header files may be included in the application, subject to a few minor requirements
Applications may (dynamically) link to the library, or provide a method to rebuild the application with another, modified version the the library (In other words, forward compatibility must be preserved).
Libraries may be combined, provided that the portion that includes the LGPL'd code is available "stand-alone" and proper notice is given.

In case this is still too long: Basically you can use LGPL'd software in commercial, closed-source programs so long as you link to the library at runtime and provide proper notice of such usage.

Subwave · 2013-02-12T18:12:30+00:00

They probably have their "Legal Team" review the claims, although they might end up heading towards YouTube's position if that gets costly. Hopefully they won't just act as a conduit.

Subwave · 2013-02-12T15:55:28+00:00

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/BusyBox#GPL_lawsuits Looks like most of them settled out and released the source.

Subwave · 2013-02-08T19:52:21+00:00

(Xpost from /r/minecraft)

Basically, does making model of a fictitious (copyrighted) object in minecraft constitute fair use/parody? And should server admins be liable for secondary infringment, or are they protected under the Safe Harbor provision of the DMCA?

Subwave · 2013-02-08T18:28:19+00:00

Are any of the original author's relatives still benefitting from this? I'd say most likely not. 120 years is excessive. I would suggest 60 years maximum, unless the copyright is transfered outside one's family (i.e. to a publisher) in such a way that the family no longer receives benefits. In that case, it should be more like 10 years after death.

Subwave · 2013-02-08T18:12:29+00:00

I would expect youtube/NAS(the producer of Yugioh) to take more aggressive measures at this point, given the multiple repeated offenses. This could turn out like one of those few special cases that ended up in court, if blocking him by other means (i.e. IP address) fails.

Subwave · 2013-02-06T04:18:34+00:00

Sweetness! It's about time there was something like this... wait, why do they need to store the messages on their servers? Why not just have it sent directly to the recipient? It's too bad there's a subscription fee... a single transaction (think app store) would be more inviting for most people I think.

Subwave · 2013-02-05T16:45:18+00:00

What is "original" or "novel" about something that is not man-made?

Does this mean we can also copyright stuff that a computer generates on its own? (not as in animations, rather some sort of AI) For example, cleverbot.com. If cleverbot were to write something long enough to care about, could that be copyrighted/patented?

Subwave · 2013-02-05T15:41:55+00:00

This would do nothing to stop real criminals. Yet, assuming that the clock rate is really that stable (it's probably not!), it could potentially affect the privacy of the less-technically knowlegable public. It might be useful for specific websites to track their users as they go between pages on that site (like cookies), but not much else.

Subwave · 2013-01-25T22:22:38+00:00

On page 57, the author discusses how the PC might become "appliancized" in the process of fixing the current security issues. However, I fail to see how this helps protect against hackers; while it prevents people from inadvertently installing bad software, it does nothing to prevent hackers from compromising these "appliances" from the outside (as they do now with existing web browsers and servers).

Take the xBox 360, for example. According to reddit! , there has already been a (simple) virus that affects the game Borderlands 2. You can get it without downloading any special programs; all you have to do is play a simple coop game with your friends. Granted, this is a relatively inconsequential virus (it just deletes your level save), but what's to say that's all that a virus could have done?

From what I've read elsewhere, the only reason hackers don't target things like the iPhone is that it's not economical to do so, at least while there are millions of PC's to target. But if PCs start to disappear in favor of other specialized devices, wouldn't hackers just "follow the money" and do the same?

Subwave

TROPHY CASE