Good analysis. I think the main problem of today is that there is no need for being a "hacker" anymore.

The ancients here will remember how it was vital for them to be "hardware hackers". Because a computer, that was something IBM built, that filled storage rooms and that NASA could afford. If you wanted one, you built your own. Out of necessity. It was either impossible to get one, or at the very least impossible to afford one.

Fast forward to the 70s and 80s, when computers became more or less portable little things you would plug into a TV. We didn't have to solder our own boards together anymore, but programs was a different matter. We had to know quite a bit about programming, even if we weren't into it, for some of the more important tasks were only possible if you at least understood what's going on inside your machine. Not to mention that nearly all of them came with some kind of "user port", where the user could plug in ... hell, nearly anything.

90s and 2000 brought the internet, along with having to learn a bit about TCP/IP if you wanted to actually get anywhere. Let's face it, Windows was not really too keen on letting you connect to the internet without jumping through more hoops than should be necessary, and trumpet was to us far more than just an instrument.

What these eras have in common was that you had to learn something to get somewhere. In the stone age of computing, you actually had to learn how to build such a machine. And I'm not talking about "putting a CPU without accident into its socket". Later you had to understand the machine's language and had to be able to program, at least a bit, if you wanted to get anything. The early years of the internet meant for you to learn a thing or two about networking if you wanted to succeed.

Today, we transcended it all. Nothing is necessary anymore. NO knowledge, no information, for everything there is a "wizard". Our kids aren't learning anything anymore, and I could hardly blame them. Would I have learned how to build a computer if I didn't have to? Unlikely.

We're also at the point where anything big can only be done with a LOT of manpower behind it, and everything small can be bought for a few cents from China. There simply is no reason anymore for anyone to learn anything about the machines he uses. Unless, of course, he'd be interested in it.

It depends on their business plan. If they sell high speed internet connections, chances are that they do want people who use them, too. Because I sure as hell don't need 100mbit simply because, well, I don't download movies where I need a few gig a pop. So I don't need (and hence don't pay for) a huge pipe.

On the other hand, if their customers notice that they must not download movies anymore, well, what do they need the fat pipes for? Right. Nothing. So the logical consequence would be to step down to a smaller package. A cheaper package. Generating less revenue for the provider. And since providers planned for the customers they have, that would leave them with a LOT of unused bandwidth that can't be sold.

So depending on how desperate your ISP is to sell bandwidth, it may actually be in his best interest to tell his customers "Hey, don't worry, relax, keep downloading!"

Depends on your definition of siding.

They need to send out the notice. It's in the law. They need not participate in the usual FUD of the content industry that only costs them money but doesn't generate any, while offering advice to the paying customer not only satisfies the customer but also keeps him interested in the high priced premium service. Because, well, what does the average person need a 100mbit link for if he can't leech movies?

Most companies, at least if they wish to survive, will side with whatever makes them money.

If they want the data, they have to deal with the consequences.

The alternative is NOT collecting it and storing it indefinitely. Fine by me, too.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?...

I tried to find different people doing it. Funny enough, the three songs played (Toccata and Fuge, He's a pirate and "the Tetris theme" (seriously, when will /. support Cyrillic characters?) were done by pretty much anyone doing floppy music.

Yes, it's not interactive. But please, it's not like they invented the genre of floppy music, there's a ton of videos out there of people making music using floppies. With far better results.

Hint: The key is to make both directions sound equal. I'm still working on that. The interactive part (i.e. playing it with a piano) is actually surprisingly easy to do.

Who'd you side with? Your paying customer or some shady business that does nothing for you except cause you work without compensation?

Know how to hack SBCs? Be reasonable. How many are simply going to toss a random answer in to win something?

If the NSA relies on that kind of junk for data collection, their information level is worse than I'd have expected. And I don't expect anything good from them.

Your jurisdiction, unlike the traffic of the internet, is limited to your own country. And the countries you control. Which is a lot, I give you that, but by no stretch whatsoever it's all.

Also: Money trumps laws. Twice so if corporations are involved. If $evil_bastard_country wants to throw money at whoever sells them $supersecret_technology, corporations will not obey your law, they will race against each other to find the loophole. Which usually ends in the tech involved being developed abroad by those suspicious foreigners and then sold to the $evil_bastard_country.

The net effect for the US of such a ban is a loss of jobs, loss of knowledge and most of all valuable IT security information in the hands of whatever foreign country was smart enough not to be as stupid as you are, putting shackles on your own ITSEC industry.

Yeah, it's "on the interne"... erh... wait, can I start over?

In that case the correct answer would be "moar boosters!"

Not to mention that sometimes the people doing covers of some songs are actually better or at least more entertaining than the original group.

Ya know, I wonder why them terrorists don't do that themselves. Why don't they blow up some nasty corporations instead of, say, subways and running events? They really suck at PR, do you have any idea what goodwill they could harvest if they blew up some corporate HQs?

If movie quality was any reason for a rise or decline in copying, infringing would have hit rock bottom years ago.

ISPs send out threatening letters to those that they find copying. ISPs see a 70% drop in copying.

In other words, a third of the people who got the "you filthy pirate" letter simply ignored it.