This site makes extensive use of JavaScript.
Please enable JavaScript in your browser.
Live
PTR
10.2.7
PTR
10.2.6
Beta
Discussion on IP piracy
Post Reply
Return to board index
Post by
Squishalot
All of which is simple text, you can fit 500 characters in a kiobyte of data, that's nothing complex. The fact that you didn't know this confirms for me that you have no idea how data is stored.
Uh huh. And how precisely do you conclude that about 60 fields of information is only 'a few kilobytes of data'?
That being said, the table in question contains 130 million transactions per month. 5 years of information, at 3 kilobytes per transaction is 21.8 terabytes. This is for a bank that serves a mere 10 million customers, and probably only deals with about half of each of those customers' transactions. Across the US, if the US banks have similar systems and behaviours, that's over 600 terabytes in databases, just on transaction account details.
So no, I don't think 200-400TB is really that big relatively speaking. Certainly, it's not the biggest ever.
Size will only matter if the video was uploaded in whole, which is rare, and wasn't compressed (which it may be) and wasn't appended. Average volume also tells you nothing because it's not a unique property and varies depending on the audio codec used as well as the length of clip and adding extra or removing content from the video will invalidate it. Nor would any of those measurements tell you if the audio was infringing copyright or it contained videocamera footage of copyrighted material. Simply looking at the metrics you mentioned would show precisely zero.
How many times do I need to tell you that it doesn't need to be a precise match?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Data_mining
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Analytics
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Logistic_regression
I need to go for now. Take a look at the above links and hopefully that will clarify the techniques that I'm talking about.(##RESPBREAK##)8##DELIM##Squishalot##DELIM##
Post by
MyTie
What about the loss of anonymity? That spurred the middle east uprisings. Information is one of the best tools to unhinge ruthless despots and dictators. I, for one, am all for the free exchange of information without having to have names attached to everything. The importance of ending piracy is overshadowed by the importance of freedom.
Who said anything about loss of anonymity? Who is Squishalot? Is there a name attached to him, or his YouTube uploads, or his forum messages? No.
There's no less anonymity from the uploading of videos and having them scanned for copyright material than there is from you posting on Wowhead.
Lol, seriously? Let me connect the dots for you. A website (like youtube), that uses uploaded info, will need to either be massively advertisement heavy, or require paid subscriptions from its users. Make a nice money trail to the users on the internet, then see how anonymous it is. Squishalot is not so free to speak his mind when under a despotic government if Squishalot's subscription is paid by Mr.Banks who gets his bank statements mailed to 17 Cheery Tree Ln. These problems I see with this bill are just off the top of my head. You aren't even seeing all the implications of what you are supporting. You need to step back, and put more thought into this before you continue to support it. Every time you post something in support of this bill you make yourself appear more and more oblivious to reality. Your ignorance is a danger to yourself and, really, all of humanity.
Post by
204878
This post was from a user who has deleted their account.
Post by
Squishalot
Make a nice money trail to the users on the internet, then see how anonymous it is. Squishalot is not so free to speak his mind when under a despotic government if Squishalot's subscription is paid by Mr.Banks who gets his bank statements mailed to 17 Cheery Tree Ln.
You make it sound like it's not possible to do that right now.
Your ignorance is a danger to yourself and, really, all of humanity.
Wait, you're the one who thinks you're completely anonymous right now, but not if you have to pay for a subscription, and you think
I'm
the ignorant one?
I'm aware of all of these. Those are a few extremely broad subjects which on their own would do nothing, it would require skilled combinations and the database I suggested to accomplish this task. That's like linking to the ingredient list and saying "therefore fully cooked meal".
/facepalm. Of course on their own each of those topics 'does nothing'. I linked them because they provide the underlying framework for what I'm suggesting. Yes, if I give an ingredient list to a chef, I reckon he'd be able to give me the fully cooked meal. Likewise, if I gave the task and the data to any of the analytics teams I've worked with in the past, they'd be able to give me a copyright scorecard to work with as well.
But, you know, screw that. You've gone from "it can't be done" to "it's not possible to do with technology in our lifetime" to "it's too big a step from ABC to XYZ". I'm not going to waste any more time on that.
Let's take a step back, as MyTie has asked me to do. You still haven't provided a convincing argument why piracy should be accepted.
Post by
gamerunknown
What of the person that sends a file to their friend and then deletes the original? It happens fairly often with torrents. They've surrendered their own ownership: the difference between the digital and the analogue entity is that the digital one can be further copied and transmitted at next to no cost. The entertainment industry wants to preserve inefficiency.
We're at the industrial age and the politician's campaigns are being paid for by the hand loom.
Post by
Squishalot
Contractual breach of terms of use, if the content provider prohibits that action. If we could find a way to demonstrate the deleted original and prove that it was merely passed on (as opposed to sent to hundreds of others), I'm sure that'd be a different kettle of fish.
I still maintain that gaming innovation is being stifled by piracy. There is less motivation to go out on a limb and develop an awesome game if it's just going to be copied and sent all over the world for free.
Post by
204878
This post was from a user who has deleted their account.
Post by
Squishalot
I don't much care if it's accepted, nor do I believe it should be. It'll happen either way.
Why are you still in this thread if you don't want to discuss it? You don't believe it should be, so why?
Something MyTie agreed with me on (and god only knows how little he's been doing that in the last week):
The issue is, I don't think that enough people actually circulate their money back into the areas of the gaming / music / video industry that deserve to be rewarded. If money saved by pirating Skyrim flows back into WoW subscriptions, where is the incentive to produce Skyrim quality games?
No matter how much money continues to flow into the relevant sectors, unless pirates directly funnel their money back into the product that they're pirating, the demand/supply incentive mechanism is disrupted. How are game companies supposed to deal with that?
Post by
91278
This post was from a user who has deleted their account.
Post by
MyTie
Make a nice money trail to the users on the internet, then see how anonymous it is. Squishalot is not so free to speak his mind when under a despotic government if Squishalot's subscription is paid by Mr.Banks who gets his bank statements mailed to 17 Cheery Tree Ln.
You make it sound like it's not possible to do that right now.It is certainly more possible to be anonymous on the internet before government regulations force subscription format for vast parts of the net.
Your ignorance is a danger to yourself and, really, all of humanity.
Wait, you're the one who thinks you're completely anonymous right now, but not if you have to pay for a subscription, and you think
I'm
the ignorant one?When did I say "completely anonymous"? I didn't. I will say though that you can access most websites with complete anonymity in various ways. SOPA puts that in jeopardy.
Something MyTie agreed with me on (and god only knows how little he's been doing that in the last week)
We both agree that cancer is bad, too. You are the one who wants to operate on inoperable cancer with a chainsaw. I'm all like "NO SQUISHY! THAT CANCER IS INOPERABLE!" and you are all like "BUT CANCER IS BAD! WE MUST GET RID OF IT." and I'm all like "PUT THE CHAINSAW DOWN" and you are all like "CHAINSAWS AREN'T REALLY THAT DANGEROUS, ONCE I TURN THE SPEED DOWN." and I'm all like "ITS INOPERABLE CANCER, SO THE CHAINSAW CAN ONLY HARM NOT HELP, AND BESIDES, IT'S A CHAINSAW" and you are all like "BUT I TURNED THE SPEED DOWN" and I'm all like "YOU ARE GOING TO KILL THE PATIENT" and you are all like "BUT I HAVE STOP THE CANCER"... and round and round we go.
The internet is the patient. The piracy is the inoperable cancer. SOPA is the chainsaw. Just, put it down.
Post by
91278
This post was from a user who has deleted their account.
Post by
Squishalot
Sinespe - someone's already quoted Gabe. I've replied already somewhere - not sure which thread it's in though, seeing as there are a couple of similar ones running.
It is certainly more possible to be anonymous on the internet before government regulations force subscription format for vast parts of the net.
When did I say "completely anonymous"? I didn't. I will say though that you can access most websites with complete anonymity in various ways. SOPA puts that in jeopardy.
It's not. You have a net connection - that makes you just as identifiable as when you use a bank account. Even moreso, once you consider the rising use of pre-paid cards for online purchases.
The internet is the patient. The piracy is the inoperable cancer. SOPA is the chainsaw. Just, put it down.
Your analogies are getting from bad to worse. If piracy keeps growing, that's not going to kill the internet. Therefore, your analogy is rubbish. That being said, if SOPA is the chainsaw, and I want them to replace it with a scalpel. You want to sit around and do nothing.
Post by
Adamsm
You know, if you want to get rid of piracy, the only way to do that is to take out the human element; setting up something that big companies can abuse to shut down websites isn't the answer....after all, how long till what happened to TV happens to the Internet, where nothing original can be used, and everything needs to the Jimmy Heart version of it.
Post by
MyTie
You have a net connection - that makes you just as identifiable as when you use a bank account. Even moreso, once you consider the rising use of pre-paid cards for online purchases.Proxy servers and wi fi, combined with a generic laptop and some internet = anonymousThe internet is the patient. The piracy is the inoperable cancer. SOPA is the chainsaw. Just, put it down.
Your analogies are getting from bad to worse. If piracy keeps growing, that's not going to kill the internet. Therefore, your analogy is rubbish. That being said, if SOPA is the chainsaw, and I want them to replace it with a scalpel. You want to sit around and do nothing.
First of all, cancer doesn't always lead to death, so rubbish to you. Secondly, you can operate on an inoperable tumor with a toothpick, a bowling ball, a dolphin, a precision surgery laser, or anything you want, and it won't make any difference. It's inoperable because operating on it won't help. Congressional legislation wont help. It can cause damage, but it wont stop piracy.
Edit: I mean, honestly, if there is nothing to benefit over legislation, and there is the slightest possibility of harm, why continue with it?
Post by
Squishalot
You know, if you want to get rid of piracy, the only way to do that is to take out the human element;
It's politically difficult, but that's actually the most effective way - going after the individual uploaders. The guys who are being sued by Sony, for example, if they were threatened with jail terms on criminal charges rather than contract violation liquidated damages, would that change things? Yes. Would it be politically tenable? Judging by the environment online here, probably not.
Proxy servers and wi fi, combined with a generic laptop and some internet = anonymous
Only relatively, just as anonymous as a cash chain floating around the country. All it takes is a knowledge sharing agreement with the proxy's ISP. That being said, do you use a proxy server to connect to Wowhead at the moment?
It's inoperable because operating on it won't help.
By that, you mean that it won't get rid of the cancer completely? Of course not, but you'll temporarily remove a great source of uncomfort and pain for the person.
I mean, honestly, if there is nothing to benefit over legislation, and there is the slightest possibility of harm, why continue with it?
This is the fundamental source of our disagreement, as I just highlighted a few minutes ago in the other thread. I do think there are benefits from legislation, because I don't see it as completely unstoppable.(##RESPBREAK##)8##DELIM##Squishalot##DELIM##
Post by
Adamsm
You know, if you want to get rid of piracy, the only way to do that is to take out the human element;
It's politically difficult, but that's actually the most effective way - going after the individual uploaders. The guys who are being sued by Sony, for example, if they were threatened with jail terms on criminal charges rather than contract violation liquidated damages, would that change things? Yes. Would it be politically tenable? Judging by the environment online here, probably not.So are you gonna do that retroactively, and go after anyone who ever made a copy of a music CD for a friend? Or a copy of a DVD they purchased but didn't want to take with them on vacation?
What about those people who release free music of their bands on line, fully expecting it to be copied and passed around, then when the album comes out, people will remember it and go pick it up? Or those who write online novels and share them on sites; those same sites could be taken down because someone believes someone else stole an idea and all of the stories on that site need to be removed?
Or, the machina creators, who while making movies about themselves and their friends, happen to take songs and use a sample in their movie; does that mean they have to shut down because someone raised a fuss?
Seriously, when does it stop being hunting piracy and start turning into a weapon for the companies to create a monopoly where you have to buy what they have no matter what, or how much it's being charged for?
Post by
Squishalot
So are you gonna do that retroactively, and go after anyone who ever made a copy of a music CD for a friend? Or a copy of a DVD they purchased but didn't want to take with them on vacation?
Of course you wouldn't, it'd be forward looking. Backup DVD copies are permitted under existing law, if I'm not mistaken, provided you still retain control / possession.
What about those people who release free music of their bands on line, fully expecting it to be copied and passed around, then when the album comes out, people will remember it and go pick it up?
If a band wants to give away their stuff for free, nobody is stopping them.
Or those who write online novels and share them on sites; those same sites could be taken down because someone believes someone else stole an idea and all of the stories on that site need to be removed?
Wait, are you talking about what I'm talking about, or are you still clinging onto SOPA?
Seriously, when does it stop being hunting piracy and start turning into a weapon for the companies to create a monopoly where you have to buy what they have no matter what, or how much it's being charged for?
I believe that if someone, be it an individual or a company, makes a desirable product, they should have a monopoly on its distribution, yes. You don't have to buy it if you don't want to. If it's too expensive, go to a competitor, or better yet, compete yourself.
That is how it works in the physical space (i.e. physical products like apples, cars, computer cases), and nobody argues about the principles of ownership and distribution and theft there. Why should it be any different in the digital space?
Even more bewildering - we're happy for Dell to complain that a competitor is putting a Dell label on their laptops and marketing them as Dells, but we wouldn't be happy if they complained that someone was wholesale copying their software and selling it. Where's the logic?
Post by
MyTie
I mean, honestly, if there is nothing to benefit over legislation, and there is the slightest possibility of harm, why continue with it?
This is the fundamental source of our disagreement, as I just highlighted a few minutes ago in the other thread. I do think there are benefits from legislation, because I don't see it as completely unstoppable.
Ok then. Explain to me how the US government can stop foreign websites from distributing copyrighted material without infringing on freedom of speech, marginalizing websites by laying heavy cost regulations on them, driving web servers to other countries, invading the privacy of users, or controlling ISPs (aka online dictatorship). I'm open to suggestions.
Post by
Squishalot
Ok then. Explain to me how the US government can stop foreign websites from distributing copyrighted material without infringing on freedom of speech, marginalizing websites by laying heavy cost regulations on them, driving web servers to other countries, invading the privacy of users, or controlling ISPs (aka online dictatorship). I'm open to suggestions.
No, that's a strawman. You said that there's nothing to benefit over legislation while causing harm. I'm saying that there are benefits of legislation in stopping piracy, with some 'harm' required (where harm is defined as "a negative repercussion to the community").
That being said, it's reasonably simple matter to engage with the foreign governments to deal with the issues and bargain out a solution that gets their support for anti-piracy efforts, just as they do with anti-terrorism ones. How do we deal with the Taliban? We get agreement from Afghanistan (even if it was obtained post-hence) to settle in and chase them down. Same principles apply.
Post by
MyTie
Ok then. Explain to me how the US government can stop foreign websites from distributing copyrighted material without infringing on freedom of speech, marginalizing websites by laying heavy cost regulations on them, driving web servers to other countries, invading the privacy of users, or controlling ISPs (aka online dictatorship). I'm open to suggestions.
No, that's a strawman. You said that there's nothing to benefit over legislation while causing harm. I'm saying that there are benefits of legislation in stopping piracy, with some 'harm' required (where harm is defined as "a negative repercussion to the community").
That being said, it's reasonably simple matter to engage with the foreign governments to deal with the issues and bargain out a solution that gets their support for anti-piracy efforts, just as they do with anti-terrorism ones. How do we deal with the Taliban? We get agreement from Afghanistan (even if it was obtained post-hence) to settle in and chase them down. Same principles apply.
I'm not willing to risk negative reprocussions on the internet to stop swedish pirates. The internet is too important and movie profits are too trivial.
Hunting the Taliban causes harm to the internet? My analogies are bad, huh?
Post Reply
You are not logged in. Please
log in
to post a reply or
register
if you don't already have an account.