What is Digg?99 Comments
- SultanTravi, on 10/12/2007, -6/+75I was going to say this too, but I noticed the comment and I realized it's a pretty cliche response. I figured I would say something really clever, but unfortunately I'm just not clever enough for that. So I'll go with a slight remix of a cliche:
***** the MPAA - Lambach, on 10/12/2007, -0/+62Man , I want a job using math , and not have to be right about it.
- FluffyArmada, on 10/12/2007, -1/+58When a man says something in the woods, and there's no women around to hear him... is he still wrong?
- inactive, on 10/12/2007, -3/+58That's not a hair question. I'm sorry.
- Lnx991, on 10/12/2007, -0/+50[what MPAA thinks they deserve to make] - [what they actually make] = [amount of piracy]
- DeathBorn, on 10/12/2007, -2/+51You're wrong. They don't make the numbers up from thin air, they make them up from their hot air.
- inactive, on 10/12/2007, -5/+42Way to copy someone else's comment.. Pretty much ruined any humour I got from it. -1
- poracious, on 10/12/2007, -2/+33No you don't. Statistics show that 99% of incorrectly-mathematical jobs result in gruesome injury, 87% of that ending eventually in death. This is totally true, honest.
- CandidateZero, on 10/12/2007, -2/+31This "***** the MPAA" attitude has to stop, or rather, it has to be redirected. The many studios comprising MPAA organization just hide behind it, as the hundreds and hundreds of record labels do with the RIAA. Neither of these organizations sell anything to the public, so they have zilch to lose by a negative image.
The MAFIAA is just a negative PR sponge that protects the real perpetrators. The MPAA and RIAA represents the interests of its clients -- the studios and the labels -- who are more than happy to have public ire directed away from them while they push their middle man organization to do the dirty work. The trend I would like to see is the targeting of studios rather than the shield that is the MPAA.
The only way organizations like this will stop is if their clients become afraid of the negative PR that they will receive. The MPAA is a shield for these companies and the shield is the worst place to attack. - wwwdot1jesdotus, on 10/12/2007, -0/+254 out of 5 people think the 5th one is an idiot.
- Bega, on 10/12/2007, -1/+25hot air has a lower density than cold air, so technically it is thin air :P
- nikkesen, on 10/12/2007, -1/+25"Aw, people can come up with statistics to prove anything, Kent. Forty percent of all people know that."
- gingerchris, on 10/12/2007, -5/+26only if he's the pope
- Sanchez, on 10/12/2007, -3/+20Does the sun rise and set once a day?
- JimXugle, on 10/12/2007, -5/+1786% of all statistics have no basis in reality and should be disregarded as such.
- manamizer, on 10/12/2007, -0/+11@Gmorgan
So statisticians aren't people? - fugitiveALiEN, on 10/12/2007, -9/+19Does the Pope crap in the woods?
- Buckiller, on 10/12/2007, -5/+15Does cheesecake taste good?
- destinywaste, on 10/12/2007, -2/+11what else can you expect from an association that is run by *****.
- GMorgan, on 10/12/2007, -2/+10There's a 94% chance that the person who made that quote banged his head hard on the door frame and hence is crazy.
- GMorgan, on 10/12/2007, -0/+8I have unbreakable encryption. I copy the file onto HDD, melt the original disc with thermite, randomly swap bits of data, randomly blast it with random data, pass it through an MRI, pour acid inside it, nuke it then drop it into a black hole.
No data coming out of the black hole. Perfect encryption.
I should contact the MPAA in case they want to hire me for my unbreakable encryption. - perkbrian, on 10/12/2007, -0/+7not exactly good grammar, not exactly on topic, but a good point
- p51d007, on 10/12/2007, -1/+8The MPAA makes up numbers just like a lot of others.
For instance, when you hear on the news, (now this is an EXAMPLE!) "a person is killed in an automobile accident every 4.3 seconds"
Run the numbers...that's 2,260,080 per year! Just pull down your "favorite" statistic and run the numbers and sometimes, you'll find
what they give equals more than the population of the USA.
Another thing they do is twist the percentages. They will say that x percent of something is better than it was the year before, but, the year before no one was doing x, so how can they come up with a number?
I read everything, by enviromentalist, government, industry, ANYONE with a grain of salt. I do some research to find out where they come up with their numbers, ESPECIALLY polls! Depends on how they ASK A QUESTION as to how they get the answer they actually want. If I asked you, "If your choice was between person X, who says they are not and will not run for office, and person Y, who says
they will run, who would you choice? Then, on the news, they will report that 80% of the people polled said they would vote for
person Y. If all you read/saw what that poll, you would think that 80% of the people are for person Y, without even knowing how they
asked the question. - digitalranger, on 10/12/2007, -1/+8Nice, perhaps with that method we could just encrypt the entire MPAA and RIAA eh?
- digitalranger, on 10/12/2007, -0/+6I'm just waiting for the AACS people to come out with that if it wasn't for piracy then they'd have had the funding they needed to make their encryption totally unbreakable. lol.
- iSamurai, on 10/12/2007, -1/+6The MPAA sticks dots in the film at certain spots just for like 1 frame so they can track what theaters online releases are coming from.
These are wholly different from what you guys think he is talking about. - GMorgan, on 10/12/2007, -3/+8You can convince 100% of people some of the time, some people 100% of the time and a statistician never.
- theendlessnow, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4I was recently at a school giving a talk to both Junior High and High School students about free software. At one point I asked them if they ripped music from CDs... about 75% said yes. I then asked of those how many shared copies of their ripped songs with friends, it was about 90% or more (possibly even 100%). I told them that I believe that the ability to rip the music is fair use (though I know that right is being taken away from us), but that when they gave their friends those ripped selections that they had violated law. Some I could tell didn't know they were violating the law (a simple way of saying everyone else is doing it... so I'll do it too).
Just fyi... - aguilr, on 10/12/2007, -1/+5The MPAA found one of those electromagnetic "wormhole" thingies to get their statistics from!
- LiquidFusion, on 10/12/2007, -2/+6Is the Space Pope Reptilian?
- morriscat, on 10/12/2007, -1/+5Better question: Was the entire MPAA pulled out of someones ass?
(not saying they are rabbits, think of the old joke on where lawyers come from.) - acdcfanbill, on 10/12/2007, -2/+5All US cam/telesync releases lately have those wonderful 'MPAA dots' cut out from them, so I'm not quite sure how they are determining where the cams are coming from. Man I hate those dots, they annoy the crap out of me every time I see them when I'm sitting in the theatre. They don't help either, so whats the point of annoying your customers. :(
- thomashallock, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3Instead of linking to other blog posts, here are links for the actual articles that cite the conflicting statistics:
50% from Canada, From http://www.wtopnews.com/index.php?nid=114&sid=1130323
"In a Nov. 30 letter, [Bruce Snyder, Fox's Hollywood-based president of domestic distribution], warned [Ellis Jacob, the Toronto-based chief executive of Cineplex Entertainment], a friend and business associate for 20 years, to do something [about the illegal camcording of a steady stream of Fox blockbusters, including Borat, Eragon and Night at the Museum]— or he would.
...
In the letter, Snyder fumed that his company had discerned that, at one point during 2006, Canadian theatres were the source for nearly 50 per cent of illegal camcords across the globe..."
50% from NYC, From: http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/story/RTGAM.20070112.wpirates13/BNStory/Entertainment/home
"The Motion Picture Association of America says more than 40 percent of bootlegged films are secretly videotaped in New York City theaters. The duplications are typically sold for mass reproduction or posted on the Internet, sometimes just hours after the movie has premiered."
The claim about NYC does not cite any sources, which leaves me in doubt. - benitojuarez, on 10/12/2007, -1/+4What happens when the hawking radiation decrypter is released?
- actorboy, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3@ KungFuJesus
It wouldn't throw the MPAA of unless they removed that same frames as a copy from a different location. It would be pretty easy to see which ones fit their known patterns and which ones didn't. - DonSlice, on 10/12/2007, -4/+7Now that we're allowed to post it, nobody wants to. It's taboo now. Sorry.
- xst4t1kx, on 10/12/2007, -0/+360% of the time it works everytime!
- Arkholt, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3It's all the same in the MPAA and RIAA and the like. I remember when "the customer is always right" was the prevailing business model. These days it's "the customer is always a criminal." Lower the price of movie tickets and make better movies and I'll go to them. Same with the RIAA. Lower CD prices and make better music and I'll buy it. It doesn't mean I'm stealing your product, it only means I don't like your product. Look at your product and find what problems it has before blaming the customers.
- KungFuJesus, on 10/12/2007, -1/+4@actorboy
Then they can just remove some frames that don't have the dots just to throw the MPAA off - Emachine, on 10/12/2007, -1/+3I'm 200% sure the MPAA sucks.
- flygirl62, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2Yah, not exactly like it's hard to miss the these-show-which-theater-this-copy-was-sent-to dots. I imagine that it's quite easy to remove them -- or at least cut out the frames that include them. You'd think they'd do something more subtle and harder to find.
Anyone who is willing to CAM a move and then transfer it to digital media, can easily remove the frames with the dots... or, even more interesting, with a little editing, could probably move the dots around and maybe send them to a different theater. Of course, if there's some sort of checksum or something a random change wouldn't send them on a wild goose chase. But it would demonstrate the futility of the "dots."
It just makes me wonder how stupid they think CAMmers are. - actorboy, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2Your analogy is confusing. When you say, "If you say something long enough and loud enough then people will eventually believe what you are saying regardless of the truth," are you referring to MPAA statistics that show no proof, or the anti-MPAA diggers that show no proof in trying to debunk them?
- RoflMyWaffle, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2well this may be true... here are some of the titles of camcorder movies i downloaded...
1. The Fast and The Furious, eh?
2. American History X, eh?
3. Grandma's Boy, eh?
... you get the idea - projectstartrek, on 10/12/2007, -1/+3We estimate that uh.................76? yes, 76 percent of people on Digg are actually software pirates!
- actorboy, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2Pirates have already done that, and, yes, the entertainment industry has taken notice. You take the higher moral ground if you boycott the entertainent industry all together-- no piracy, nothing. Otherwise, you're veiwed by the general public as people who would rather steal entertainment than pay for it, whether copyright infringement is legally considered stealing or not.
- actorboy, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2Finally, someone is trying to bring in some sources. Thank you.
There are only a couple of problems with it though. The NYC article cites the MPAA as the source for the 40% number (not 50%, as you posted), and relates it in general terms, while the Canadian article cites a Twentieth Century Fox team for the 50% number, relates it specifically to Fox releases, and couches it with the statement "at one point during 2006, Canadian theaters were the source for nearly 50 per cent of illegal camcords across the globe." In short: Two different sources for the percentages; and MPAA numbers relate to movies from multiple studios over a period of time, while the Fox numbers relate to Fox movies at a particular point in time. Given this information, they could both be correct. - actorboy, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2"What's next? The death penalty for running over a bunny?"
Actually, you can be fined up to $5000 per incident and/or face up to year in jail for killing a bald eagle.
And despite your "lol", you still offered no evidence. Saying someone pulled something out of their ass and proving it are two different things. - acdcfanbill, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2It's not that easy because some groups compare different sources, and they cut more than one frame. Also, I have no idea how the MPAA tracks theatres vs dots, but from thew ones I see, they are always different patterns.
Also, a quick google search for MPAA dots reveals this article with a nice example.
http://www.dvdfuture.com/fs.php?id=4 - actorboy, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1@ stevealford
I still owe you an answer to your question in our last conversation. It's been a busy week and i haven't had time to sit down and construct it (I fear it will be long), but i haven't forgotten about you. I'll find you in another thread when I finally answer so you'll know to check back. - actorboy, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Whoa! They're the crooks? Not the people taking their work without paying for it? What kind of Bizarro world do you live in?
-
Show 51 - 98 of 98 discussions
Check out the new & improved 
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is