|
Up
Front:
Wednesday,
September 10, 2003
A
Leveling of the Entertainment Industry
Lars Ulrich of Metallica compares making records
to fixing cars, insisting that an auto mechanic
who downloads his record without paying for it should
come over to his house and fix his car for free.
Unfortunately, Lars can't seem to shift to paradigm
7.0.
The statistics are in, the bottom lines are dwindling,
and the campaign has begun. Through legal action,
press, restructuring, and price reductions, the entertainment
industry is confronting the estimated 50 million human
beings that are now connected through a searchable
peer-to-peer network via the Internet.
Enough talk of the ins and outs of P2P has been broadcast
by almost every major news outlet in the world. At
this point, nothing is shocking about it; probably
because most everyone is doing it, or knows someone
who does.
Moral debate will roar for a while longer, but given
the statistics--evidence of the sheer volume of P2P
traffic, the debate has been resolved democratically.
The people have voted with their mice for the sharing
copyrighted materials for personal use from the privacy
of their own homes.
The unfortunate initial "victims" of this
wonderful technological and cultural phenomenon are
the entertainment enterprises that deal with sound
recordings. This will extend fully to the motion picture
industry as the "pipes get wider" and per
capita bandwidth improves, allowing motion-image files
of acceptable quality to be shared more conveniently.
Text industries have also felt the sting of digital
innovation, and for much longer than those in sound
and motion pictures. Fortunately for their business,
most people find that prepackaged printed materials
are worth the money, and rarely bother to download
and print items such as books. And this will continue
to be the case for the professional manufacture and
packaging of all media.
These industries will adapt. They will go through
a tumultuous period of transition. They will lower
their prices, resort to cooperative advertising strategies,
cut costs, sign fewer music groups (or work on smaller
budgets), and focus more on theater markets than DVD
markets. It will be painful, but will stabilize..
Legally speaking, the courtrooms will continue to
serve as a battle ground for copyright disputes, yet
if we apply a basic supply/demand curve to our legal
infrastructure, we will find ourselves trying copyright
cases only in matters of life or big money: for profitable
patents, copyrighted intellectual property, and the
like. The SCO/UNIX
vs. IBM/ Open Linux is an example of how this
will work.
The issue of ethics in this case is moot. It is founded
on outdated assumptions about economics and our material
environment. Lars Ulrich of Metallica compares making
records to fixing cars, insisting that an auto mechanic
who downloads his record without paying for it, should
come over to his house and fix his car for free. Unfortunately,
Lars can't seem to shift to paradigm 7.0.
Before the advent of the Edison phonograph, there
was no Lars Ulrich. Sure, there were great musicians,
composers, and the like, but you had to get close
enough to their organism (or printed music) to enjoy
them. It was the development of the commodified storage
medium that led to Lars Ulrich, and arguably what
we know as the culture industry.
Copyright law on information is a relativity new
construct. It is remains only as real as the mechanism
that enforces it. Our changing technological environment
is a reality, and I want to see our limited resources
for enforcement to be used wisely. Lawsuits against
12-year
old girls for downloading songs to listen to is
a waste of our collective resources.
Our future will see a great change in the nature
of the culture industry. As home computer systems
become more powerful, the ability to produce original
symbolic information will lead to culture that is
both more decentralized and specialized on the one
hand, and more unified and homogeneous on the other.
Exceptional talent will still be celebrated, and the
quality of symbolic information will improve as the
productive barriers of opportunity are lowered.
While the 20th century's hugely profitable commodity
driven entertainment industry will forever influence
what we have come to know "Pop Culture,"
the fact remains:
..artists don't need the industry, the industry needs
the artists.
Oh, and Lars, when I can hook my car up to my computer
and have it fix itself, then there won't be any more
auto mechanics.
Index
Record
Labels Getting Desperate
By Mathew Ingram - Toronto Globe and Mail September
5 2003
Universal Music, one of the five major record companies,
announced late on Wednesday that it is chopping the
retail price of its "top line" CDs by anywhere
from 23 to 30 per cent. The company said it is making
this magnanimous gesture "with the aim of bringing
music fans back into retail stores."
And where are all those fans whose absence is such
a concern?
Universal doesn't come right out and say it, but they
are in living
rooms, university dorms and even offices around the
world, downloading MP3 files as fast as they possibly
can. Universal's price cut isn't really a magnanimous
gesture at all -- it's a desperate cry for help.
Among other things, the price reduction -- a move
that will likely be
copied by the other major labels -- helps to confirm
the widespread
suspicion that the music industry's profit margins
are truly
astronomical. How could they not be, if Universal
can contemplate a sudden 30-per-cent reduction in
its CD prices without even blinking?
It's also ironic that Universal is asking retailers
to help by
reducing the actual prices they charge for CDs (since
few people ever pay the full retail price for a CD).
In other words, they don't want the record stores
to use the price cut to boost their own profitmargins.
The irony is that Universal and the other major labels
weresanctioned not that long ago for pressuring retailers
not to lower their CD prices.
In February of 2000, the U.S. Federal Trade Commission
found that the major record labels had acted in concert
to keep CD prices artificially high, and that consumers
had overpaid by as much as $500-million (U.S.) between
1995 and 2000. Following the ruling, attorneys-general
in 43 states charged the record companies with price-fixing,
a case that was finally settled this summer; the companies
agreed to paya total of $140-million, $64-million
in cash and $76-million in CDs donated to schools
and libraries.
So is the price cut going to stop the downloading
hordes? It might
help stem the flow a little, but it's unlikely to
persuade large
numbers of people to give up downloading and head
back to the store.
Expecting the move to help boost CD sales by 30 per
cent, a forecast made by one music industry executive,
is dreaming in technicolour.
That's not just because there are millions of scofflaws
out there who
love stealing music -- if that is even what downloading
amounts to
(it's not quite that simple, despite the industry's
ad campaign to the
contrary). More than anything, the downloading phenomenon
is a symptom of a larger problem, which is that the
whole pricing structure of the music industry is broken,
and probably for good.
To get a sense of how some of the downloading hordes
feel, all you need to do is sample some of the comments
made on various websites, such as those at the tech-focused
site Slashdot.org. One member responded to the CD
price cut by saying: "How generous. Rather than
making 90,000% profit on $0.02 worth of plastic, they're
taking it in the shorts with a measly 65,000%. Give
me a break."
Of course, the music industry argues that its costs
are higher than
they appear, and that CD sales have to cover not just
marketing and distribution but also have to make up
for the money spent on bringingin new artists -- artists
who may or may not recoup that investment. Still,
the perception is that CD companies have been lining
theirpockets for some time, and Universal's move will
do little to alter that view.
Whatever the actual numbers are, the fact remains
that a sizeable
number of people -- the user base of Kazaa, a file-sharing
network, is estimated at more than 50 million -- have
voted with their mice, and the message they have been
sending is that the music industry nolonger meets
their needs. For several years now the industry has
beentrying to fight that reality, and all it has done
is to dig itself
deeper into the hole it is trying to get out of.
Ever since the Napster file-swapping network first
appeared on the
scene in 1999, the major record labels seem to have
spent most of
their time doing one of three things: a) suing the
file-trading
networks and those who make use of them; b) trying
(and largely
failing) to design their own downloading services;
and c) keeping
prices high to maximize their dwindling profits.
The advent of Apple's iTunes music service, and the
success it has hadin just the few months since its
launch -- 6.5 million downloads as of August -- shows
that there are a substantial number of music fans
outthere who are willing to pay money for music. They
just aren't willing to pay what they see as the drastically
inflated prices charged for CDs, and they seem to
like the ability to select particular songs rather
than having to buy a whole "album."
The sooner the music industry gets religion on those
two points, the
better off it will be. As someone once said, if you
find yourself in a
hole the first thing you should probably do is stop
digging.
Microsoft
Windows: Insecure by Design
By Rob
Pegoraro
The Washington Post
Sunday, August 24, 2003; Page F07
Between
the Blaster worm and the Sobig virus, it's been
a long two weeks for Windows users. But nobody with
a
Mac or a Linux PC has had to lose a moment of sleep
over
these outbreaks -- just like in earlier "malware"
epidemics.
This is
not a coincidence.
The usual
theory has been that Windows gets all the
attacks because almost everybody uses it. But millions
of people do use Mac OS X and Linux, a sufficiently
big
market for plenty of legitimate software developers
--
so why do the authors of viruses and worms rarely
take
aim at either system?
Even if
that changed, Windows would still be an easier
target. In its default setup, Windows XP on the Internet
amounts to a car parked in a bad part of town, with
the
doors unlocked, the key in the ignition and a Post-It
note on the dashboard saying, "Please don't steal
this."
Not opening
strange e-mail attachments helps to keep
Windows secure (not to mention it's plain common sense),
but it isn't enough.
The vulnerabilities
built in: Security starts with
closing doors that don't need to be open. On a PC,
these
doors are called "ports" -- channels to
the Internet
reserved for specific tasks, such as publishing a
Web
page.
These ports
are what network worms like Blaster crawl in
through, exploiting bugs in an operating system to
implant themselves. (Viruses can't move on their own
and
need other mechanisms, such as e-mail or floppy disks,
to spread.) It's canonical among security experts
that
unneeded ports should be closed.
Windows
XP Home Edition, however, ships with five ports
open, behind which run "services" that serve
no purpose
except on a computer network.
"Messenger
Service," for instance, is designed to listen
for alerts sent out by a network's owner, but on a
home
computer all it does is receive ads broadcast by
spammers. The "Remote Procedure Call" feature
exploited
by Blaster is, to quote a Microsoft advisory, "not
intended to be used in hostile environments such as
the
Internet."
Jeff Jones,
Microsoft's senior director for "trustworthy
computing," said the company was heeding user
requests
when XP was designed: "What customers were demanding
was
network compatibility, application compatibility."
But they
weren't asking for easily cracked PCs either.
Now, Jones said, Microsoft believes it's better to
leave
ports shut until users open the ones they need. But
any
change to this dangerous default configuration will
only
come in some future update.
In comparison,
Mac OS X ships with zero ports open to
the Internet.
The firewall
that's down: A firewall provides further
defense against worms, rejecting dangerous Internet
traffic.
Windows
XP includes basic firewall software (it doesn't
monitor outgoing connections), but it's inactive unless
you use its "wizard" software to set up
a broadband
connection. Turning it on is a five-step task in
Microsoft's directions (www.microsoft.com/protect)
that
must be repeated for every Internet connection on
a PC.
Mac OS
X's firewall isn't enabled by default either, but
it's much simpler to enable. Red Hat Linux is better
yet: Its firewall is on from the start.
The patches
that aren't downloaded: Windows is better
than most operating systems at easing the drudgery
of
staying on top of patches and bug fixes, since it
can
automatically download them. A PC kept current with
Microsoft's security updates would have survived this
week unscathed.
But hundreds
of thousands, if not millions, of Windows
systems still got Blasted, even though the patch to
stop
this worm was released weeks ago.
Part of
this is users' fault. "Critical updates"
are
called that for a reason, and it's foolish to ignore
them. (The same goes for not installing and updating
anti-virus software.)
The chance
of a patch wrecking Windows is dwarfed by the
odds that an unpatched PC will get hit. And for those
saying they don't trust Microsoft to fix their systems,
I have one question: If you don't trust this company,
why did you give it your money?
Microsoft,
however, must share blame, too. Windows XP's
pop-up invitations to use Windows Update must compete
for attention with all of XP's other, less important
nags -- get a Passport account, take a tour of XP,
hide
unused desktop icons, blah, blah, blah.
Microsoft's
critical updates also are absent from retail
copies of Windows XP, forcing buyers into lengthy
Windows Update sessions to get the fixes since last
year's Service Pack 1 upgrade. At least the version
of
XP provided to PC manufacturers is refreshed once
a
quarter or so -- and Microsoft says it's working to
shorten this lag.
The lack
of any limit to damage: Windows XP, by default,
provides unrestricted, "administrator" access
to a
computer. This sounds like a good thing but is not,
because any program, worms and viruses included, also
has unrestricted access.
Yet administrator
mode is the only realistic choice: XP
Home's "limited account," the only other
option, doesn't
even let you adjust a PC's clock.
Mac OS
X and Linux get this right: Users get broad
rights, but critical system tasks require entering
a
password. If, for instance, a virus wants to install
a
"backdoor" for further intrusions, you'll
have to
authorize it. This fail-safe isn't immune to user
gullibility and still allows the total loss or theft
of
your data, but it beats Windows' anything-goes approach.
Because
Microsoft blew off security concerns for so
long, millions of PCs remain unpatched, ready for
the
next Windows-transmitted disease. Microsoft needs
to do
more than order up another round of "Protect
Your PC"
ads.
Here's
a modest proposal: Microsoft should use some of
its $49 billion hoard to mail an update CD to anybody
who wants one. At $3 a pop (a liberal estimate), it
could ship a disc to every human being on Earth --
and
still have $30 billion in the bank.
Index
The
Future of Filesharing
The pressure from corporations (lawsuits) to stop
filesharing will lead to the usual: ingenuity and
innovation.
The sacrificial lambs are being chosen; some poor
computer users just wanting to hear that old Beach
Boys tune are confronting huge fines, restriction
of internet access, and even major lawsuits. It is
only a matter of time before average computer users
will believe the 6:00 hype and uninstall Kazaa. But
this isn't necessary--the hacker community is poised
in the wings with a solution to whatever Orwellian
restrictions present themselves.
In May,
the opening shots of this chapter in the ongoing information-property
saga were well documented by online media:
A day after
developers at America Online's Nullsoft unit quietly
released file-sharing software, AOL pulled the link
to the product from the subsidiary's Web site.
The software, called Waste, lets groups set up private,
secure file-sharing networks. The product became available
on Nullsoft's Web site on Wednesday, just days shy
of the four-year anniversary of being acquired by
AOL. Waste is a software application that combines
peer-to-peer file sharing with instant messaging,
chat and file searches. Users can set up their own
network of friends and share files between each other.
The features
of Waste are similar to those of file-swapping services
such as Kazaa and the defunct Napster, but the difference
is that only small networks of people (up to 50, according
to the Web site) can use it. The software also offers
encryption and authentication to prevent non-invitees
from accessing the private networks.
The quiet
launch of Waste was the work of Nullsoft's principal
developer, Justin Frankel, a soft-spoken 20-something
known for his tech savvy and his streak of rebelliousness.
Waste had
been used internally to share files between AOL's
San Francisco office, where Nullsoft is based, and
its Dulles, Va., headquarters, according to Ian Rogers,
a former founding member of Nullsoft.
"The
real play is when you've got small networks of co-workers
or friends who can share whatever they want securely,"
Rogers said in an interview. "It could be a group
of government officials sharing secure documents or
it could be Justin sharing video files with AOL Dulles."
An AOL
representative did not return requests for comment.
Nullsoft
has had its conflicts with AOL in the past, such as
in 2000 when Frankel developed a music file-swapping
technology called Gnutella. AOL quickly pulled it
off the Web fearing legal ramifications, but not before
developers downloaded it and began creating services
based on its software code.
AOL also
forced Nullsoft to shut down an MP3 search engine,
fearing the legal consequences of the software. Then,
Frankel and his cohorts caused a stir when they developed
software called AIMazing, which replaced banner advertisements
on AOL Instant Messenger into wiggling sound waves
accompanied by music.
Fortunately,
since the source of WASTE was GPL'd, it was only a
matter of time before the open source community had
several ports and much more powerful mods of this
code ready for distribution, the most noteworthy being
FILETOPIA.
Filetopia
is a free communications software that includes: instant
messaging, chat, a powerful file sharing system with
a search engine, online friends list and message boards.
What is
unique to this software is the level of security and
privacy that it provides. It uses a choice of strong
ciphers and public key techniques for all communications
and sophisticated techniques to protect your IP and
thus make you truly anonymous and safe from attacks.
Don't worry
kids, expect more variations of the encrypted P2P
software to keep artists starving and your local node
bogged down for years to come!
Index
Contiki: The Ultimate
Miniature OS
The Contiki desktop environment is a highly portable,
modern, open source, Internet-enabled operating system
and desktop environment for very constrained systems,
such as 8-bit homecomputers like the Commodore 64
Contiki was originally written for the Commodore 64
system (1 MHz 8-bit 6510 CPU, 64 k RAM) but ports
to a lot of systems are currently being developed
by a bunch of developers: 8-bit Nintendo Entertainment
system, PCEngine, Gameboy, Atari 8-bit, Atari Jaguar,
Atari Lynx, Apple ][, VIC-20, CBM PET, Plus/4, Tandy
CoCo, Sharp Wizard, Casio PocketViewer, Sega DreamCast
and the Sony Playstation.
The first
version of Contiki includes the following:
Multi-tasking
kernel.
Windowing system and themeable GUI toolkit.
Screen-saver.
TCP/IP stack for Internet networking, either with
RS-232/SLIP or Ethernet (PPP is under development).
Personal webserver for convenient file transfer. (Only
in the C64/TFE version.)
Simple telnet client. (Only in the RS232/SLIP version.)
Web browser for Internet web surfing. (Worlds first
web browser for 8-bit systems!
All of
the above is included in the self-contained Contiki
binary, which is 42 kilobytes large and runs comfortably
in 64 kilobytes of memory. More applications are under
development.
Contiki
can be downloaded from the downloads page. Contiki
is almost entirely written in C and the source code
is released under a BSD-style license and may be used
and modified freely.
Contiki
works directly from memory and does not need any secondary
storage like disk drives for caching or loading. This
makes Contiki fast, portable, and also makes Contiki
accesible for tape drive users. Index
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
|
