What is Digg?Sponsored by Best Buy
Geek Squad employee sings for Best Buy in holiday campaign. view!
youtube.com/bestbuy0 - Valerie DeAngelo explains the moment she got the casting call.
81 Comments
- M0b1u5, on 10/11/2007, -2/+86Two words: Analog Hole.
RIAA is retarded. - shifty2, on 10/11/2007, -4/+71i'd like to seem them ban all male-male speaker cables!! there is nothing to stop me from hooking up my line-out to my line-in and hitting the record button!!
the RIAA is all about the baffoonary!! - RedHerringHack, on 10/11/2007, -1/+60They are not going to stop, they will get laws that require layer after layer after layer of BS to go through for the average consumer. DRM will never be good enough. Someone has to put a stop to it before we are paying $30,000 for an FM radio, or $200,000 for a TV. Just look at HDCP. You probably have no idea how bad it already is, and by the time you do, it will be too late. Hobbyists are already screwed. Those of us that build high quality projection TVs have to hack HDCP just to get the highest quality possible from our hand made gear. But we are doing it. ***** the RIAA, ***** the MPAA, ***** SONY most of all.
- dharm, on 10/11/2007, -1/+56they will build, and some guy at home will break it... next please.
- MercedRocks, on 10/11/2007, -0/+52If it can be heard it can be recorded.
This just in: "RIAA develops new copy proof DRM headphones, demands all their music now be played back only on specially certified headphones." - LGod, on 10/11/2007, -8/+49Ahhh, yeth... Bring on the hot male to male action!
- enivid, on 10/11/2007, -0/+30No I still see potential flaws with that technique.
Better:
This just in: "RIAA develops new copy proof DRM, demands all their music now be played back only on mute." - _skin_, on 10/11/2007, -0/+26Its got to come out of those speakers at some point, and when it does, I grab it!
- civperc, on 10/11/2007, -1/+24LOL, RIAA thinks they are going to prevent computers' ability to record sound? They get more hilarious with each passing day...
- Ugoff, on 10/11/2007, -0/+19This just in: "RIAA develops DRM on ALL audible sound, demands anybody who wants to hear anything to pay a $200,000 licensing fee."
Now that I think about it, DRM sounds an awful lot like ransom. - MercedRocks, on 10/11/2007, -0/+15That'd be par for the course with these RIAA nutjobs
- JohnnyRad, on 10/11/2007, -0/+15AudioHijack FTW!!!!
- marcomc2, on 10/11/2007, -1/+14haha, that would be ***** insane, and ridiculous.
- N080dy, on 10/11/2007, -0/+13Stop giving them ideas!
- sadatoni, on 10/11/2007, -0/+11Two words: Notch Filter
- theholycow, on 10/11/2007, -0/+9It would probably sound better that way anyhow.
- noblepaladin, on 10/11/2007, -5/+12Realistically, how many people rip from streams? Anybody who knows how to rip from a stream knows how to use a P2P application to find a full quality version ripped from a cd or from some other better source.
- theoallardyce, on 10/11/2007, -0/+7One problem, there is no such thing as "anti-stream ripping technology".
- S1L3NTC, on 10/11/2007, -0/+7I'll put a ***** lime in my Corona if I want.
- stalefries, on 10/11/2007, -1/+8What about live performances on your favorite radio show? You can't get that P2P.
- kurtwinter, on 10/11/2007, -0/+6This is just plain *****. This is the opposite of capitalism. The RIAA should be paying web broadcasters for promoting their artists, not the other way around, and the market has already decided on the best formats for web broadcasts, the best at the best price. Why should we allow the RIAA to create these monopolies around bad technology?
- Sirocco, on 10/11/2007, -0/+6Streamripping is "safe" in that the broadcaster has no way of knowing you recorded anything.
- CaptPanic, on 10/11/2007, -0/+6Actually there is something you could do. You could embed some kind of signal (even into an analog feed) and then have the hardware check for that signal and prevent it from ever leaving the audio chip. Getting around such a signal would almost necessarily require degrading the audio quality to a noticeable degree. Way back before I ever heard of Palladium I'd have said such a thing is never going to happen. Now it seems unlikely but not completely improbable. Ultimately, though, it doesn't really matter HOW the RIAA makes our lives miserable. What matters is that they ARE making our lives miserable and they seriously have to stop... or be stopped.
- jordan314, on 10/11/2007, -1/+7lol really?
http://forums.hak5.org/index.php?board=21.0 - gta3mobster, on 10/11/2007, -0/+6I haven't seen anybody mention this yet in the comment section.. *ahem*
***** the RIAA. - krnldmp, on 10/11/2007, -3/+8Stream content is currently safe from ripping primarily because the audience can today reasonably depend upon them being free and satisfactorily repetitious. If they become increasingly interspersed with audio ads or the sites plagued with ad banners the situation Will change.
Don't fruit the beer. - the0ckid82, on 10/11/2007, -1/+6Pandora's jar FTW i let it run all day and all night
- MWeather, on 10/11/2007, -0/+4Is recording off the radio stealing? No. It's not even illegal. And neither is stream ripping.
- rohanch, on 10/11/2007, -0/+4Even if they did that, you could simply connect the line out to line in on a different PC (or any recording device).
- shifty2, on 10/11/2007, -0/+3nothing like a hot gangbang of male and female connectors....
the will be an orgy on the back of my computer tonight!! - Toddbrew1, on 10/11/2007, -1/+4Who the ***** says baffoonery???
i'd like to seem them ban all male-male speaker cables!! there is nothing to stop me from hooking up my line-out to my line-in and hitting the record button!!
the RIAA is all about the baffoonary!! - conman16x, on 10/11/2007, -0/+3At this point it doesn't seem that unrealistic. Only being able to listen to their music on certain music players that you have to take to chain stores so that they can load them with music for you and then you can only listen using their certified headphones so that you're thieving friends can't listen without paying.
- nibus, on 10/11/2007, -0/+2One word: Tunebite.
- zioxide, on 10/11/2007, -1/+3The reason why stream ripping is not a problem is because most streams are ***** quality.
- hseldon, on 10/11/2007, -0/+2Stealing (theft) and copyright infringement are 2 different things:
theft (also known as stealing) is the illegal taking of another person's property without that person's freely-given consent
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Theft
Copyright infringement (or copyright violation) is the unauthorized use of material which is covered by copyright law,
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Copyright_infringment
Hope that helps! - snakeysnake, on 10/11/2007, -0/+2stream rip with audio hijack or some other desktop capture program, get even a nominal sound editor, chop out any silence or ads they may stick in front of song, run a normalize plug-in to bring up the hotness level, dump the wav file into itunes, name your files, reencode into an AAC, and never buy another major label CD again. ***** the RIAA, all the music the studios put out is ***** anyway. and come on, i know you want that live acoustic version of _________ that you saw on youtube for 2 days before they took it down =).
- skrshawk, on 10/11/2007, -1/+3Most of yas are forgetting that this sort of crap isn't about us (those who know how to use the simple workarounds to do what we like). It's about trying to be a pain in the ass to your average idjit by not giving them an easy way to do it. They seem to have this idea that by making paying for music more convenient they will sell it at the price they demand. Of course, the sue 'em to hell strategy has done tons to reduce piracy... *gag*
- inactive, on 10/11/2007, -0/+2I tried hooking up my line-out to my line-in once, just out of curiosity, but unfortunately it wouldn't reach.
- fantasticFlan, on 10/11/2007, -0/+2It doesn't deprive them of their intellectual property, they still have that, there's just an illegal copy of it.
Get over it, copyright infringement is not theft, it's a different beast all together. - inactive, on 10/11/2007, -0/+2sme one will rip it and it will be on p2p so the answer to your question is yes.
- MacParrot, on 10/11/2007, -0/+2The RIAA is certainly going out of its way to look stupid. WTF is anti-stream ripping technology and how does that prevent an analog signal from being recorded if someone is desperate enough to do it?
Radio is a dying business (of almost any kind) and is the number one source for new and existing artists to get their content out. It's all free advertising for God's sake. Whether it's off the net, satellite, or terrestrial, it still has to be converted to analog to be heard by the human ear.
Also, considering that most radio is broadcast at a relatively low rate, it's hardly worth recording anyway. The people they are soooo afraid of are going to get it off P2P sites, not from a streaming internet station. It really shows the amount of desperation the RIAA has to defend its old, out-molded ways. Good riddance to bad dinosaurs. - edwartica, on 10/11/2007, -0/+2This reminds me of an inititive the Oregon Liquor control tried to push through a few years ago. Basically they wanted to outlaw the sales of any alchohol at any theater (including the theater pubs we have all over town) because of the potential for minors getting a hold of alchohol.
Why does this relate? Well, the OLC said that it wasn't a problem, but it might be a few years from now.
I hate this kind of logic. Or would you even call it logic? - inactive, on 10/11/2007, -0/+2Yea because people recording FM radio onto their cassettes like totally ruined the music industry in the 80s. History should be good enough to prove this is BS. We've seen this song and dance before and we know what the motives are, and how the story goes.
The difference is that the government is way easier to buy off this time 'round. And the only way to offset that is to make it quite clear that you won't vote for anyone who supports the continued degradation of our rights. - sadatoni, on 10/11/2007, -0/+2Also notice "limited time". If the RIAA and ilk had it their way, it would be forever.
- Tomamama, on 10/11/2007, -0/+1"...why wait until it is a big problem to start addressing it? There are available technologies in the marketplace to address this issue."
Yeah, because we all know how great the RIAA has been with adapting to technology. - zgregoryg, on 10/11/2007, -0/+1Is there any end to the RIAA lunacy? Don't they understand all music can be easily ripped directly from radio play? Dang!
- inactive, on 10/11/2007, -0/+1http://www.stationripper.com/
- obijohn, on 10/11/2007, -0/+1The "sue 'em to hell strategy" is not about reducing piracy, it's about making money. Roughly 2 out of every 10 suits results in an immediate settlement. It only costs about $200 to file the suit to begin with, and they settle for around $5,000. 7 out of the 10 result in default judgments all in the $3,500-$5,000 range. Only about 1 in 10 bother trying to fight, and of those most result in settlement. Only about 1 in 100 actually cause the RIAA any discomfort at all.
It's strictly a money-making machine. And if for every case in which the RIAA is ruled against they've collected 100 settlements, they'd be stupid NOT to continue to file as many as they possibly could. The consumer be damned. - jav1231, on 10/11/2007, -0/+1This is great news. The more the RIAA moves away from the consumer, the more their business model begins to crumble. This is why I support DRMing the hell of out Vista.
- theholycow, on 10/11/2007, -0/+1It's been repaired? I used to use it until it stopped working and no new version was forthcoming...
-
Show 51 - 81 of 81 discussions
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is