Sorry, but I have to mention this show because it cracks me up everytime.
For the best parody of the hacker world AND rednecks ever done, watch Infonomicon TV episode 4. Topics include wifi hunting, lockpicking, wireless communications. Download it – You won’t regret it.
Download Infonomicon TV Episode 4
And while you’re at it, check out their radio show as well!
Forgive me father, for I have sinned. I have bought two pieces of hardware. The first is an RJ-11 –> Stereo jack adapter. In other words, it lets me plug in my [regular] phone into the mic/speaker jack of my sound card. Essentially a VoIP adapter. The second piece of hardware is a switch, that lets me switch the phone from using that VoIP “line” to using the regular phone landline. Now I use the landline for local/incoming calls, and VoIP whenever I dial long-distance.
After work on Canada Day [July 1st], I headed downtown to take part of the celebrations. I also brought my camera along; and took the following photos. Click to enlarge.
Watch End of Fireworks [MOV, 7.7MB]
Hollywood wins Internet piracy battle
NEW YORK (CNN/Money) – The U.S. Supreme Court ruled Monday that software companies can be held liable for copyright infringement when individuals use their technology to download songs and movies illegally.
The unanimous decision handed the music and movie industries a crucial victory in their battle to curb Internet piracy.
In MGM v. Grokster, the high court overturned a ruling that had barred Hollywood and the music industry from suing Internet services used by consumers to swap songs and movies for free.
I cringe whenever I see such acts as being considered a “win against piracy”. This isn’t a win against piracy – its a win for a corporation. No more, no less. To assume that undoing filesharing software is equivalent to undoing piracy, as this article insinuates, is blatant misinformation.
The implications are a loss to the consumers, as criminilizing any technology on the basis of its potential unlawful uses rather than its overt lawful applications may do. This is the equivalent of suing pen manufacturers [and winning] because pens make good stabbing-weapons.
“One who distributes a device with the object of promoting its use to infringe copyright … is liable for the resulting acts of infringement by third parties using the device, regardless of the device’s lawful uses,” Justice David Souter wrote in the ruling.
It’s difficult not to be a cynic in these times. I am positive that were this sort of corporate mentality present ten years ago, they would have succesfully managed to ban the Internet. This case won on a basis of ignorance; no more. It is the lack of technological savviness on the part of those ruling that has won this case.
The same logic that has been used as the principle of justification for this case also has dire consequences. By making technologies liable for the acts of individuals, a luxury not even awarded to gun manufacturers, future innovation will be at the mercy of the corporations who can afford the biggest lawyers.
By stifling technologic innovation, who will win? Certainly not us consumers.
Whatever your stance on the sharing of copyrighted materials may be, it is clear to anyone with any mild technological background that this path chosen by the Supreme Court is not the appropriate solution. That is why I must make this Piracy film.
I’ve changed my shopping philosophy, and have in the process began boycotting certain stores. Whereas previously my shopping destination depended on who had the lowest prices, it now depends on who pays their employees better. I mostly base this upon the pay of the frontend retail staff, as manufacturers get payed the same reguardless.
For instance, instead of shopping at Staples which offers their employees minimum wage, I opt for retailers like Futureshop which provide much better pay. Better yet are local businesses.
I don’t really lose money by not shopping at places like “Walmart” and “Staples”, despite the fact that they force their employees to tell you of their “lowest prices”. Its an illusion; maybe a quasi justification to for them to cheap out as much as they can at every turn, and offer their workers the lowest amount legally allowed.
One cannot realistically live on minimum wage, and its my disgust with such practices that cause me to make this move.