I think his computers should be destroyed as an example to the comunity as to what might happen...and of course then he could cry and say it was all a mistake...Im sure destroying computers will never happen, its to much of a risk and would outrage to many people.
after those comments, comments about infringing on peoples rights to possessions I think he deserves to be hacked now...why wait? Hehehehe, I think he already crossed the lines. I also read somewhere about some college kids that got introuble for pirated mp3s or what not and were being sued for millions...these were broke college kids...makes me mad...grrrrrrr.
a) Someone will think of a way to exploit it, just think if someone was able to hack it and sent out a signal that destroyed everyone computer it could reach? Think about the damage it could cause.
b) Equally important, someone will develop something to render the system ineffective. I mean think about it, they'd have to develop some way that the chipset or something would send a signal to the power supply to initiate a power overload. But since everyone would have the hardware, it wouldn't be hard to circumvent the problem.
c) How exactly could you implement such a system? The senator is probably not very computer literate himself.
d) What happens if something like I mentioned in point "a" happens or someone feels that their computer was wrongly destroyed?
e) What about the millions of computers that already exist, since there would have to be some sort of hardware element to destroy the computer, those existing computers would be immune.
I could go on, but it's obvious it isn't feasable or practical.
you know that mp3s, contraily to many people beliefs, hardly damage the group at all. the only person it damages is the undeserving manager who exploiting the group. mp3s are even good for artists because they let you discover a group and then you go to their concert. which gives more money to the artist than a cd.
but that guy should have have his computer smashed up with a sledge hammer and be laughed at. i think that people would would release anit viruses for thes type things as well
photoshop too expensive? use the GIMP! www.gimp.org
On the issue of mp3's: I don't care if people download them as long as they buy the cd if they keep the songs. Come on, the band released the songs on a CD for a reason, to be bought and played over CD players not to be downloaded for free.
On to oracleguy's point b: I am pretty sure they were thinking more along the lines of a viral attack. Something that would go in and just delete a ton of sys files and shred the software to bits. This of course would avoid the hardware troubles. It also brings back the whole magic lantern (that is what the FBI's little virus is called right?) thing where the gov't would probably pay anti-virus companies to leave holes in the software so that their virus could work.
if holes where left in software for this to happen, or when it does happen there will be away to get round it. Like every time they invent a new cd encoding to stop it being played on PC a way round is created.
It is the snobby record compainies who are really causing people to download illegal music, when did hte price of cd's in the uk fall? they haven't fall much since they came out (so i'm told). So i think it is the record compainies who are causing the problem and seeking the wrong solution.
Spammers next time you spam me consider the implications:
(1) that you will be persuaded by me(in a legitimate mannor)
(2)It is worthless to you, when i have finished
What Hatch and RIAA are proposing amounts to vigilantism, letting an organization or individual take the law into their own hands.
Fortunately, the U.S. Constitution forbids this. You are innocent until proven guilty in a court of law. You cannot take it upon yourself to convict some one and impose punishment, that's illegal and that's what we have courts for.
If RIAA pursues the idea and buys itself some kind of legislation, I'm sure it will be quickly struck down in the courts.
Maybe some one should email a copy of the Constitution to Senator Hatch. He should read and understand what he's sworn to uphold.
They would also have to be certain that the person's computer that they were going to "shutdown" is inside the U.S. otherwise it would be outside their jurisdiction. And that would be some what diffcult to assertain, especially if they were running through various proxys that were located around the world.
Regardless of his feelings of pirating software/music/whatever -- for him to damage my personal property is not only UnConstitutional, it's unAmerican.
No one person has the right to destroy what I posess in my inevitable goal of Life, Liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.
But, as with most our leaders, they make laws that are less reflective of the people and more reflective of their pockets. In the end, everyone knows he has a limited intelligience on this issue -- it's garaunteed that he's using AOL at home on his Pentium 1, IMing George Bush on the benefits of Government control on Proper Health Care, though he doesn't have a Medical Degree as well...
He has the right to voice an opinion (and he'll most likely pop this somewhere under the category 'Terrorism', heighten the National Security to Code Orange for MP3 theifs, and tell everyone who pirates software they are a supporter of Drug Dealers/Terrorists) -- in the end, though, it'll take more than a few rants to back this up.
// Art is what you can get away with. <-- Andy Warhol
...:.:::: bradyjfrey.com : htmldog : ::::.:...