PDA

View Full Version : Who controls the past controls the future



B. de Corbin
10 May 2016, 05:38
In George Orwell's classic book about totalitarian government 1984, the main character's "job" was to destroy old information that the gooberment didn't like and replace it with a revised version - then instantly "forget" having done so.

One of the beauties of science fiction is that, sometimes, it can so accurately predict the future (I can't help noticing this as I read Fahrenheit 451) - although the future doesn't always unfold the way it's predicted.

Sooo... It turns out that it isn't really the gooberment we have to worry about... It's those massive companies that have control of information... Google, Apple, etc.

Here's an interesting sign of things to come:

Apple Stole My Music. No, Seriously. (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/james-pinkstone/apple-stole-my-music-no-s_b_9873638.html)


For about ten years, Iíve been warning people, ďhang onto your media. One day, you wonít buy a movie. Youíll buy the right to watch a movie, and that movie will be served to you. If the companies serving the movie donít want you to see it, or they want to change something, they will have the power to do so. They can alter history, and they can make you keep paying for things that you formerly could have bought. Information will be a utility rather than a possession. Even information that you yourself have created will require unending, recurring payments just to access.Ē

When giving the above warning, however, even in my most Orwellian paranoia I never could have dreamed that the content holders, like Apple, would also reach into your computer and take away what you already owned...

MaskedOne
10 May 2016, 06:24
Apple demonstrates once again that it can't be trusted though I could see that stunt coming back to bite them eventually. Terms of use are annoying barriers but not always perfect. Anyway, yes, hold onto media that you value and if you see a book or movie that you really want to guarantee access to then get hard copy. I'm replacing a number of my fiction books with google play versions because right now, I value space and easy mobility more than the assured ownership of those novels but there is a distinct risk when you deal with e-books that you'll be screwed over.

EDIT: Though this particular bit of screwing over the customer is far more egregious than I ever expected and I tend to think it should be followed by criminal prosecutions.

Amadi
10 May 2016, 08:19
Always keep hard copies of your data somewhere safe.

The delete/import does seem pretty bad though. I use spotify and it recognises the songs/mp3s I have on my pc but it doesn't automatically import them (it does register that they are in my music however; I can see all the files on other devices, but I can't access them.)

anunitu
10 May 2016, 08:23
My Cable Company does this with "Buy" a movie BUT it remains on their system,and if you bought it and then left for another provider,you lose your "Bought" movie. I love hard copy,something I can touch and see.

Hawkfeathers
10 May 2016, 09:17
Amazon did the same thing. Back in 2000, I got a Dell PC and they offered a free Dell music player. You copied all your physical cd's into it. When that was discontinued it was transferred into Yahoo, also free, then to Amazon, free for a while. When Amazon did their most recent update, a couple of my cd's were missing from my music files. I was able to re-do them and Amazon rejected at least one. I was able to copy it to Google music so i can play it on my phone, which was all I wanted.

But, yeah, they are deleting my stuff which I pay an annual fee to have access to, across devices. I'll hold on to my records/tapes/cd's, and real books, TYVM. This Kindle thing is the next big ripoff.

thalassa
10 May 2016, 09:22
<-------owner of records and paper books


The only e-things I buy online are things I either intend to consume once or twice and don't care about otherwise, or things I already own or plan to own once I find it used at a decent price.

faye_cat
10 May 2016, 09:43
Personally, I've never subscribed to cloud stuff like Itunes, kindle, etc because of stuff like this. I would like a Kindle, but like Thal said, only for stuff I already have physically or cheap stuff that is kind of interesting but not a must have. With my music, I've never even had an Ipod or other MP3 player because either you have to purchase the music from their database or they make it a complete pain to transfer your music into their format. Adobe has made it near impossible to outright buy Photoshop; instead it's a month to month lease that will cost you so much more.

In the bigger scheme, this does slightly chill me. It doesn't even have to be taken to an extreme. Changing history because of the bad associations guarantees we can't learn from our mistakes and do better.

anunitu
10 May 2016, 09:54
In this we ponder why people would "Pirate" things...In fact the whole copy protection thing back in the way back,spawned much of the Cracking/hacking scene when a lot of people had C64's and the Copy protection could/would knock your drive out of alignment.and it could cost you a lot to get the drive realigned. Stripping the CP,would save you the cost of doing that. Over protection breeds work around's. Think about what is termed "Jail breaking" with phones. Try to restrict peoples access and it turns into an attitude of "They did it to me first"...turnabout is fair play.

Azvanna
10 May 2016, 15:59
I read this article the other day and it was a huge wake-up call for me. Because I write music as well, I'm not really sure what to do now with all my original music to keep it safe other than buy a tape deck!!!! I was going to transfer all my CDs onto my PC and then get rid of the CDs, but I've changed my mind now!!!

MaskedOne
10 May 2016, 16:22
I read this article the other day and it was a huge wake-up call for me. Because I write music as well, I'm not really sure what to do now with all my original music to keep it safe other than buy a tape deck!!!! I was going to transfer all my CDs onto my PC and then get rid of the CDs, but I've changed my mind now!!!

Keeping music on a machine can be done safely. Just

A. Keep backups
B. Be very careful with stuff like Apple Music

I've got some ebooks through google that I can lose if google does something silly. I have others that are just watermarked pdfs that don't have that risk. Computer storage isn't inherently risky if handled right, the random silliness that several large companies are indulging in is.

Hawkfeathers
10 May 2016, 16:23
Aside from an entity like Apple, Amazon, etc., controlling things, there's the simple fact that the way we access our stuff changes. Vinyl - 8-tracks - cassettes - cd's - mp3, etc. And after some time, it's hard to find a way to play the stuff you have. Turntables are still around but 8-track players aren't. As far as anything on a computer, that changes too. I have a box full of floppy disks, and a micro-cassette from an old answering machine with someone's voice on it. That sort of thing. Kindle changes your edition. A real book, however, is still a book, until the pages turn to dust.

Change vs. tradition. I'll take tradition.

anunitu
10 May 2016, 16:51
The feel of texture as you turn the pages...the optical scan as you sit or lay with the book in your hands and fingers touching the words on the page....

DanieMarie
11 May 2016, 03:16
<-------owner of records and paper books


The only e-things I buy online are things I either intend to consume once or twice and don't care about otherwise, or things I already own or plan to own once I find it used at a decent price.

Same. I just never really caught on to electronic stuff. I have a few mp3s I bought on iTunes and a few eBooks I bought on Amazon, but it just didn't feel the same so I resumed buying physical media again.

I do listen to streaming music and download public domain books, but that's about it.

I think it's stuff like this that makes me hold onto my physical media, though. When you buy digital downloads, you don't *own* those products. You buy a license to use them. It's not the same as owning a record or a book.

This guy's case is way worse than just a few ripped CDs though. From the sounds of it, he's a musician or producer, and the program ripped his own music and deleted it from his hard drive, which is HORRIBLE. I'm not really prolific with recording, but I have a few folk demos and some experimental sound layering pieces that I made on my hard drive. If one of my music apps deleted those, I'd be PISSED. Also, I wouldn't even want to give any of them permission to access them or upload them. Those are mine, and many of them aren't even finished products. I want to choose what, where, and when I share my own music on the Internet.

B. de Corbin
11 May 2016, 03:23
I actually like electronic files - over the course of my life I have accumulated so much stuff, in the form of books and music, that I have no place to put them, so I have to go on periodic "purges" to make room. Then, of course, immediately after sending a load of books off to the library book sale, I find that I need to get hold of a source... that I no longer have access to.

However, I don't like having my stuff stored by a "service." First, because I don't have extremely reliable internet so the "service" is not always available when I want it, and second, because I am then at the mercy of the "service" and what it's owners may or may not decide to do, like changing format or raising costs, or going out of business.

I much prefer having actual copies of efiles on my computer, or thumb drive, or where ever - that is the only way that I feel I "own" the stuff outright.

The whole idea of a "service" having control OF ANY KIND over my person files is abhorrent.

(I have trust issues. I earned them the hard way)

DanieMarie
11 May 2016, 03:29
I just don't even listen to stuff on my computer. If I want to listen to music while I'm on the computer, it's easier to just launch Spotify.

thalassa
11 May 2016, 09:08
Same. I just never really caught on to electronic stuff. I have a few mp3s I bought on iTunes and a few eBooks I bought on Amazon, but it just didn't feel the same so I resumed buying physical media again.

I do listen to streaming music and download public domain books, but that's about it.

I think it's stuff like this that makes me hold onto my physical media, though. When you buy digital downloads, you don't *own* those products. You buy a license to use them. It's not the same as owning a record or a book.



Oh, I love my kindles (I have a fire and a paperwhite)...but I use them as a secondary form of media, not as a replacement.

anubisa
12 May 2016, 19:05
I never really liked the e-books. My mother loves them and has a kindle, but I just can't stand them. I have to have books. I have actual cds. I don't often get cds anymore unless it's something from my past like Savage Garden or No Doubt. I like Bruno Mars. I do use Amazon MP3s, but I also back them up on a portable drive. When I write, I do using text files and Microsoft Word. That I do like using electronic media. It makes it much easier to write. It's hard to let go of some things, but easier to come into others. I have found that I love the cell phone, social media, blogging, email, etc...

Hawkfeathers
12 May 2016, 19:17
Oh, I love my kindles (I have a fire and a paperwhite)...but I use them as a secondary form of media, not as a replacement.


My music is the same way. I still have all of it except the 8-tracks.

MaskedOne
18 May 2016, 16:27
http://www.businessinsider.com/apple-sent-engineers-to-customers-home-after-itunes-music-deletion-bug-update-2016-5?utm_source=slate&utm_medium=referral&utm_term=partner

Apparently public outcry still gets a response. Not sure on useful yet but it's something.

B. de Corbin
18 May 2016, 16:43
http://www.businessinsider.com/apple-sent-engineers-to-customers-home-after-itunes-music-deletion-bug-update-2016-5?utm_source=slate&utm_medium=referral&utm_term=partner

Apparently public outcry still gets a response. Not sure on useful yet but it's something.

Hmmm...

Very deeply mysterious...

In the original article, didn't the author say he contacted AppleCare, and was told the software was "working as intended"?

I wonder if (parnoid as I am) Apple was field testing to see how it would fly?

MaskedOne
18 May 2016, 17:00
Here's my issue. If that software was operating as intended then replicating the issue should have been really easy. My position right now is that somebody is lying about something and while I'm willing to believe Apple is the one doing so, I'm not absolutely convinced of it. There's a non-zero chance that the complaining party screwed himself over by misusing Apple software and is now dealing with the fact that Apple decided, "Hey, this is crappy PR. Let's go above and beyond to help figure it out."

B. de Corbin
18 May 2016, 20:21
That would be another option. I wonder... Has it happened to others?

If so, how easy is it to misuse (assuming they weren't trying something funky) the software?

So, yeah - sounds like there is something strange somewhere, but what it is we'll never know.

MaskedOne
18 May 2016, 20:53
That would be another option. I wonder... Has it happened to others?

If so, how easy is it to misuse (assuming they weren't trying something funky) the software?

So, yeah - sounds like there is something strange somewhere, but what it is we'll never know.

Also, third option going by his updated blog (there's extra in your link, apparently from when Apple called him), the initial customer service rep didn't have a clue. This option should be unlikely. Customer service people should either know what they're talking about or know when to escalate your issue to someone who does. Unfortunately, I've dealt with living proof that this is not always true. I nearly got stuck manually re-entering 30 credit transactions a couple years back because the initial service rep didn't know how to settle all of them out on her end. My ass was saved because when I called back ready to start this up, a more experienced rep, said, "What the hell? No! I'll settle everything on my end and walk you through resetting your credit terminal. You ever have this issue again, ask for my department when you call and we'll take care of things for you."

DragonsFriend
19 May 2016, 11:00
How does the application remove files from an internal hard drive. Don't you have to give your permission and password to remove files?

Oh! my bad. The permission and password is a Linux thing and not part of the Apple software.
I'm pretty sure you can get Linux OS to run on your Iphone.

monsno_leedra
19 May 2016, 11:13
How does the application remove files from an internal hard drive. Don't you have to give your permission and password to remove files?

Oh! my bad. The permission and password is a Linux thing and not part of the Apple software.
I'm pretty sure you can get Linux OS to run on your Iphone.

The problem there is by proxy you give implied permission for them to access and "Change" your operating systems, hardware, etc by using the product. That not even speaking upon the fact you never actually own the operating codes and such you simply pay to use as long as they allow it.

anunitu
19 May 2016, 11:16
Most likely included in the TOS,that no one reads..and most likely allows a remote connection to YOUR system. See "South park episode about the "Human centipede""

Go here to read about it. (http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1884035/)

Denarius
19 May 2016, 11:17
How is it that South Park is always ahead of the times?

anunitu
19 May 2016, 11:21
I really do not know,but they do ROCK to be sure. Part of it is the way the cartoon is produced.

See here how they are produced in 6 days. (http://www.realityblurred.com/realitytv/2011/10/tv-documentary-six-days-to-air/)

DragonsFriend
20 May 2016, 06:59
According to the Open Source Software license, with Linux, I DO own the software. I can share it, sell it, even make money off someone else's work as long as I include the license in the product and don't modify the license agreement. If you buy the phone you should be able to put any OS on it that you want.

anunitu
20 May 2016, 07:17
Thing is you can have Linux on your phone,BUT nothing says any and all carriers have to take you on as a client. Also any OS would have to have been compiled to function with the phones CPU chip. I suppose you could start your own carrier but you would have to bid for the bandwidth to run it.(good luck with that) and you might be able to piggyback on cell towers for a FEE. A PC generally has an X86 chip..some phones have ARM chips,Not sure what apple runs on now..used to be 68000,but I think Intel now.
anyway,good luck with that...have fun.

- - - Updated - - -

All the chips that are used on phones. (http://www.digitaltrends.com/mobile/mobile-processor-roundup/)

monsno_leedra
20 May 2016, 10:22
According to the Open Source Software license, with Linux, I DO own the software. I can share it, sell it, even make money off someone else's work as long as I include the license in the product and don't modify the license agreement. If you buy the phone you should be able to put any OS on it that you want.

No legally you own a copy of the software user registration not the software itself. You can sell your license to another person, maybe even allow them to piggyback off your license but most software today has user limits on how many can register under a given number. However the actual software program is still owned by the corporation who developed and marketed the software. No different than buying Windows and getting a registration number but Microsoft still owns the software and its actual coding.

Freeware is a bit different but even then I believe there is a legality of who owns the software and such. Especially hidden in all the check here boxes that allow you to download and install upon your platform.

Denarius
20 May 2016, 10:43
Open source is different than freeware. Open source can be freely modified and distributed, and is typically a community project. Dirty, dirty, socialism.

MaskedOne
20 May 2016, 10:45
No legally you own a copy of the software user registration not the software itself. You can sell your license to another person, maybe even allow them to piggyback off your license but most software today has user limits on how many can register under a given number. However the actual software program is still owned by the corporation who developed and marketed the software. No different than buying Windows and getting a registration number but Microsoft still owns the software and its actual coding.

Freeware is a bit different but even then I believe there is a legality of who owns the software and such. Especially hidden in all the check here boxes that allow you to download and install upon your platform.

Actual Open Source software released under GPL tends only to have the restrictions necessary to keep me from buying a copy qnd then treating it as proprietary. Hence why anyone who wants a copy of Red Hat software for free just downloads it under the name Cent-OS. The people running Cent-OS get a copy of Red Hat, pull out all Red Hat trademarks and logos, replace them with Cent-OS and release the software for free. Red Hat makes money off their service agreements instead of software. Of course, the other catch to Open Source illustrated by this example is that you don't just distribute software and the GPL. You also are required by the GPL to make source code available for minimal cost (i.e. at most, the cost of a disc and postage) to anyone who acquires the software from you and their rights to use and abuse the software are set by the GPL, not you. The GPL makes interesting reading if you have time.

monsno_leedra
21 May 2016, 02:55
Actual Open Source software released under GPL tends only to have the restrictions necessary to keep me from buying a copy qnd then treating it as proprietary. Hence why anyone who wants a copy of Red Hat software for free just downloads it under the name Cent-OS. The people running Cent-OS get a copy of Red Hat, pull out all Red Hat trademarks and logos, replace them with Cent-OS and release the software for free. Red Hat makes money off their service agreements instead of software. Of course, the other catch to Open Source illustrated by this example is that you don't just distribute software and the GPL. You also are required by the GPL to make source code available for minimal cost (i.e. at most, the cost of a disc and postage) to anyone who acquires the software from you and their rights to use and abuse the software are set by the GPL, not you. The GPL makes interesting reading if you have time.

I stand corrected that sounds more like shareware vice freeware or other. I've seen lots of shareware that is set so you can "Improve" or "Change" it. To be honest those I tended to leave alone as unless you checked the code and really understood it who knew just what you might get. Especially if your code skills didn't match the new programs and such. Mine are way out of date so more of teaching an old dog new tricks than the benefit seems to be worth.

DragonsFriend
21 May 2016, 06:04
I use nothing but Open Source and what I write is released under the same license.
Apparently Linux has been used on phones for some time
http://www.pcworld.com/article/250899/mobile_linux_its_not_just_android_anymore.html
Putting a new OS on it doesn't change the ID or function of the phone so you can keep your provider. If I was going to use a mobile phone I would definitely run Linux on it.

anunitu
21 May 2016, 06:07
Truth be told Android is an offshoot of Linux (http://www.howtogeek.com/189036/android-is-based-on-linux-but-what-does-that-mean/)

So,yes Linux gets around.