Sorry. Wrong answer. I agree with the first guy. When you move out of your mama's basement and get a real job, you'll realize what it's like to create something. You'll want to get paid for your work and you'll hate the first punk kid who comes long full of rationalizations.

And the public says, "I would rather have a cool game built by people who are paid and given health coverage than pirate something." So EA wins. People are willing to pay for content and if DRM stops the freeloaders, DRM helps the legit customers who pay full freight.

1) So what if it's older. They get huge bushels of cash from Google and the Brin foundation today. And so they dance like any hired gun. http://boingboing.net/2011/12/10/give-to-eff-today-and-your-do.html 2) Maybe the reason you don't know this is because your invite got lost: https://www.eff.org/event/eff-mixer-google 3) DRM is secure communication. The pirates are the eavesdroppers. Get a frickin clue. And Torvalds's logic is solid. Locking up my love letter so only my spouse can read it is the exact technological challenge as locking up my artistic creation so only the non-pirates can view it. http://www.linuxtoday.com/developer/2003042401126OSKNLL http://news.cnet.com/Torvalds-says-DRM-isnt-necessarily-bad/2100-7344_3-6034964.html Quit being a sap for leeching business models. The EFF and Google just want to manipulate you into hating DRM so the money will keep flowing to them. DRM doesn't break the Internet, it breaks Google's business model. They're not the same thing.

The EFF is heavily supported by Google and DRM breaks Google's business model. Is it any surprise that the EFF is saying this. But as Linus Torvalds says, DRM is just the same problem as cryptography and secure communication. If we want to have privacy and cryptography, DRM is just an extension of it.

They're not asking for a free pony, they're just asking that people respect their fences and not take their pony. They're perfectly happy if people make their own ponies, they just don't want people taking their pony.

No, you idiot. If you don't like it, that's fine. I just get cheezed off by the torrent-lovers who want everything to be free. If they can afford $7 for a cup of coffee at Starbucks, they can afford to pay for a movie.

For a long time, everyone kept saying that the fines were too high. And they were right. So now the fines are reasonable and people are still complaining. About what? Would you rather be fined $150,000 for each infringement? $50,000? $5000? Infringement is against the law and with good reason. I like a functioning Hollywood where the actors, writers, directors and production crew are paid. That money has to come from me and the other viewers. If the other viewers aren't pulling their weight because they're sucking down a torrent stream, well I've got to pay more or the production quality drops. I don't like either choice. So pull your weight.

Do you know what court costs are to fight a traffic ticket? Much more. Alas, we need something to allow the people who are really innocent from being crowded out fo the court system by those who aren't. Court costs are just a fact of life in the legal system.

He shouldn't be writing about this without disclosing his conflict of interest. Heck, she shouldn't be writing about this. Google does its own evil things with users' content.

Alas, Hollywood is reporting the best Thanksgiving Day weekend ever. Did the demise of Megaupload make a difference? I doubt it, but I'm sure that TorrentFreak is only interested in datapoints that support its lifestyle choice. http://www.deadline.com/2012/11/thanksgiving-holiday-box-office-starts-so-so-rise-of-the-guardians-underperforms-life-of-pi-overperforms-red-dawn-as-expected-breaking-dawn-2-still-1-bond-skyfall-2/

iTunes is a paywall. If you don't pay,you don't listen to the music. And while the researcher might not be paying out of his or her own pocket, the institutional library is paying and that money comes out of his or her pocket indirectly. The library must be funded by the campus and so that means less money for pay raises. Once again, someone is paying. There is a wall involved.

It explains how to store personal information so it can be used correctly. http://wayner.org/node/46

Hah. Yes. Those little words in English are so important....

I've had math professors who could barely speak English because they were foreign countries. And the ones raised speaking English still had trouble communicating. It's a difficult subject and there are often big disagreements over the best way to present the material. Some think you should start from a high-level theory and work your way down. Others think you should start with basic examples and eventually get to the theory. Naturally, I've found that professors in one camp think those in the other camp are "bad". This guy just sounds like a tenured member of the college industrial complex who is deathly afraid that people will stop subsidizing his way of life. I wouldn't be surprised to find that 90% of the people taking college calculus don't need the material and never use it again. Math departments are kept afloat with distribution requirements. There's a lot of money at stake. If these big online courses catch on, the professoriate will be out on the street. Of course they're going to hate it.

Another option is that some third agency, as yet unnamed, officially owns the UDID values, and they were just sharing them with this guy. The agencies always play this game. They'll say "No one at ABC did this" knowing full well it was someone at the XYZ agency who was assigned to ABC. In the mean time, XYZ will deny authorizing anyone to do it, knowing full well that the authorization was done by someone at ABC.