Stream ripping is a piracy problem
Last December I wrote a post about “stream ripping” and its relation to the internet radio royalty issue. To quickly recap, I said that one possible effect of low, government-mandated internet royalty rates is the theft of that music through “stream ripping.” I said that as our internet connections became faster and the quality of internet radio broadcasts increased, an unsecure internet radio station could be a good source for music pirates. And to make it worse, music artists and record companies can’t do anything about it.
Well, I was corrected by a stream-ripper today. I said that it would be a bigger problem in the future, but he informed me that high-quality rips are available now:
BTW, quality is not a factor for stream ripping. There are plenty of excellent stations with 192, 256, or 320 kbps streams offering clean gaps and no talking or crossfading over songs. These can produce higher-quality rips than what you can buy on iTunes or Amazon.
And he continued:
Personally I only stream-rip songs I cannot buy in non-DRM’ed form from iTunes, Amazon, etc. So it seems to me that artists who don’t want me to stream rip their music have a simple alternative: let me BUY a non-DRM’ed copy of a song!
The internet radio royalty debate is not just about protecting internet radio, or even making the best of a bad situation. I think comments like the one above show why it’s essential for artists to be able to control what is done with their property.
Tags: [internet radio, stream ripping]Earth Day Advice
Today is Earth Day, a day full of advice on how each of us can live a “greener” lifestyle. Today is a day for raising awareness of our planet and how we should balance our needs with its protection. In the spirit this day is supposed to be about, I’d like to offer a bit of advice on how you should treat our planet.
My advice: Use the earth and all of its resources to fulfill your every need and want, and don’t feel guilty about it.
For the truth is, your life and happiness depend on your ability to use the earth’s resources. The things that you need to live (such as food, medicine, computers, automobiles, oil, electricity, etc.) are not made out of thin air; they are extracted from the earth. Luckily for us all, the earth has plenty. Our planet is an enormous ball of resources that could not only sustain us, but make our lives last longer and be immeasurably more enjoyable. We haven’t even begun to realize the true potential the earth has for our betterment. The true limit is not the amount of resources the earth contains, but our knowledge of those resources and our imagination.
If the earth deserves our appreciation, then it’s for the great value it offers us. And therein likes the flaw in the way Earth Day is celebrated. Instead of celebrating Earth as a source of human prosperity, it is treated as something that should be protected from humans. We are told that we should aim to limit our effect on our environment. This might seem like a noble goal, but if your life is dependent on your ability to use the environment, what is really being limited? Your life and your happiness.
Some people might think that is a fair trade to make, but I do not. We each have a relatively short time to spend on this planet, and I think it’s unfair to ask anyone to sacrifice even one precious second of that time for the sake of plants, animals, or inanimate matter. We all will be one with the earth eventually, so let’s make the most of our lives while we can.
So this Earth Day, don’t be afraid to take advice. Save gas money by carpooling. Get some exercise by riding a bike. Lower your utility bill by adjusting your thermostat a few degrees. Just don’t forget why you’re doing it.
Tags: [earth day, environmentalism]Evidence that net neutrality is coming…
I’ve been very busy the past few weeks. I’m at a weird time when one of my biggest hobbies is also my job. I’ve jumped heads-first into full-time .Net and WPF programming. It’s lots of fun, but it requires a lot of work and study.
Anyway, I probably would have neglected my blog for another night if I hadn’t read tonight’s post on the Hands off the Internet. I normally like HOTI because it’s one of the few blogs (relatively speaking) that actively speak out against net neutrality and government regulation of the internet, but I wanted to yell out “NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO” after reading this one. The post was a short one just to point out a quote from a recent Wall Street Journal article on the Comcast-BitTorrent issue, but the fact that they thought this quote was worth highlight makes me believe that there’s nothing to stop government regulation of the internet. Here’s the quote from the WSJ (emphasis mine):
Government’s role here, properly understood, is not to tell Comcast how to manage its network. Rather, it is to make sure consumers have alternatives to Comcast if they are unhappy with their Internet service.
HOTI considers this quote as the “clincher.” NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!
If the biggest opponents of net neutrality accept the premise that the government has any role in providing or promoting internet access, they’re doomed. They would have conceeded, in principle, to the net neutrality advocates’ basic argument for net neutrality, which is that an individual’s rights can be trumped by the will of the majority with the assistance of the government. The only real difference between the two sides is how much government intervention is necessary in this market. The net neutrality advocates say a lot, and the net neutrality opponents say a little. Or, more precisely, net neutrality advocates say “The government should create more competition in the ISP market and stop any discrimination of data on an ISP’s network!” and net neutrality opponents reply, “Ok, the government should encourage competition, but hey… there are many practical reasons to discriminate some types of data, ok?”
They won’t say it, so I’ll say it. Net neutrality won’t provide better internet for the same reason that stealing cars won’t provide reliable transportation. No matter what short-term benefits the theft might appear to bring, there is a simple truth that can’t be ignored: Individuals can’t live together if they’re always fighting and stealing from one another. We have to find boundaries that allow every individual to live his or her own life, and then use the government to enforce those boundaries. I’d suggest that one’s life, liberty, and property be boundaries that no other individual can cross. Every individual would have sole ownership and control over his life, what he does with that life, and the property that he rightfully earns with his own work.
Net neutrality is a bad policy because it crosses these boundaries. Net neutrality allows some individuals to take control of the property of others. Yes, the property is lost by big, rich companies like AT&T and Comcast, but why should property rights be decided by who is rich and who is not? I think the right to own property should be respected on principle, not as a rule-of-thumb.
I think there are a lot of net neutrality opponents who don’t agree with this, and I think this is why more government regulation of the internet is inevitable. Unless net neutrality opponents stand up for property rights (even for big businesses like AT&T and Comcast), it’s just a matter of time.
Tags: [HOTI, net neutrality]Will wonders never cease
It’s halftime of a KU basketball game… and I’m rooting for KU?
I’ve lived in Kansas for most of my adult life, including three years in Lawrence. I don’t have much love for KU, though. Part of it is the fact that I grew up on the Missouri side of the state line, and another part of it is that I’ve always thought the fans were a little obnoxious. Most of it is the fact that I’m not that interested in college sports. I feel differently about this particular KU team, though, for a couple reasons:
1.) I don’t like KU that much, but I like a lot of KU fans. I don’t want them to be disappointed.
2.) Many of the KU players have suffered through some shocking, early exists from the NCAA tournament. Maybe I’m naive about this, but I still think of those players as young college students who only have a few years to do something they love.
3.) It’s hard to be a hater. And by “hater,” I mean someone who wants bad things to happen to another person or organization… just because. I may like other teams more, but that doesn’t necessarily mean that I have to hate the accomplishments of another team. I’ll always root for Missouri over Kansas, but they’re not playing tonight.
There is one exception to this, though: I hate the Denver Broncos. But it’s for a rational reason, though: They are evil.
Back to the game…
Tags: [ku]Economic Stimulus Package
I have a feeling that my check might get lost in the mail.
Tags: [economic stimulus]RIAA Piracy Tax?
On this week’s edition of Copyright 2.0, I learned of a new idea that is gaining interest among the heads of some record companies: A “piracy” tax. As reported by Wired:
At the music industry trade show MIDEM last year, John Kennedy, the head of IFPI — the RIAA’s international affiliate organization — offered modest support for the kind of licensing fee Griffin and Jenner propose. “It’s a model worth looking at,” he said at a press conference. “If the ISPs want to come to us and look for a blanket license for an amount per month, let’s engage in that discussion.”
Jonathan Bailey, one of the hosts of Copyright 2.0, was open to the idea. Charging a flat rate to everybody (five dollars is the amount being discussed today) for the “right” to download your music sounds better than the losing battle the RIAA is facing today, right? There is some precedent for the idea of forced royalties and compulsory licenses, too. Bailey didn’t totally endorse the idea, but he said that it might be a good place to start until a better idea comes along. I enjoy hearing and reading Bailey’s opinion, but this time I have to respectfully disagree. I think this is a horrible idea that completely shreds the idea of copyright and intellectual property.
I think the problem becomes self-evident once one brings the definition of “copyright” into the issue. A copyright is the right to control the distribution and use of a piece of intellectual property. This right is initially secured by the creator of that property simply by the fact that he created it. Since he did the work to create it, he or she gets to decide what is done with it. Like any right over material property, it can be sold, exchanged, or given away. The owner owns it, so he gets to decide. That’s what copyright is about.
Now apply this concept to the idea of allowing everybody to use a compulsory license to download whatever music they want, in exchange for a $5 tax that is collected and distributed to copyright holders according to some process. Obviously, there are some conflicts. Copyright says that the owner of a creation gets to decide how to use that creation, but a compulsory license says that paying a tax allows anybody can download the copyright holder’s property — with or without permission of the copyright holder. Copyright says that a the owner of a creation can charge whatever he or she wishes for his music, but the compulsory license establishes a set rate for everybody — with or without permission of the copyright holder. All of the “benefits” that a compulsory license might bring about are at the expense of the artist’s rights.
When copyright is discussed today, I think too much focus is placed on the idea of making sure that artists receive some form of “fair” compensation for their work (I don’t mean to include Bailey in this group, now I’m just talking in general). When they’re not constrained by the rights of artists, people are free to imagine all sorts of “new models” that might bring more money to the artist than today’s system. And the funny thing is, some of these imaginary systems might, in fact, bring in more money for some artists if they were ever put in action. Some artists might even prefer it over today’s sytem, too. I doubt it, but I guess it’s possible, especially if one cherry-picks the right examples. However, any additional income will be at the cost of something that’s priceless. Control over one’s work is something that nobody should be forced to give up.
There are a number of other problems with a tax like this. How is the appropriate rate established? How would an artist receive compensation from a tax like this? How can one accurately measure downloads, anyway? These are questions that have no good answer. Like most “new models,” the system becomes pretty arbitrary when the details are established. It probably doesn’t matter, anyway: I doubt the RIAA would ever agree to a blanket, compulsory license in exchange for this tax, even if they were allowed to control the income. If the RIAA pushed a tax, it would be to make up for their losses from illegal file sharing. In other words, it would still be illegal to download music, but you’d pay the tax anyway. Even if you didn’t illegally distribute or download music.
The main source of the music industry’s trouble is the lack of understanding and/or respect for intellectual property, by both consumers and the recording industry. Gimmicks like this tax aren’t going to solve anything.
Tags: [copyright 2.0, isp, isp tax, piracy, plagarismtoday, riaa, tax]Pre-eclampsia and health care
Late last January, in a post about how our next child was going to be a girl I wrote:
I’m really looking forward to the baby’s birth. I do tend to worry about most things, but after everything I’ve seen with our doctor, the hospital, the technology involved in bringing a baby into the world, and a few dozen episodes of Baby Story, I can honestly say that I’m not worried about this baby. Just a few more months to wait now!
The next day, my wife became so sick that I had to take her to the hospital. My wife developed pre-eclampsia, a serious condition which causes high blood pressure, excessive protein loss, and potentially worse symptoms in pregnant women. From what I understand, it’s basically caused when the placenta and the woman’s body start to fight, and the only way to cure it is to deliver the baby. Our pregnancy was only 22 or 23 weeks along, which was just too early for the baby to make it. We lost our baby that weekend, and it took nine full days in the hospital for my wife to reach the point where she could go home again. It was a horrible time for both of us, but the important thing is that my wife is going to make a full recovery and we will hopefully be able to try again.
There are a lot of things to say after something like this, but few that I’d want to share on a blog. One of those few issues have been swirling in my mind for weeks now, so I’m going to let it loose. For me, one of the biggest benefits from writing posts is that it forces me to organize and clarify my thoughts into something more concrete. Or put in another way, it makes me turn my opinion into a position. I might have more to say later, but for now I’m just going to write on our experiences with the health care system.
Health Care
Before this situation happened, I had hardly any experience dealing with hospitals and health care. I’ve never had anything serious happen to me, or most of my family for that matter. After seeing the experience my wife had to go through, I’m very concerned about what might happen in the future if America’s health care system becomes socialized (or more socialized…). Let me describe what happened.
My wife experienced shortness of breath, nausea, and swelling all around her body. She told me that it felt like her body was falling apart. When we went to the hospital, she was immediately admitted and checked over by her doctors. Tests were ordered, which were taken immediately in order to get the results back as soon as possible. From diagnosis to labor to delivery and to recovery, we had immediate assistance and advice from the appropriate specialists, all of whom put my wife’s treatment as the highest priority. Nurses watched her condition closely for the length of the entire stay, making sure that the doctors knew whenever something bad happened. Everything was done to make her better, and it worked. My wife and I were given great care, and I’m very grateful for the doctors, nurses, and medical staff that made us better.
I think that many people would look at this situation and say that we were lucky. After listening and reading most commentary on our country’s health care system, one would think that health care is something that is granted to you by someone, and it’s chance that separates those who don’t get it from those who do. These people are absolutely wrong. While many doctors and nurses played a big part in my wife’s recovery, I think that my wife and I were mostly responsible for it. Months ago, my wife researched local hospitals and picked the one that was the best at handling these types of emergencies. My wife and I are both hard workers who prove our worth every day and bring in steady income and health insurance. We spend our money in a way that allows us to pay for emergencies like this. My point is: We didn’t just happen to have all of this great care fall out of the sky; we made it happen.
If we’re fortunate of anything, it’s that we live in a country that has enough remnants of capitalism that allow us to transform our work into things we need. It’s pretty fantastic, if you think about it. My wife teaches elementary school and I program computers, but what do we get in exchange? Educated kids and computer programs? Hardly. We get anything we want. We get a house, two cars, plenty of food, things to entertain us, and in times of medical emergency we get the attention of incredible doctors who will make us better. No matter what we want, we just have to be able to put in the work to achieve it.
But how long will it be this way? I’m scared that in the next few years, America will adopt a fully socialized health care system that will prevent us from doing what we have to do to take care of ourselves. That’s the real cost of socialized health care: The right to choose what you do with your own life. If you want to choose your hospital… tough luck, you have to go to the one the government tells you. If you want to choose your doctor, too bad… the government tells you who to see. If there is a waiting line to see your doctor and you want to pay for another doctor out-of-your-pocket, don’t bother… that would be a crime. If you’re a doctor and you want to try a better treatment or work extra hours to see more patients… there goes your medical license. Instead of a system somewhat like today where patients and doctors are able to make their own decisions with their own intellect and free will (though, there is a lot of government influence today), everybody gets locked into a system where your only real choice is to comply with the law or not.
What would have happened if our system was socialized today? What if my wife had to wait an extra day before she was admitted to the hospital? What if they let her go early and told her to recover at home in bed? What if any of the great doctors we saw had left because they didn’t want to work in that system? Would my wife had been ok? Possibly, but that’s not a gamble that politicians or socialized-health-care advocates have a right to make.
I felt strongly about this issue before, but now whenever I see debates online or on tv I keep thinking back to this single, concrete example. And it infuriates me to think that anyone would get between us and the health care we arranged for, especially when that interference is done for the supposed purpose of helping us! If someone wants health care for everyone, then my suggestion is to find someone who doesn’t have health insurance and buy it for them. Find someone with a medical bill and pay it. Just whatever you do, stay out of our way.
[Update 2008-03-16: I’m disabling comments on this thread. I really appreciate everybody’s well wishes, and we’ve received a lot of them! I don’t want to make a thread where people feel they have offer condolences, and given the subject matter I’m guessing that most people who disagree with my stance on medical care aren’t going to argue with me here. Don’t worry about us, we’ve had some time and we’re going to be ok. Really.]
Tags: [health care, preeclampsia, socialized health care, universal health care]VGtdApi - .Net library for Vitalist
Some months ago, I wrote that I was going to give up Vitalist and write a GTD application of my own. While that application is still being worked on (but moved to .Net, instead of PHP), I’ve become extremely attached to my Vitalist account. Yes, Vitalist is a little more expensive than other sites, but I haven’t found a UI half as good as Vitalist. It’s simple, it’s fast, and it closely matches the GTD methods. It’s great, and it’s worth the $5 a month I spend.
I thought it would be nice to be able to pull my data into other applications. So, I wrote up a quick and dirty .Net library for interfacing with the Vitalist API. If you pass it your Vitalist API key, it will pull down your data and fill collections of easy-to-use objects for your programming pleasure. Below are some quick examples of how it can be used.
Here is loading data:
VGtdApi.MyVitalist myVitalist = new VGtdApi.MyVitalist();
myVitalist.ApiKey = “[YOUR VITALIST API]”;
myVitalist.LoadData();
Here is adding an item:
VGtdApi.Item item = new VGtdApi.Item();
item.Body = “testapi”;
item.DueDate = System.DateTime.Now;
item.Priority = VGtdApi.Item.PriorityOption.High;
item.ListId = VGtdApi.Item.ListIdOption.Waiting;
myVitalist.Items.Add(item);
myVitalist.Save();
And here is making a change to an existing item:
myVitalist.Items[0].Body = “testapi 1234″;
myVitalist.Save();
I think this API could be a great head-start to anybody who wants to write a .Net application that uses Vitalist data.
HOWEVER
There’s a basic fact about this API that there is no getting around: An API for a service can only be as good as the service itself. And frankly, there are a lot of things that can’t be done with the Vitalist API. Here are my biggest problems right now:
1.) When you get your data, you have to download everything. Now, there is a filter that lets you break things apart by major sections (Inbox, Waiting, etc.), but that’s it. If you want to get what’s due today, you have to download every item in your account. Even completed items! I don’t think this is a very efficient way of pulling data, especially for people who have lots of Vitalist data. As you use the system more and more, each download is just going to get bigger and slower. I don’t know of another way around it, though.
2.) You can only see projects, contacts, and contexts that are attached to items. The XML format of the download is basically just a list of items, so if something is not attached to an item it won’t be included in the export.
3.) You are very limited in what you can add. I documented what limitations I found in the project. My memory may be off, but I think you can just create the name, due date, priority, context(s), and the type of item. That’s all. Projects and contacts can’t be touched.
4.) You are very limited in what you can update. Again, I documented what limitations I found in the project. The biggest limitation is the fact that the API won’t let you set a complete date. This means that you can see your items, but if you want to mark them as complete you have to log in to the website. That was a huge disappointment to find after a few hours of development.
According to the Vitalist API page, the Vitalist API is in its first version and is subject to change. If it does, the VGtdApi could stop working. And if Vitalist updates some of the missing features in their API, this API could suddenly work better than it does today without any code changes! I hope this project might be a small example of what Vitalist could offer.
You can download the VGtdApi project below. Anybody is free to use it, but I put an Attribution Assurance license on it. Have fun!
Tags: [vgtdapi, vitalist]Jokes of the Day
On the lighter side of things, I came across two jokes in today’s morning news. The first joke came from Bill Clinton, who was out yesterday promoting his wife’s presidential campaign. As reported by Newsbusters, he said the following:
This is not your rally. I heard you. That’s another thing you need is a president, somebody who will stick up for individual rights, and not be pushed around, and [Hillary] won’t. The policies she spearheaded saved a heck of a lot more lives than all the TV ads that were bought and all the hot air that was spread. And we ought to talk about that.
Get it? Funny stuff! But not to be outdone, Fidel Castro decided to leave power with a zinger of his own. As reported by NPR:
When the Cuban parliament meets Sunday, Castro said, he will neither seek nor accept a new term as president.
Term as president? Good one!
Tags: [bill clinton, fidel castro]Launchy and Digsby
Over the past couple weeks, I’ve been using some new programs that have had big impacts on the way that I use my computer. They have been so useful, I’d like to share!
The first one up is Launchy, a keystroke launcher for Windows. What is a “keystroke launcher,” you ask? It’s a program that lets you launch programs using keystrokes instead of the Start Menu. Launchy is pretty simple: All you do is hit Alt-Space and start to type the name of a program in your start menu. It will recognize what you are typing and give you the option of opening it with the enter key.
So, for example, if I want to open Firefox, I just press Alt-Enter and start to type “firefox.” By the time I’ve typed “fi” the option to open Firefox appears, and I can just click enter. Or, if I want to open Google, I type “goo” and I can hit enter.
What makes Launchy great are all of the options you can give it. You can associate your favorite websites with Launchy commands. You can associate programs outside of your Start Menu with Launchy commands. And here’s the kicker: You can point Launchy at a directory and have it index any file type you wish. For example, if you point Launchy at your music folder and tell it to index your .mp3s, you’ll be able to play any mp3 simply by typing in some words in the name of the mp3 file. Personally, I use Visual Studio most of my work day, so I pointed Launchy at my projects folder and told it to archive all of the .sln files. Now I can open any project just by typing the name of it in.
As silly as it sounds, I think you’ll save more time than you know by skipping over your Start Menu when you want to open a program. All you have to do is think of the program you want to use, start to type its name, and it appears on your screen. I took a few screenshots to show how the program works.
Let’s say that you want to look up the latest news on net neutrality. Normally you’d go to your internet browser, go to news.google.com, and then search for “net neutrality.” With Launchy, you can just press Alt-Space, type in “News [TAB] net neutrality” and you’re there!
Now let’s say that you want to work on a Vitalist API .Net project that’s almost ready to be released. Just press Alt-Enter, then type in “vitalist,” the option will appear.
Just give it a try for a week or so, and I bet you’ll never want to go back.
The next program that I want to introduce is Digsby. Digsby is a program that integrates IM, email, and Facebook into one application. It doesn’t have all of the features that Trillian supports, but I think it’s friendlier. And for those that use online mail services like GMail, Hotmail, or Yahoo Mail, it lets you manage your email without going to the particular site. If you get an email alert that you know is spam, you can mark the email as spam from Digsby. Again, big time saver.
It even lets other people talk to you through Facebook or HTML widgets. If you look near the upper-right portion of the screen, you’ll see a Digsby widget that will tell you whether I’m online. If you want to send me an instant message, all you have to do is type it, click enter, and it will appear on my computer! Here’s an example of what I’ll see:
Thanks to Flibbertigibbet for showing me this Digsby feature. After I saw it on his blog, I had to have it!
Launchy is available here. Digsby is available here, but it’s under a private beta. There are a number of invite codes floating around the
internet if you don’t want to wait for the first public version.