fantastic_jackie: (Default)
Uh... I don't mean to spam you guys on this issue, but how appropriate is my last post in light of this article from Kotaku?

Sources: The next X-Box may not play used games

I'm trying not to explode here.

As these are rumors, details are non-existent. Microsoft released a statement that effectively communicated, Maybe the rumors are true.............

The Kotaku theory of how Microsoft would achieve this limiting feature is that gamers would register their particular game to their particular X-Box. Then only your X-Box would be able to utilize that game disc. Peeps, what we have here is the end of used games and borrowing games from friends. No more bringing your game to your buddy's house, no more joint endeavors to purchase games together, no more cheap used games from your chosen retailer.

Now theoretically, Kotaku also speculates that gamers could potentially overcome this feature by not connecting their console online. First of all, that would kill the best part of most X-Box games: multiplayer. Secondly, I don't see why such a feature would have to be limited by X-Box online connectivity. That could easily be a feature that wouldn't require any sort of online account or access.

More technical X-Box talk about Cloud features etc... )

Now out of all of the "Big Hollywood" industries, gaming makes the most sense to be going this direction. I still hate it, and I sincerely hope that it's not true. Otherwise, I'll have to leave X-Box behind, as much as I adore it, and hope that Sony and Nintendo will choose instead to dismiss the idea as a serious flaw in their competitor's product.

This would effectively mean the deaths of companies like GameStop and GameFly. - Well, at least from the X-Box side. I haven't seen anything about Sony or Nintendo pursuing this model, but we all know that it would only take one for them all to follow suit.
fantastic_jackie: (Space 1)
I think I should confess something- a realization I just recently had. Maybe I'm just getting too far into the motives of my villains in the novel I'm working on (Geez, that feels so weird to say, but it's finally true!) or maybe I'm just really angry about SOPA and big Hollywood in general. Maybe I've always secretly admired hackers and what they can do.

Guys, I think... I think I support piracy. Not just that I'm apathetic towards it or even just okay with it. I think I literally support pirates and hacktivists. In fact, you may even call me an Internet picture pirate, because many of the images I use, I'm supposed to pay for; I'm handy enough with photo editing that I easily remove their watermarks. I won't apologize, either: I'm not paying up to $1000 just to download a tiny image I'll alter and use for a few months at best. That's just a tad bit excessive if you ask me.

The main reason I support them is because of my hatred for the Hollywood industry. Yes, piracy is theft. But I would classify a $15 movie ticket because it comes with 3D glasses theft too. - Okay, so it's actually greed, but still. - Their response to that would be that they've had to raise the prices because of piracy, but we all know that's bogus: if all piracy ended today, you would not see a dime of price changes on anything from music to blu rays. The excessive court cases would continue, too. Like the woman who was fined millions for uploading 22 songs or the 10-yr-old whose charity video was fined thousands until the charity dollars were all in the pockets if greedy CEOs, lawyers, and producers.

Unjust court cases aren't all they pursue, though. No, they crafted a purposely vague law in the hopes of catching even accidental offenders. They lobby and intimidate Washington -why do you think dems still support the legislation?- to ignore the rights their bills will endanger. If someone says the word greed, I don't think of Wall Street; I think of Sunset Boulevard.

So I support pirates to get back at them the only way they can comprehend: their wallets. Whether though means of piracy, DDOS attacks, hacking to steal information and posting it publicly, or evolving the threats of being online thereby costing them more in R&D to protect themselves. The more havoc they cause, the better.

What are the reasons for piracy, anyway? )

In one of their attacks a couple years back, Anonymous compared the Internet and the regulations it faces to limit its abilities and the information it is allowed to pass on to the political history of the printing press: it was this comparison that really made me stop and think.

You see, within the Internet exists the ability to be entirely anonymous, to be entirely free. While this freedom is often abused to carry out illegal activity, I believe that the freedom SHOULD exist. And hey, sometimes that illegal activity has a very good reason, even! Even so, just because Megaupload was used for piracy doesn't mean it was always used for piracy. (It also doesn't mean that the DOJ should have free reign to shut down sites at will. What happened to due process and innocence until proof of guilt in a fair court of law?) Much like the second amendment, freedom has always and will always require responsibility on the parts of the free.

I just... I dunno. While I'll never support thievery, I can't help but support piracy: the free spread of any and all information, regardless of what it is. It's hypocritical, I know. Maybe it's anger; I get pretty angry about abridged rights and such, which is what greedy Hollywood is after. At the same time, I've always believed that information above all should be accessible to all. - Not as an entitlement, but as a right. While governments and individuals are allowed to have secrets and privacy, no government should have the power to limit access to information.

What do y'all think about piracy? Is it a good thing? Are hactivists awesome? Or are they criminal menaces who should be hunted down? I'm certainly not against the prosecution of hackers and pirates; they are breaking the law and stealing, and they should pay the price if they're caught. - But not excessive prices... Like when a handful of pirates from Pirate Bay were fined $6.5 million. Like they'll ever be able to pay that! It's just greed!
fantastic_jackie: (Quotes - JM: Alarm)
After all the LJ entries, Facebook links, forum posts and articles, and Youtube videos that explain dire consequences of what would and could happen to you and I should this bill pass, (actually, these bills), I decided that I needed to know more. They're pretty scary claims, ranging from Uncle Sam and Big Hollywood/Record Labels unilaterally blasting sites off the internet for tiny infractions to individual users facing felony charges and being fined and jailed for Youtube fanvideos and violating a site's TOS.

The question is, are they actually true? Should we really be panicking?

As a conservative, my knee-jerk reaction is to believe whatever the government is doing is bad, so I have to work against that bias. After researching the bill further, I don't think that's quite the case, but I have to admit that I do still have reservations about it. After all, good intentions often pave the road to destruction.

If this is a bill you're concerned about, I'd suggest reading at least the links provided below, if not my commentary that accompanies them. I am just some chick on the internet, after all.

For me, this is a topic of legislation I've followed off and on, pretty much just whenever it gets into the news. I have read the bills in addition to articles, both for and against the legislation. My intention with this post is not to sway you one way or another: just to help those of you concerned find out the facts of the bills.

You keep saying bills. How many are there? )

Are there any differences between them? )

So Jacks, what's the big deal? What are these bills about? )

Will Uncle Sam and Big Hollywood/Record Labels be able to nuke websites they don't like unilaterally? )

Does the bill result in attacking fans like me who like to watch/make fanvids, make covers of my favorite songs, or even write fanfic? )

So overall Jacks, do you support the bill? )

Below are a very few of the articles I read. I uh… lost the document that had all my other sources. Epic fail? Yes. >.>

http://www.readwriteweb.com/enterprise/2011/11/legal-analysis-of-sopa-protect.php
http://www.techspot.com/news/46381-sopa-loses-backing-of-tech-giants-amid-policy-concerns.html
http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20111026/12130616523/protect-ip-renamed-e-parasites-act-would-create-great-firewall-america.shtml <--An article AGAINST the bill

The Senate Protect IP Act
http://www.govtrack.us/congress/bill.xpd?bill=s112-968

The House SOPA/E-PARASITE Act
http://www.govtrack.us/congress/bill.xpd?bill=h112-3261

Profile

fantastic_jackie: (Default)
fantastic_jackie

April 2012

S M T W T F S
12 34567
8910 11121314
15161718192021
22232425262728
2930     

Syndicate

RSS Atom