Posted 11/02/2009 at 11:51:33am

Don't get me wrong... I think anyone who texts while driving is a bloody imbecile and should probably be slapped with whatever penalties drinkers get, but...

How does anyone plan to enforce a law like this? I mean, I don't see a breathalizer test for texters coming up anytime soon, so except for complete morons who actually text while a cop is like driving right BESIDE him, how does one get caught for this? Are we going to let cops into our phone records on suspicion of texting so they can match the time with... with what? I guess it *maybe* could be used in some accident cases if the cell phone was broke in the accident, or the time of the accident was known down to the minute...

Mostly, however, this is an unenforceable law. Do we really want more pointless crap cluttering legal books? 

Posted 10/26/2009 at 06:45:27pm

You didn't read what I posted.

Yeah, Sweden experienced a massive drop in bandwidth use... for a DAY to a WEEK. I think closer to a day, but I haven't checked. It was merely a halo effect of fear induced paranoia that predictably wore off in no time.

The same thing would happen here as users were knocked off the net... until they adapted and started hacking into wifi hotspots for their bandwidth. Then the bandwidth use would climb almost back to where it was, possibly higher depending on a few factors (unlikely, though.) The difference? The ISPs wouldn't be getting paid anything more for the 'new' bandwidth being soaked up by previously quiet users.

Shortly after that, the first innocent user would be kicked off the internet, resulting in a HUGE politically farce. At which point the government in question has massive amounts of egg on their face and we get to enjoy a real fun media circus.

Posted 10/26/2009 at 01:37:00pm

You don't know much about WiFi then, do you?

I've gotten full signal strength from over a kilometer away, using cheap materials. And I'm a rank amateur at it. The world record for a full signal is 304 kilometers, though I'll admit that won't be happening in any city I can imagine.

A simple add on antenna is enough to grab a signal from almost any reasonably ranged line of sight source, and from many sites not visible, depending on the configuration of the signal, terrain, etc. Plus, you aren't limited to one connection, you can signal hop and make it even more impossible to track you, since in most places now there are multiple wifi spots within range of a simple Cantanna.

All this law will accomplish is punish ISPs and Legitimate users for the actions of a few and the greed of even fewer. Piracy, if it is determined to be a crime, should be dealt with in court. NOT by sending a letter to an ISP.

Let me be absolutely clear here, I'm not arguing that piracy is right... or wrong. I have no care for the legality of it, or the morality. The only 'ity' I care about here is REALITY. The reality of the situation is this... There are no pirates. There are only petty thieves and pickpockets. Piracy in modern parlance is a term that Studios invented to make their problem sound grand and important. They're selling you and everyone else a bill of sale that this 'scourge' can be wiped out A La Piracy of old. It can NOT.

You can not now, nor EVER, stop petty thievery. It's just NOT possible. You do what you can, arrest those you catch, but in the end it's just a token gesture. Do you see any multi-billion dollar 'War on Pickpockets' announced in the news? No. Why? Because it would be a WASTE of MONEY. It's also severely Un-Glamorous. Hence the term 'pirates'.

But by any other name, the money is still going down the same sinkhole. The EU is going to start crippling the ISPs and soaking tax payers for more cash, all for nothing more than a few glitzy headlines when the first few 'pirates' get cut off. Headlines the politicos will pay for in blood when they chop the first innocent person's net connection because he was hacked. Then we'll see how long this law stays in effect. It's only there now because some politicians took some bribes, how long do you expect it to last when it starts destroying careers?

Anti Piracy measures don't work. They will NEVER work. What they do is make products more expensive, and thus more likely to be pirated.

As for you 'playing by the rules'. Bullsh%t. Don't even TRY to tell me you've never recorded a song off the radio, or taped a show off TV. If there's a single person on the planet who hasn't they must be living in a place with no radio, tv, or electricity. There is no difference between the common and ACCEPTED practices of using a VCR and the vast majority of so called piracy. Now, don't get me wrong... people who sell pirated materials, well that was WAY illegal a long time ago and should damn well remain so. But getting TV episodes off the net is the same thing as Tivo-ing them, or recording them off the TV. Same for most movies, although I do get the outrage over stuff that's not even in theatres yet and such.

I don't listen to much music, myself, but same story. You can record high quality tracks from any number of sources... why is downloading an MP3 a crime??

It's insane. I can get a copy of a movie, if not legally then at least in ways no court would touch, using a DVD-R hooked up to my TV but not a DVD-R hooked up to my computer?

WHAT THE F-?? 

Posted 10/26/2009 at 12:11:32pm

Ok, 14% of net users are pirates... I'm guessing that's an under estimate, but let's go with that for the moment. So they kill 14% of the net users in a given country, chopping the ISP's income by 14%, cause I don't know about you guys but I'm sure as hell not paying for service I'm not getting. The next move is the pirates, and let's face it pirates are known to be adaptable, it's what makes them dangerous.

So, let's do a little bit of role playing. I'm a pirate, and I just lost my net for a year. Ho Humm, what do I do? Settle for network TV and reading before bedtime for the next 12 months? Ehhh... you know what, I think I'll leech WiFi from my more law abiding neighbors. Cracking security on those is mostly a joke NOW, imagine how easy it'll be after a few disenfranchised hackers turn their attention to it after losing their net connection.

So, within a short period, ISPs lost 14% of their income... yet almost none of the bandwidth costs. Then the requests start coming in to cut off the 'new' pirates that are cropping up. Are they REALLY going to start dropping people off the net for a year for the crime of having their wifi hacked?? Is the EU so desperate for a return to the good old days of Castles, Moats, and dead cows on catapults that they want to destroy the profitability of their ISPs in order to bring about the start of a new Dark Age?

Does this really make sense to ANYONE, I mean... even a Government Bureaucrat should be able to figure this out. Well, no, obviously one of those can't... still, any human being ought to have brain power enough.

Posted 10/15/2009 at 07:59:42pm

Ok, in principal I can see the attraction... In practice, however, does anyone really believe that in the event of a real problem this service will update your twitter with feeds like this :

Plane Hijacked. Hijacker coming this way... Oh God. I love you mom!

Plane missing, presumed crashed on desert island.

The person you are trying to reach is now part of a rising fireball. You must be so proud.

And if the service doesn't update with the bad news, and I mean really bad news, then who are they kidding when they say Put your loved ones at ease by allowing them to follow your flight on Facebook or Twitter? I mean, if I know that the service is gonna lie it's ass off to me in the case of a crash, I'm not really being put at ease, am I?

Posted 07/15/2009 at 12:41:53pm

It's obviously an attempt to halt game piracy, because that's the ONLY reason for this move. If it were merely to track player standings then EA would simply in form gamers that to be ranked they had to be online when they played. Offline games wouldn't count. End of Story.

Instead they're hiding this antipiracy measure in behind the current trend toward social experiences online. It's deceptive, probably includes various invasive breaches of trust, and will probably be the gold standard for anti piracy attempts in the future. That's not to say that it will actually WORK, just that this is the new way to waste money and alienate consumers.

Up until RA3 I have *purchased* every C&C game except for Renegade, however starting with RA3 I couldn't gather any further interest in the verse despite being in the Beta Test... or is that DUE to being in the beta test? RA3 was... childish, even when compared to the tongue in cheek fun that was RA2. I don't know, didn't like it anyway. And I can't say that I'm likely to buy into C&C4 either, though this internet nonsense is merely a small part of that. EA simply isn't very good at making story driven games. And if I want to play just another RTS I'll load up RA2.

Let's be frank, RTS games are stale and not getting any better. I want a revolution in my favorite game category... Give me an RTS where I can play multiplayer and command other REAL people in combat. I want real PILOTS flying the Orcas, Tank Commanders who can think for themselves, and infantry that knows how to take cover without me micromanaging their motions.

Simply put? I want command of an army of real players working along with me to take out another army of real players working along with their commander. and THAT is a game I would be happy to be online to play. 

Posted 06/19/2009 at 01:43:27pm

it's simple insanity. They won't even be able to recoup LEGAL expences from this woman, let alone the punitive fines, and any sane person seeing this is going to view it for what it is... an absurdly stupid response to a minor infringement. Pirates will retaliate by downloading more and buying less, the publicity will further tarnish their image, and in the end they'll have spent more money with no hope of recuperating any significant portion of it on a fools errand.

The end result is predicatable... Prices for CDs climb to cover the morons Lawyers, so more people download and less people buy, and they get hotter under the collar and sue even more. The Cycle continues until one or more of the big labels actually faces financial problems from it, gets bought out by a smarter company, and someone in the corporation figures out how to make MONEY from the downloaders legitimately... much the same way they did with VCRs back in the day.

The labels obviously think that they can bully people into settling, thus make some money without the pubilcity of the full lawsuits like this one... and for most, they probably can. However it only takes a few people to stand up and take the bullet before they looks as bad as they really are. Unfortunately, here is someone who's taken the bullet.

What's really disturbing here is how obviously the legal system has been manipulated. The implications are a little chilling, because it implies both that the system is easy to twist and that the people doing twisting are too STUPID, or too untouchable, to do it with any degree of intelligence or subtlety. First that a woman can be brough to court for downloading TWENTY FOUR songs... that's just... No. That's beyond stupid. A Judge should have looked at that and immediately tossed it back to small claims court, or out alltogether. Twenty Four HUNDRED, maybe. Uploading 24 songs, possibly... But downloading 24 songs? The Judge, the Jury, and the Congressmen who set the laws in place to allow this are all imbeciles.

Downloading 24 songs is, at MOST, a 45 dollar offence. Arguably, uploading those same songs is a FAR greater offence, since they can be downloaded hundreds or thousands of times each, but merely downloading them is akin to shoplifting the same CD. If someone got sued for 2 million bucks for shoplifting a single CD, I can't imagine the reaction...

We live in a time where the tail doesnt merely WAG the dog... apparently it does most of the 'intelligent' thinking as well. I guess when people say the government has their heads up their posteriors... they're really not kidding.

Posted 05/01/2009 at 06:40:30pm

I'd like to point out that the vast majority of younger ebook readers are aware of the DRM problems with the kindle and likely already own devices they use for reading. Myself, I use a Nokia N800 and am willing to wait until a less shackled piece of hardware is available. What point is there to me buying a Kindle as opposed to, say, a Bookeen Cybook?

Posted 04/19/2009 at 03:27:41am

Everyone keeps looking at this along legal or moral lines, and it's not. Forget whether it's theft or not, forget whether it's a freedom of speech thing. I don't care. Look at this from a little place I like to call 'REALITY' people.

 First, The companies in question pay a FORTUNE for DRM systems that do not work, have never worked, and likely will never work. Period Dot. This is INSANITY. This rises the price of their product and creates more pirates.

 Second, These same companies pay a LARGER FORTUNE to *sue* their customer base for millions of dollars that they will NEVER be able to recoup because, frankly, none of the people they sue have that kind of money. This aggravates their clients, resulting in more downloads in 'protest', while the prices of their products rise so that we, the consumer, can pay for their idiotic mismanagment. This is INSANITY.

 Let's face some cold hard facts people. Piracy is here to stay. It has been here in video since the invention of the VCR (which, for the record, these same companies also attempted to have outlawed) and will be here in a myriad of different forms for so long as we exist as a race. The day humans no longer pirate media in whatever form it exists is the day we have evolved into a new species, or been wiped out by a Rock from space. Take your pick.

 What's the lesson to be learned here? For PC game companies it's pretty simple really. Stop paying money to load a game with DRM that doesn't work, at least stop paying so much. I agree that some basic DRM is called for, if only to prevent every single user from copying the game for their pals... but really, all you need is the most basic form. If a gamer is savy enough to download the program that lets them copy the disc, well they'll be able to get through ANY DRM you place. For music a Movie companies it's a little tougher, however. They're in a spot where they have a whole new paradigm tearing into their consumer model and, while it's NOT impacting their profits yet, they're terrified of it. They need to stop shaking in their boots and start taking some chances... try new methods of working with online sources and keep trying until one works.

 Contrary to what these same morons believed, the VCR did NOT sink their buinesses. In fact it was an INCREDIBLE source of revenue for them, even though they couldn't see how that might happen at first. Those days are here again, and the first company to solve this riddle, is gonna blow the doors of the others in terms of pure profit.

 So stop being idiots and get with the program. Otherwise, we'll leave you behind.

 As to this Pirate Bay issue... did it seem REALLY wierd to anyone else that the Judge game large fines and jail time, but did NOT order the site to be shut down? If you don't order the site to be shut down, isn't that a tacit acceptance of it's legality? And if that's the case, what grounds are there for assigning fines or jail time?

Posted 10/16/2008 at 09:58:59am

What's the net effect of DRM? It's an inconveniance to paying customers. That's it. That's all. If your bank made you jump through hoops, giving ID, taking photos, passing screening devices, etc in order to prevent bank robbery, and the robbers just walked past all the security with guns in their hands, would you thank the bank for the extra 'security'?

Farcry 2 is already available for download in a pirated Xbox version. I don't own an XBox, and I'm unlikely to ever own an Xbox, but if I can go download the console version that easily why are they beefing up PC security again?? DRM does not work, has never worked, and will not work any time in the forseeable future. it's not a question of morality... people who will pirate, WILL PIRATE.

Why is this so hard for companies to understand? They're spending millions on security that doesn't work, jacking up prices of their games to drive away paying customers, and then blame it on US when sales and profits go down?? I'll give them a hint. Save the millions spent on piracy, release a game sans DRM... or at most just simple DRM to dissuade kids from using Nero or whatever came with their PC to make copies for all their friends, and sell the game at a reasonable price. It's a no brainer. Sales will go up, costs will go down, and pirates? Pirates will STAY THE SAME.

Pirates are part of the biz, you dopes. They have been since Gutenberg invented the printing press. Media has always been pirated, and will always be pirated. If you don't want to deal with pirates, try another line of work, like the Navy. And yes, piracy is more widespread today as the internet makes communication easier... so WHAT!? SO is your Audience. Twenty years ago there was no way you could reach the same scale of audience as today. Fifty years ago you would have had to make do with a few tens of thousands. The scale of piracy has climbed along with the scale of your markets. The only thing driving down the profits of media companies ARE the media companies.