Gold Plated Desert Eagel Pricce

EMI's revolution and the paradox of the dangers of DRM emule

Almost all providers of DRM systems ("DRM" English "Digital Rights Management") acknowledge that, in the case of audio songs, "the absolute prevention against duplication is technologically impossible." That
Shuman Ghosemajumder emphatically asserts in his essay "The Open Music Model", in which he proposes to overcome the restrictions in recent years driven by the majors labels through an alternative model of musical asset management.

musical economy is currently dominated by five major corporations - AOL / Time Warner, Sony, Bertlsmann (BMG), Universal / Vivendi, EMI - are responsible for 80% of sales global music. aggressive policies against the "Moloch" of the network, P2P systems, have evolved through a steady tightening of sanctions for violation of copyright and increasing its scope. On the one hand corporations have subsidized systems record digital rights protection (DRM) and other have made it illegal to inactivate the same systems.

limits of this policy are obvious if we imagine the paradox that the monks management system that during the Middle Ages, copied and saved the old books, today would be persecuted by law . is clear that this model exclusively repressive intellectual property protection does not take into account that:

-social costs are reasonable (puts limits on new forms of creativity, cultural production and distribution )
-
can not regulate a technology without a stable environment, that is until you take off all possibilities and until the three factors-code-market society can not adapt to new technological environment.

leaders do not know whether EMI and Apple have raised the issue in those terms, but does little more than a week EMI have announced that from May to sell in their catalog online iTunes store without DRM protection. Currently
DRM systems prevent legitimate buyers to freely enjoy the music because they are linked to a specific brand of readers, as in the case of iPod and the songs on iTunes. As of May instead be able to choose songs without DRM paying 1.29 euro per song (increase of 30 euro cents) still maintaining the ability to do it with protection system, which remain at the current price of 0.99 euros. Moreover, the price of complete albums without DRM was not affected.

This paradigm shift in online music sales comes after the announcement Steve Jobs, February 6 last month, in which "Mr. Apple" publicly asked the record to waive the protection technology. Jobs's speech attempts to emphasize the futility of these systems, blaming the "majors" record that they had been imposed.
For many consumers do not make sense to pay for an extra to have something that should be a right, the consumer can freely enjoy what they have purchased legally. However, the payload of this announcement is based on three motivations:

1. breaks the taboo on the sale of music online, because for the first time a major, even the smallest of the 5 "sisters", proposes an alternative solution to the problem of copyright management in the network;

is
2. imposes a twist to the concept behind the fight digital piracy, which is illegal according to the inactivation of digital protection systems of rights. is clear that if they sell music without protection systems, and legal concept becomes obsolete and inapplicable in particular. For us to get to the point of pursuing the same record they had imposed such a law;

3. reveals the paradox of anti-piracy system by which the same record (as highlighted in Jobs their case) are the first systems to distribute free versions copy of his own songs, with CD for sale in all stores. Also, if we think the record still sold 90% of his own music without protection (in 2006, 20 billion songs on cd against protected 2 billion), the question to draw benefits from the sale of music systems DRM.

Taking into account also that most music consumers consider these systems as a torment which is pretty useless and just make fun of them, it concludes of the complete futility of DRM.

Despite the motivations that Apple and EMI have pushed this radical change, which is the result of business logic or a courageous act of trust to consumers, there is no doubt that it has begun a change of strategy in combating piracy.

March Of Welcome Salieri Sheet Music

... or perhaps better said, the dangers of government when they get out of IT: 20,000


personal data of members of CC OO, given because of P2P

The news is from El Pais newspaper that also has cloth is how the news sometimes. Headlines read this headline:

"CCOO data shows 20,000 members by misusing the eMule"

interior in the news, the headline has changed to that:

"20,000 personal data of members of CCOO, the view because of P2P "

And I think that the two owners can not have written the same journalist. The first, the cover story, says what has happened: it has been misused eMule, because first of all, security, network of an organization dealing with databases of people and should not be allowed to use the program.

The second headline, the news of the interior, is handling (or ignorance) total. It you manage and SO SO bad your union, your workers are set to use the emulator as you work, and of course, as the system administrator so should be using (either directly, not hit once) because it is going and not short access to programs like emule.

Whose fault is it? P2P, of course. I think a headline detestable, especially coming from a newspaper like The Guardian. If an employee had stolen the database threatening with a gun, what would said El Pais? This:

"20,000 personal data of members of CC OO, in view of a gun because"

What To Do When Your Baby Has Banged Its Head

Guidelines on blogs

The newspaper El Pais echoed the seven standards of conduct for blogs initiative that part of Tim O'Reilly (founder of the prestigious O'Reilly and author of the term web 2.0) and Jimmy Wales (founder of Wikipedia). They explain it well, a wiki on blogging .

Removing Popcorn Butter Stains

multitasking is not productive

digital technologies that allow us to do many things at once: read email, chat, edit Word files, searching google, music, etc. Would tell what it is supposed, is that working this way is slow to do things one by one. In the interest of efficiency, it is best to do one thing at a time, concludes a study by the University of Michigan.

other hand, companies like Microsoft and HP are jointly investigating sensors and intelligent software that will act as "watchdogs of time" for workers. That is, the problem that technology has brought us what we intend to solve with more technology, instead of acting like sensible beings capable of regulating their use of tencología so as not to interfere excessively in their productivity. A typical example of technological determinism, which relies on technology as a way to solve problems.

And if you are interested in the subject, you can read "I was addicted to the internet and did not know" , Nikolai Stravrogin, a contributor to this blog.

(this post has broken Article Multitasking, performance rival for proposing a reflection on technological determinism)