Learn from the mistakes of others

Hollywood agrees to burning DVD issue
Dawn Chmielewski (July 20, 2006 - 10:36AM)

Hollywood studios will cross a significant technological and psychological frontier this week when they offer the first downloadable movies that can be legally burned to a DVD.

Psychological maybe. Technological. Bittorrent anyone? *sigh*

Coupled with the CinemaNow agreement, a deal with Apple would cement the internet as a viable distribution vehicle.

The Internet is already a "viable distribution vehicle."

Stupid corporates.

Although studios have offered online movies since 2002, piracy fears have kept them locked to computer hard drives. That restriction has limited the market for legal downloads.

No. Their stupid paranoia has prevented them from selling their own product to us ... wasn't as if we couldn't, nor wouldn't, accept movies digitally.

CinemaNow's service employs relatively new anti-piracy technology, which prevents the burned DVD from being recopied. Because that technology is still being tested, the initial batch of titles [are] what's left "at the video store when you arrive too late and the shelves are picked clean".

*sigh* DRM.

Hollywood agrees to burning DVD issue
Dawn Chmielewski (July 20, 2006 - 10:36AM)

Hollywood studios will cross a significant technological and psychological frontier this week when they offer the first downloadable movies that can be legally burned to a DVD.

Psychological maybe. Technological. Bittorrent anyone? *sigh*

Coupled with the CinemaNow agreement, a deal with Apple would cement the internet as a viable distribution vehicle.

The Internet is already a "viable distribution vehicle."

Stupid corporates.

Although studios have offered online movies since 2002, piracy fears have kept them locked to computer hard drives. That restriction has limited the market for legal downloads.

No. Their stupid paranoia has prevented them from selling their own product to us ... wasn't as if we couldn't, nor wouldn't, accept movies digitally.

CinemaNow's service employs relatively new anti-piracy technology, which prevents the burned DVD from being recopied. Because that technology is still being tested, the initial batch of titles [are] what's left "at the video store when you arrive too late and the shelves are picked clean".

*sigh* DRM.

having just filled out an "expression of interest" for a television documentary (which shall remain confidential) i have realised that i can express my interests in 50 words or less.

i have been interested in the the use and abuse of power since i was in high school. i am particularly interested/concerned with the use and abuse of communication, and hence certain technologies. my legal interests largely spin out from this: propaganda, whistleblowers, sedition, privacy, intellectual property, governance, etc. so to much of my interest in technology, and society.

yep. i'm an aspie, and i'm interested in how people do and don't communicate with each other.

i have had a theory for about twenty years now; that people tend to do/study the things that they need most. by that i mean, look at what a lot of undergraduates end up studying - those who get to choose somewhat freely. they do what they need to do, what makes them tick - or not tick.

how many students in psych could do with a nice long lie down? how many med students are really good at healing compared with how many are driven to do it? (i'm not talking about those who go into med because they're told to or pushed in or got good enough grades or whatever.)

i mean need in both senses - being driven by it, and requiring it.

for me, i'm driven by a need to understand others - and to be understood. i think that's pretty obvious to all of us by now.

so, now i need to do something with this re-realisation.


wish me luck!

having just filled out an "expression of interest" for a television documentary (which shall remain confidential) i have realised that i can express my interests in 50 words or less.

i have been interested in the the use and abuse of power since i was in high school. i am particularly interested/concerned with the use and abuse of communication, and hence certain technologies. my legal interests largely spin out from this: propaganda, whistleblowers, sedition, privacy, intellectual property, governance, etc. so to much of my interest in technology, and society.

yep. i'm an aspie, and i'm interested in how people do and don't communicate with each other.

i have had a theory for about twenty years now; that people tend to do/study the things that they need most. by that i mean, look at what a lot of undergraduates end up studying - those who get to choose somewhat freely. they do what they need to do, what makes them tick - or not tick.

how many students in psych could do with a nice long lie down? how many med students are really good at healing compared with how many are driven to do it? (i'm not talking about those who go into med because they're told to or pushed in or got good enough grades or whatever.)

i mean need in both senses - being driven by it, and requiring it.

for me, i'm driven by a need to understand others - and to be understood. i think that's pretty obvious to all of us by now.

so, now i need to do something with this re-realisation.


wish me luck!

it is interesting to consider the way the people respond to technologies, particularly new technologies.

dna technologies - or more accurately, the way dna technologies are used - has been a focal point for a number of social dichotomies. a recent article on the newsweek website prompted me to think about some of them once more.

the article "dna testing: in our blood" examines the experiences of a number of people, and their families, who have explored their ancestry through dna analysis. a large project, co-sponsored by the national geographic and ibm, is attempting to build a large map of genotype branches for humanity, the genographic project. they are already working from dna data collected and collated concerning mitochondrial and y chromosomal fingerprints used to analyse ancestry and relatedness.

mitochondrial dna passes down female lines to their offspring, while y chromosomes are passed male to male. both are quite stable - other chromosomal dna is subject to significant rearranging between matching pairs. mitochondrial dna can therefore give us a good look back along matrilineal inheritances- where your mother's mother's etc dna came from. ditto for tracing the heritage of your father's father's etc. in combination, population geneticists are able to map out broad family groups and identify ancestries back tens of thousands of years.

they can't say exactly who your ancestor was, but rather where they came from. and that can be a real eye-opener.

it's also raising all manner of questions, ethical and otherwise. not all potential donors like the idea of anyone else having access to their dna. some distrust the purposes to which their dna might be used. plenty of indigenous populations have discovered they have no claim over the rewards derived from their cultural and biological heritage in the past -they are wary of losing this, their most intimate heritage.

stumbling across this, i'm reminded of ideas and interests i explored a decade or so ago. back when i was a biology student, learning the hard way that science is rational but scientists can be a different matter entirely.

population genetics, genomics, genethics, and other neato buzzwords were in their infancy back then. as was the internet. i was neck deep in all of it. somehow i got sidetracked into programming and desktop support. and the law.

i remember why i got into the law, more or less. perhaps i should have done philosophy instead? i was/am the bastard most likely to ask why ... why is this so? why is that the way things work?

in a way, even before autism and asperger's entered my regular vocabulary, i was aware of how much i didn't understand about people. in particular, why they said and did some of the things they did. these days i'm wondering if i'll ever be able to understand.

in the meantime, how do i best make use of my interests and my knowledge and my skills and my talents. because the intersection of those things, considered in light of the kind of environment i flourish in, ought to point me in the direction of what i could be doing with my life.

i am interested in the effects of technology, they way people use it - often in ways unlike that expected or intended by their creators/marketers, and where it's all going anyway.

this is why i like science fiction. who are we and where are we going are key questions in that genre. (that and the cool gadgets. do like my cool gadgets, when i can afford them :)

i think too much.

it is interesting to consider the way the people respond to technologies, particularly new technologies.

dna technologies - or more accurately, the way dna technologies are used - has been a focal point for a number of social dichotomies. a recent article on the newsweek website prompted me to think about some of them once more.

the article "dna testing: in our blood" examines the experiences of a number of people, and their families, who have explored their ancestry through dna analysis. a large project, co-sponsored by the national geographic and ibm, is attempting to build a large map of genotype branches for humanity, the genographic project. they are already working from dna data collected and collated concerning mitochondrial and y chromosomal fingerprints used to analyse ancestry and relatedness.

mitochondrial dna passes down female lines to their offspring, while y chromosomes are passed male to male. both are quite stable - other chromosomal dna is subject to significant rearranging between matching pairs. mitochondrial dna can therefore give us a good look back along matrilineal inheritances- where your mother's mother's etc dna came from. ditto for tracing the heritage of your father's father's etc. in combination, population geneticists are able to map out broad family groups and identify ancestries back tens of thousands of years.

they can't say exactly who your ancestor was, but rather where they came from. and that can be a real eye-opener.

it's also raising all manner of questions, ethical and otherwise. not all potential donors like the idea of anyone else having access to their dna. some distrust the purposes to which their dna might be used. plenty of indigenous populations have discovered they have no claim over the rewards derived from their cultural and biological heritage in the past -they are wary of losing this, their most intimate heritage.

stumbling across this, i'm reminded of ideas and interests i explored a decade or so ago. back when i was a biology student, learning the hard way that science is rational but scientists can be a different matter entirely.

population genetics, genomics, genethics, and other neato buzzwords were in their infancy back then. as was the internet. i was neck deep in all of it. somehow i got sidetracked into programming and desktop support. and the law.

i remember why i got into the law, more or less. perhaps i should have done philosophy instead? i was/am the bastard most likely to ask why ... why is this so? why is that the way things work?

in a way, even before autism and asperger's entered my regular vocabulary, i was aware of how much i didn't understand about people. in particular, why they said and did some of the things they did. these days i'm wondering if i'll ever be able to understand.

in the meantime, how do i best make use of my interests and my knowledge and my skills and my talents. because the intersection of those things, considered in light of the kind of environment i flourish in, ought to point me in the direction of what i could be doing with my life.

i am interested in the effects of technology, they way people use it - often in ways unlike that expected or intended by their creators/marketers, and where it's all going anyway.

this is why i like science fiction. who are we and where are we going are key questions in that genre. (that and the cool gadgets. do like my cool gadgets, when i can afford them :)

i think too much.