|
As this forum is rarely used anymore, we've locked it. Feel free to browse and read. Questions? Please reach out to us directly. Cheers! |
|
 |
|
|
| Author |
Message |
macgyver655
Joined: 22 Aug 2007
Posts: 8508
|
| Posted: Wed May 28, 2008 7:42 pm Post subject: |
|
|
deleted
Last edited by macgyver655 on Fri May 30, 2008 3:09 am; edited 1 time in total
|
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
macgyver655
Joined: 22 Aug 2007
Posts: 8508
|
| Posted: Wed May 28, 2008 8:00 pm Post subject: |
|
|
deleted
Last edited by macgyver655 on Fri May 30, 2008 3:09 am; edited 1 time in total
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
capa
Joined: 22 Oct 2007
Posts: 33
Location: Hamburg, Germany
|
| Posted: Wed May 28, 2008 8:19 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: | | What's funny is the OP hasn't even been back!!! |
No, no, I'm still here and indeed very thankful for all your thoughts and helpful comments.
Will get back with further questions....
But having been moderator in a webforum for several years I always found it more than disturbing when
the poster came back thanking for each and every reply blowing the whole post up unnecessarily which
made it hard to see the true story.
Hope I didn't upset the people here with my restraint 
Best regards
Carsten
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
jask
Joined: 17 Mar 2006
Posts: 10187
Location: kamloops BC
|
| Posted: Thu May 29, 2008 9:54 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Person99 wrote: | | jask wrote: |
If I wasn't circumventing copy protection with a D-VHS unit |
What you talking about Willis? A D-VHS machine by definition falls under fair use (it is exactly what is protected by the famous betamax case) and does not in any way violate the DMCA. I'm not sure you understand the facts. |
I understand the facts just fine, the word means to get around or avoid, it does not infer any violation.
| Person99 wrote: | | jask wrote: | | I also think the industry has subverted the legal system with the DMCA and I look forward to every form of decryption that comes out. |
I think the DMCA has questionable aspects and worry about its legal impact, but it is a big stretch to say that a bad law legitimizes stealing. Stealing is a moral issue. |
Save your morality Dave. the crime in the DMCA is not copying- it is DECRYPTING If I chose to use a tool to access content, content I own (yes really Dave I am one of those honest guys, I pay for stuff), content that the courts have previously upheld my right to copy for personal use.THe crime is NOT theft, and in this case I doubt the courts would prosecute the charge.
| Person99 wrote: | | jask wrote: | | To allow consumers the right to legally copy media they own,and then make it illegal to produce or distribute the ability to do that is hypocritical. |
Actually, the DMCA makes it illegal to copy media you already own if the act of copying requires you to circumvent copy protection schemes. |
Yeah, I said that already... did you see the bit about Hypocrisy??
| Person99 wrote: | | jask wrote: | | I assume you are just ignoring the other positive attributes of the HTPC because the scaler may at least do this one thing better than a HTPC.Face it if you have already spent the money you are invested in the technology (limited as it is) but to ignore the many other uses and benefits of a HTPC and dismiss it as a "thiefs tool" sure sounds like a cop out. |
I'm not ignoring them, I'm just saying they are a net loss, not a net gain. The only reason I pipe up is because many of the HTPC zealots take every oportunity to tell people, "get an HTPC and use it--they are great!!!!". The fact is, they are not that great for A LOT of people. I've seen many try to use them only to regret it later so one should understand what they are getting into and why. |
Ah HA!! there is the hot button. Dave I feel real bad for you, and your troubles with computers but the OP is "savvy" to this newfangled technology.
| Person99 wrote: | | jask wrote: | Calling all HTPC owners thieves?  ...."there you go again..." |
It is a bit of hyperbole, but I think it is quite accurate (methinks thou doesn't protest too much). Anecdotally, I literally know over 20 HTPC users well enough to know their habits (not take just their word for something on a forum), and not one of them has failed to use their HTPC for illegal activities. I allow for the case that there may be an HTPC in use somewhere that is not used for stealing, but you are being disingenuous if you don't at least acknowledge this is a small minority of HTPC users. |
There you go AGAIN!!! you need to find new friends Dave, if the RIAA swoops in with a big net you do not want to be standing next to those bad apples.
| Person99 wrote: | | Hell, look at your post, you basically told people how to steal and essentially bragged "hey I'm stealing, but I'm not going to say I am so that I don't get it legal trouble when the RIAA asks for my IP". At least have the balls to man up and admit to your theft or stop doing it. |
Now you are just being a jackass, when I chose to decrypt (content I own) I am not stealing.
I do not recall telling anyone to steal, nor bragging that I steal. The RIaa can sniff my balls and so can you Dave- enough with the self righteous screeching. You are making accusations that are based on conjecture.
| Person99 wrote: | | With regard to HTPC theft, it generally comes in a mild or an egregious form. The mild form is ripping DVDs that they have rented from NetFlix or BB. I call this the mild form because logically I can see no moral difference between ripping the 5" disc you rented vs. recording the movie from the broadcast service you rented. However, in the eyes of the law, the former is illegal but the later is legal. The more egregious form is downright theft. This is downloading movies and songs from the internet. In my anecdotal experience, well over 50% of HTPC user engage in this form of stealing. |
In My anecdotal experience a large number of Computer users also do this. start a support group if you think you can help .
I still think the HTPC option is more attractive.
P.S. I really like that "HTPC Zealot" line, do you mind if I use it for a Tag??
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
perisoft
Joined: 29 Aug 2007
Posts: 2920
Location: Ithaca, NY
|
| Posted: Thu May 29, 2008 1:47 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| jask wrote: |
P.S. I really like that "HTPC Zealot" line, do you mind if I use it for a Tag?? |
Good call! But I wouldn't bother asking - just steal it from him like I did! We HTPC users are all thieves anyway, so why not?
_________________
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Person99
Joined: 09 Mar 2006
Posts: 4899
Location: Flower Mound, TX
|
| Posted: Thu May 29, 2008 2:24 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Sorry, OP. I can resist.
| jask wrote: | | Person99 wrote: | | jask wrote: |
If I wasn't circumventing copy protection with a D-VHS unit |
What you talking about Willis? A D-VHS machine by definition falls under fair use (it is exactly what is protected by the famous betamax case) and does not in any way violate the DMCA. I'm not sure you understand the facts. |
I understand the facts just fine, the word means to get around or avoid, it does not infer any violation. |
circumvent (v) - to go around or bypass; to avoid.
I still don't understand. A D-VHS machine actually preserves copy protection (honoring the "copy flags"), it in no way bypasses it.
| jask wrote: | | Dave I feel real bad for you, and your troubles with computers but the OP is "savvy" to this newfangled technology. |
I've never tried to use an HTPC because the cost/benefit analysis was never in its favor.
I do have a little bit of familiarity with this "newfangled technology." Not much mind you, but I've had some passing contact with it since I first started writing code 30 years ago when I was 14 followed by my 20 years in the software industry. In that twenty years, I've obtained a few software patents including:
- A method and apperatus for DNS-based global load balancing for reverse proxy applications (our implementation of this does much more than a "normal" DNS server, but significantly outperfms Bind).
- A method and apperatus for queueing and prioritization of HTTP traffic
- A method and apperatus for dynamic cache expiration
Currently I have a couple patents pending in the distributed capture and image processing space (mostly around security and encryption technologies).
In my 30 years of trivial piddling, I've written code in the following languages: C, C++, Java, C#, 8088/i286/i386 Assembler, 6502 Assembler, Visual Basic, Pascal, Lisp, Perl, Smalltalk, Ruby, Python, PL/SQL, T-SQL
Applications I've worked on have varied from end user apps to low level networking apps and kernel modules. The platforms I've targetted have been: HP-UX, SunOS, Solaris, BSD, Linux, DOS, Windows (NT 3.5 through Vista), Mac OS (Classic), Symbian, Embedded Linux.
I'm currently the chief architect and lead designer for a small ECM vendor.
But perhaps some day, you can school me on how these computer thingys work. Think you could find the time?
_________________
Dave
A train station is where the train stops. A bus station is where the bus stops. On my desk, I have a work station....
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
jask
Joined: 17 Mar 2006
Posts: 10187
Location: kamloops BC
|
| Posted: Thu May 29, 2008 8:02 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Semantics ....
Dave, if I had originally said " If I wasn't AVOIDING the issue of copy protection with a D-VHS machine" would you still be gnawing this bone? It still means the same thing and speaks to the original subject, and that was not the legality of D-VHS...
Thanks for the thumbnail CV, I am impressed and happy for you- but it is not relevent- the issue was the OP and his comfort with computers and HTPC.
That you have never tried HTPC............. 
School is out.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Person99
Joined: 09 Mar 2006
Posts: 4899
Location: Flower Mound, TX
|
| Posted: Thu May 29, 2008 9:04 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| jask wrote: | | Semantics .... |
Yes, but that was your case in the response, so I obviously assume it was the issue you wanted to debate.
| jask wrote: | | Thanks for the thumbnail CV, I am impressed and happy for you- but it is not relevent |
It was because you said "Dave I feel real bad for you, and your troubles with computers" (a quite pejoritive response) followed by an inference of my inadequacy with the technology as evidence by your "newfangled technology" comment. Both clearly implied that "computers where too tough for me, that is why I couldn't handle an HTPC". Since the zealots always come back with a "well its too hard for you" response, I wanted to clearly demonstrate that it was not too hard for me. This is of course in support of the argument that there are a number of other valid reasons from not wanting to waste the time, money, effort and experience the frustration that they entail.
| jask wrote: | | That you have never tried HTPC............. |
Sorry for the lack of clarity on this--my bad. When I say "not even tried to use", that means as a formal part of my system. So, I've never tried to use a DVDO processor in my system, but I've evaluated them. The same with the HTPC.
Of course I evaluated them 4 years ago when they were all the rage for use as an upscaling DVD player. My conclusion at that point was from a pure price/performance perpective, they were an excellent choice. However, from a cost/benefit perspective, they were not nearly as far ahead. I have, of course, continued to reevaluate them. However, they now no longer have a significant price/performance advantage (and in many cases, as pointed out in this thread by others, a performance disadvantage) and they are significantly behind other options in a cost/benefit analysis. In fact, so far behind that the only logical reason to use one are:
1) You will have one for gaming so you might as well use it for everything it can do (but bear in mind, since I've never seen a game in a commercial theater other than the arcade, playing games is not "home theater" therefore not a primary concern for many).
2) You used them 3 years ago when they made sense, but have not reevaluated their usage.
3) You want to use it for stealing.
So yes, my assertion that the majority of HTPC users steal is only based upon about 5 years of anecdotal evidence. There are undoubtedly category 1 and 2 users out there, but I think both you and I know that my anecdotal evidence does not represent a low probability boundary condition, but rather, as is far more likely, a representative random sampling of HTPC users.
You may in fact be an honest HTPC users, that possibility exists (though your tone, attitude, etc suggests otherwise). However, the fact remains a considerable number of HTPCs are used for theft. Given the low placement of the HTPC option in a cost/benefit analysis when used honestestly, it becomes quite obvious that the primary benefit that tips the analysis in the HTPC's favor is dishonest/illegal use.
Yes, this illegal use bothers me not just because it is morally wrong, but because it harms all of us. If it were not for all the thieves, we would not have B.S. laws like the DMCA. I find it amusing how many people get mad at the IP owners for trying to protect their IP while ignoring the thieves. My ire is directed at the root of the problem--the thieves.
I should have more clearly articulated the 2 different cost/benefit analysis structures to better articulate the fact that there are two cost/benefit structures for the HTPC:
- Honest usage
- Dishonest usage
Since the honest usage ranks low in cost/benefit against other options, I immediately jump to the logical use of them, which is dishonest usage. Unfortunately, it seems my disgust with this usage has me too quickly jump to railing against it at the expense of more clearly articulating the cost/benefit analysis.
Sorry for the confusion.
_________________
Dave
A train station is where the train stops. A bus station is where the bus stops. On my desk, I have a work station....
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
macgyver655
Joined: 22 Aug 2007
Posts: 8508
|
| Posted: Thu May 29, 2008 9:41 pm Post subject: |
|
|
deleted
Last edited by macgyver655 on Fri May 30, 2008 3:09 am; edited 1 time in total
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
macgyver655
Joined: 22 Aug 2007
Posts: 8508
|
| Posted: Thu May 29, 2008 9:45 pm Post subject: |
|
|
deleted
Last edited by macgyver655 on Fri May 30, 2008 3:10 am; edited 1 time in total
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
macgyver655
Joined: 22 Aug 2007
Posts: 8508
|
| Posted: Fri May 30, 2008 12:02 am Post subject: |
|
|
|
I want to apologize to Capa for getting involved in this and ruining your topic. I'm thinking about going back and deleting all my posts in here. You should probably start a new post if you have more questions or concerns. Again, sorry.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
kal
Forum Administrator
Joined: 06 Mar 2006
Posts: 18114
Location: Ottawa, Canada
TV/Projector: JVC DLA-NZ7
|
| Posted: Fri May 30, 2008 12:27 am Post subject: |
|
|
| macgyver655 wrote: | | Oh yea. And the fact that these actors and singers are making millions of dollars for what they do and a majority of other regular people make a measly 10 or 20 dollars an hour to work 10 times harder and 10 times longer. But let our government write laws to protect them but not the regular Joe. Just make the regular Joe pay more. |
Sorry, but I have to comment on this.
The argument that people should be allowed to steal movies because the stars make millions of dollars is just plain ignorant.
The fact they they make millions is the way the FREE MARKET ECONOMY & CAPITALISM works!
An actor, or a company CEO, or anyone else making millions is paid that much because that's what society and capitalism deems the output that the individual contributes to be WORTH. It has ZERO to do with how HARD someone works. It's all about what the results are worth.
Born with great teeth and and a nice ass? Become a super model and make millions. Because that ad company will make 10x as much.
Born with a good business sense and a ruthless demeanor? Become a CEO and start taking over companies and make millions. Because you'll make a lot for your shareholders.
But if you're born with no assets or skills you could spend your life working 80 hour work weeks working twice as hard mopping floors making $8/hr. That's because the work they're doing is not WORTH anything in comparison. Last I checked, nobody's going to pay someone $500/hr to mop floors, no matter how WELL they mop floors.
How much someone makes has no relation to how hard they WORK but what their work is WORTH.
That's capitalism. Don't like it? Then you want to check out communism. Where everyone gets paid the same for their work and in the end nobody does any. Last I checked the Soviet Union's not doing too well.
Kal
_________________
Support our site by using our affiliate links. We thank you!
My basement/HT/bar/brewery build 2.0
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
macgyver655
Joined: 22 Aug 2007
Posts: 8508
|
| Posted: Fri May 30, 2008 12:56 am Post subject: |
|
|
deleted
Last edited by macgyver655 on Fri May 30, 2008 3:11 am; edited 1 time in total
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
macgyver655
Joined: 22 Aug 2007
Posts: 8508
|
| Posted: Fri May 30, 2008 1:01 am Post subject: |
|
|
deleted
Last edited by macgyver655 on Fri May 30, 2008 3:11 am; edited 1 time in total
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
kal
Forum Administrator
Joined: 06 Mar 2006
Posts: 18114
Location: Ottawa, Canada
TV/Projector: JVC DLA-NZ7
|
| Posted: Fri May 30, 2008 2:28 am Post subject: |
|
|
| macgyver655 wrote: | | Oh yea. And maybe if the actors and singers were gettings paid wages like most other people, a Blu ray DVD might only cost 5.00 and nobody would want to steal because it wouldn't be worth it |
Sorry, but there's absolutely no logic in what you're saying. If things cost $0.01 people would still steal. People do not steal movies or music because it's too expensive, they steal because they can.
I won't be replying any more in this thread. The lack of understanding is too overwhelming.
Kal
_________________
Support our site by using our affiliate links. We thank you!
My basement/HT/bar/brewery build 2.0
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Zebu Fellenz
Joined: 21 Dec 2006
Posts: 2567
|
| Posted: Fri May 30, 2008 2:42 am Post subject: |
|
|
| kal wrote: | | macgyver655 wrote: | | Oh yea. And maybe if the actors and singers were gettings paid wages like most other people, a Blu ray DVD might only cost 5.00 and nobody would want to steal because it wouldn't be worth it |
Sorry, but there's absolutely no logic in what you're saying. If things cost $0.01 people would still steal. People do not steal movies or music because it's too expensive, they steal because they can.
Kal |
Kal,
You make a good point, but you're not factoring in the amount of time and effort some people go to to steal media. Personally I agree with macgyver655, if a BD cost $5-$10 instead of $20+ most of the time less people would just go out and buy the disc rather than spending all the time looking for a copy to steal.
Erik
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
jask
Joined: 17 Mar 2006
Posts: 10187
Location: kamloops BC
|
| Posted: Fri May 30, 2008 5:57 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Person99 wrote: | | jask wrote: | | Semantics .... |
Yes, but that was your case in the response, so I obviously assume it was the issue you wanted to debate. |
I see that, but you were wrong then and are still now.
| jask wrote: | | Thanks for the thumbnail CV, I am impressed and happy for you- but it is not relevent |
| Person99 wrote: | | It was because you said "Dave I feel real bad for you, and your troubles with computers" (a quite pejoritive response) |
It was pejorAtive- condescending people bring out the best in me!!
| Person99 wrote: | | followed by an inference of my inadequacy with the technology as evidence by your "newfangled technology" comment. Both clearly implied that "computers where too tough for me, that is why I couldn't handle an HTPC". Since the zealots always come back with a "well its too hard for you" response, I wanted to clearly demonstrate that it was not too hard for me. This is of course in support of the argument that there are a number of other valid reasons from not wanting to waste the time, money, effort and experience the frustration that they entail. |
Seriously Dave, this is not command line software.
| Person99 wrote: | | Of course I evaluated them 4 years ago when they were all the rage for use as an upscaling DVD player. |
Well , I think that should be the final word then..... all this development in the last half decade, probably irrelevant...Quad core, new graphics cards,shaders, codecs, and everyone knows the only good BR/ HD-DVD source is a set top box. and those kooky open source kids!!?...there is no profit in that!!
| Person99 wrote: | | but I think both you and I know that my anecdotal evidence does not represent a low probability boundary condition |
we both know it to be limited ,subjective,opinion.
| Person99 wrote: | | , but rather, as is far more likely, a representative random sampling of HTPC users. |
again opinion, but we have different metrics of lawful use.
| Person99 wrote: | | You may in fact be an honest HTPC users, that possibility exists (though your tone, attitude, etc suggests otherwise). |
That is by far the best Laugh I have had all day, rest assured I have been called far worse by far better than you.
| Person99 wrote: | | If it were not for all the thieves, we would not have B.S. laws like the DMCA. |
This we agree on, and as Kal had pointed out theft will happen no matter what.To support or validate a law that was obviously crafted to preclude or deny the rights we HAVE is illogical. The simple act of allowing fair use copies to legal owners of purchased material would do a lot to shore up the credibility of the DMCA.
| Person99 wrote: | | I find it amusing how many people get mad at the IP owners for trying to protect their IP while ignoring the thieves. My ire is directed at the root of the problem--the thieves. |
Mine is at those that subvert democracy and law for personal Gain, however in my case I am referring to an industry not individuals.
| Person99 wrote: | | Sorry for the confusion. |
Apology accepted
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
MikeEby
Joined: 24 Jun 2007
Posts: 5237
Location: Osceola, Indiana
|
| Posted: Fri May 30, 2008 1:39 pm Post subject: |
|
|
It seems this thread is hopelessly off topic so I will add my 2 cents.
I even question the cost benefit of stealing; let’s say the average BD movie ripped to a hard drive takes 20GB of space with all audio tracks intact you are just using a mounted ISO. This would allow 25 movies ripped to a 500GB drive costing $90. We would put 4 drives in the PC giving it a capacity of 100 movies. So far we have $3.60 in hardware cost per movie, for just storage. Now it would likely take around 30 minutes fiddling around with software to rip the discs to the hard drive, create an ISO file, catalog the movie and move it to a location on your media server. The average geek could make $15-20/hour doing an honest job. We now have about $10-15 invested in something we don’t even own. If the hard drive is permanently installed in a PC running 24/7 the average cost of running the box is $10/ month or $120/year for just electricity. Then we should amortize the cost of rest of the hardware say $500 over 4 years plus the electricity cost of $480 of over a 4 year period we now add $9.80 per disk, so we are now up to $20-25 per disk. It is highly likely that during the 4 year period one of the 4 drives will die or crash leaving you with only 75 movies, making average cost $33-$37/ per movie.
Humm it looks like crime really doesn’t pay.
Mike
_________________
Doing HD since the last century!
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
perisoft
Joined: 29 Aug 2007
Posts: 2920
Location: Ithaca, NY
|
| Posted: Fri May 30, 2008 2:21 pm Post subject: |
|
|
MikeEby, you're presuming no improvement in technology over the next four years. You're already out of date by a factor of two - 750b drives are approaching $90 and 1tb drives will probably hit $100 in the next few months.
Elec costs for running the computer are pretty minimal; the machine isn't sitting there drawing 500 watts the whole time. And it's not too likely that one of the drives will crash, either - plus, people generally don't value their time the same way hanging around at home. If that was the case, you'd have to add the cost of WATCHING the movies and setting up the whole HT, which makes the rest of it look pretty minimal (unless you're crazy, like me).
At any rate, as I said, I'm not sure how all this stacks up morally given a rental option like Netflix. You can get pretty much any movie you want at any time you want; if you want to watch one again you can get one again. The only difference is the number you can have at one time.
If you rip 100 movies to your PC using a Netflix subscription, the only difference between that and not ripping them is that you can access more at once and it takes a few days less to watch one of the ones you have if you haven't got it ripped.
If we assume that that's not morally acceptable but having Netflix is, the unacceptable part is the convenience of access, not the access itself. It's the four days you wait for a movie to show up instead of having it immediately that's the issue - particularly not the ability to watch a bunch at one time, because it's pretty unlikely you'll watch 10 movies in 3 days. And if you have a higher end netflix package, even that stops being an issue.
So the piracy then becomes the convenience and timescale between when you want to see the movie and when you GET to see it.
It's not black and white at all, as Person99 thinks. I'm going to subscribe to netflix because I can't possibly afford to buy all the movies I want to see outright. Am I depriving the studios of money if I want to watch a movie again and stream it off my drive instead of waiting three days for it? Am I only depriving them of money if I order another movie I couldn't have gotten if I'd waited those three days, and watch that one then? They still have the same income. Where's the line?
_________________
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
You cannot attach files in this forum
You can download files in this forum
|
Forum powered by phpBB © phpBB Group
|
|
