File-Sharing

File-sharing or piracy is the question.What is should be considered stealing and what benefits does it have for the industry. What can the recording industry do to either stop or work with the file-sharers. When I was in high school I used file-sharing programs more. I was always looking for new music or downloading some of the old classics. I think part of the reason why file-sharing is so popular is that there is a large amount of music out there, an amount we couldn't possibly buy, but often enjoy listening to. I would never walk in to a store and steal a CD, but some how it doesn't seem the same when you download off the of the internet. To begin, I think it has to do a lot with the idea that it is called file-sharing. I would never think to steal or pirate music but if I'm just sharing that really great song from someone else just like me it seems legal. I see nothing wrong with barrowing a Cd to burn from a friend, so why should sharing with other music lovers like my self be anything different. In addition, I believe in the long run we are helping the music industries more then we are hurting them. We are making their music and their artists more popular and many of us still do buy the CD. The RIAA said that record stores around the country are closing because of piracy. I think this is an effect of more music being used digitally. People have less need for a store when they can download it off of itunes instantly opposed to having to drive to buy it. File sharing is not going to go away, and its time that the record industries start finding a new way to deal with this. Licensing music to online radio stations and providers is a start but its not enough. Itunes does offer good deals and I do find myself now using it opposed to downloading illegally. However, the average college student thinks about the money in the record companies pocket compared to the money in theirs. So obviously they are going to choose file-sharing over buying a over priced Cd. Cd prices should lower after the initial release and continuously cost less. Music that is over a certain age should be shared legally for free. I'm not advocating stealing from record companies because their rich, but I'm also not advocating selling over priced music to people who just want to hear all that is out there. Music is something we all love. It has the power to effect our emotions, make us happy when we are sad. Music is something that everyone deserves to enjoy, which is why I advocate change for file-sharing within the industry whatever that may be.

Analog VS. Digital:The Battle

I'm not sure I can give any specific examples of how analog vs. digital has changed my life except for my ability to own more music. I can get music at the touch of a button on Itunes and I don't need to buy the entire CD. I can listen to thousands of songs and they take up no space in my room. Not to mention, I can carry around that same 4,000 songs in my hand where ever I go.
I like to think that I don't necessarly compare media opposed to appreciating it for it's different quality. There is something amazing about the idea that we can create anything on a computer and make it seem lifelike and real on the movie screen. There is also an essence of class that you can receive from a black and white film that can't be recreated the same today. It's wonderful to be able to listen to clear music anywhere I go.However, there is also something really wonderful about listening to an old record. It seems more like they are there in the room with you. The sound seems more real opposed to something created in a studio by computers.
The Pro's to Digital are: clearer picture and sound, ability to hold large amounts of music in a small space, better graphics for film, and cutting edge special effects.
The Pro's to Analog are: Clearer and more life like quality to the music, and an essence of class.
Con's to digital: often looses quality in some cases, able to loose music since it is all kept electronically, has large files that take up a lot of room on computers.
Con's to Analog: takes up space in home, may have poorer quality of sound, and little special effects done by computers.

E-waste

For the sake of poor countries such as Nigeria, China, and India E-waste is a problem in need of crucial reformation. Waste from cell phones, computers, and other electronics have been dumped off prom larger countries such as the U.S ,Europe, and Japan in to poor rural parts of poorer countries. In attempts to cut costs for recycling agency's in the U.S they smuggle their excess of materials too expensive to recycle into poorer countries. These poor countries villages are filled with large amounts on electronic waste. Waste that contains large amounts of lead and mercury which seeps in to the ground, in to the water, and ultimately in to the bodies of the people living in that community. The workers who work with the waste often burn hazardous materials with no protective gear, and use make shift tools which are often dangerous to work with. It is vital that we listen to the agreements made my the Basel Convention and stop dumping our hazardous waste on to poor countries.
Obviously, the tracking of smuggling to foreign countries is a hard thing to do. Especially when people can be paid to look the other way. That is why in my opinion it is important to deal with the problem in our own countries. We should have a tax in all the states that is set aside for the proper recycling of electronic products. We need to refurbish and reuse all electronic parts that can be reused. Furthermore, the electronics companies need to start building computers that allow easier reuse of the internal parts. As for the parts that can only be thrown away, we need to start making them out of materials that can be recycled. For the sake of our planet, we need to start thinking of suppling environmentally safe products that can easily be recycled, and longer lasting products so they don't need to be replaced so often opposed to only thinking of profit.
I used to not really think about the cell phone, or computer that i threw away or recycled. Figuring that it was just going to be properly managed by the government. You can rely on no one but yourself, it truly is up to us to fix this problem. I will try to think twice about whether I really need that new phone. Most importantly though, I will make sure that i send my used electronics to a place that will properly reuse or recycle my used products.

Computer Math!

1.
1.1011=(2^3)+(2^1)+(2^0)=8+2+1=11
2.101010=(2^5)+(2^3)+(2^1)=32+8+2=42
3.11111=(2^4)+(2^3)+(2^2)+(2^1)+(2^0)=16+8+4+2+1=31
4. 10010=(2^1)+(2^4)=2+16=18

2.
1. 31=(2^4)+(2^3)+(2^2)+(2^1)+(2^0)=0011111
2.51=(2^5)+(2^4)+(2^2)+(2^1)=110011
3.7=(2^2)+(2^1)+(2^0)=111
4.103=(2^6)+(2^5)+(2^2)+(2^1)+(2^0)=1100111

3.
1. (56 kb/s)/(8)=(7 KB/s)=(.007MB/s)
(1s/.oo7MB)=(142s/MB)*(100MB)=14,200s=236min=apprx. 4hrs

2.(5mb/s)/(8)=(.625MB/s)
(1s/.625MB)=(1.6s/MB)*(100MB)=160s=2min 40s

3.(10mb/s)/(8)=(1.25MB/s)
(1s/1.25MB)=(.8s/MB)*(100)=1min 20s

4.
(3mb/s)=(.375MB/s)
(1s/.375MB)=(2.66s/MB)*(60)=(160s)=(3min 40s/MP3)
(40/60)=(.67)---->(60min/3.67min)=16 MP3/hour

"Net Neutrality" Good or Bad?

1. Net Neutrality is the principle to keep the internet open to all users without any discrimination. It protects rights to connect with any other computer in the world without limitation. It means that internet providers can't speed up or slow down sites depending on their source or how much they pay for keeping their web page online. Networks job is to keep a steady flow of data and not decide which sites should get faster or better service.

2. The backers of net neutrality are as fallows: Amazon, Google, Ebay, Microsoft, Yahoo, Skype, Facebook, all democratic candidates, and more. The argument for net neutrality is that is keeps free and open internet for all people. It does not allow any discrimination whether its Google or my blog. They still get equal access and space on the internet. It does not allow the discrimination of speed, therefore no site can pay more for better access or speed. It protects small business, non-profit orginizations, and bloggers. It maintains free-speech and consumers rights for all internet users, no matter what the content is.

3. The backers against net net neutrality are as fallows: Comcast, verizon, AT&T, Time Warner, and more. There are federal laws already in place to keep internet access rates fair. Sherman anti-trust act of 1890 protects from any market power to use their network unreasonably to maintain, or gain a monoply. Therefore no strict rates for users, different pricing and tiered access neogotiates for how much you will pay depenging on how you use the internet. It provides the networks to be able to invest in the internet and be sure that they can gain back their investment. Their investment would mean more jobs to create these new technologies. It would stop spam, piracy of multi-media, and bottlenecks caused by overflow of use by specific sites. It allows networks to stop online violence such as sites posing death threats or hate messages. Allows the United States to keep up with Internet technology and use network that is over flowed with spam on streaming online television, and games.

4. Although, I do agree that spam on the internet is a rising and annoying problem. A problem that seriously does need to be delt with, I still am all for net-neutrality. The Internet was based on the idea that people can network with anyone in the entire world. Opposing net-neutrality would cause and unfair superiority in sites that can pay more for access. Meaning that Yahoo will maintain its fast speeds but emerging creative and intovative sites such as Ebay or YouTube could never have got a start. Which will diminish creative and inventive ideas by people just like you and me. Leaving the only new internet creations to large corporations that only work for what they know will gain them income. Google, YouTube, and Yahoo and started with small people just like everyone else and thats how the internet should remain. It is our right of free-speech and our right to have every bit as much access as individuals as do the large corporations. I am all for the intovation of new products to make streaming video, and games faster, adminish spam, etc but not at the cost of free-speech and the loss of the individual in the internet.

Cyberquatting,free speech or problem

Is cybersquatting a malicious way to get peoples money or just a matter of free speech? In my opinion, it all comes down to is that situation. Certainly, I don't believe that it could be made illegal because it's often hard to prove in these situations whether it was merely coincidental or used to sell. If for instance my name was Steve and I decided to make a website for employment. By registering the domain name Steve Jobs, am I trying to make money off the CEO of Apple or merely running a employment site. Making it illegal could violate our right to freedom of speech assuming that one person is entitled to a certain domain name.
As far as the morality of the situation of cybersquatting goes, it all seems to come down to the situation. In the context of someone using a similar domain name as political protest I think it not only is it moral but also clearly a beneficial act of freedom of speech. Personally I find the social protest sites both interesting and entertaining. Two things which cause much more pleasure than pain. As far as buying a domain name in the hopes of making a profit later, I believe it immoral. Although a wise part on the part of the entrepreneur, purposefully buying a domain name for the sole purpose of selling it for a lot of money is wrong. It provides no benefit, and is clearly not within the lines of what the internet was created for. However, I do believe that in some cases two people will desire the same domain name. In this case it is not wrong to be a smaller person or organization and have rights to a certain domain. The person who was there first has full claims to the site.
So my guidelines to determine and stop cybersquatting is the fallowing. Social and political acts that do not harm should remain legal. As far as selling domain names for a profit, there should be a price limit that everyone has to abide by. I think it would be difficult to make it illegal therefore it should be limited and managed by the government. Finally, I believe there should remain laws that deal with violating someone's copyright laws. However, if someone got their first and is using their website for their own business or organization they should not be bothered.

Internet: The Revolutionary Tool

Oh back in the good old days when it took 10 minutes to load the internet and once you signed on it took another 5 minutes to open the home page. Internet has certainly changed dramatically within the last 10 years. Now obviously with the increase in speed you can get much more work done in a timely matter. However, the change within the internet that sticks out most abruptly in my mind is the change from dial up to wireless. I remember a particular time in middle school when I was going on to the internet for something important like Neopets or AIM and wound up weeks later with a $300 bill. When dialing up my internet provider started with the connection nearest to you but if there were to many people using that connection they would switch to the next one. I lived in Santa Cruz and it continued to dial in to different connections in till it reached San Jose. This meaning that we got a $300 long distance internet bill.Needless to say my mother was quite upset with the bill or with the fact that it continued to dial up till it got to a city miles away. But not with the increased amount of technology I can have free wireless internet access for hours with the cost of a cup of coffee.
However, the internet has also had some negative effects on me. With the increased access to internet almost everywhere you go it is very easy to get distracted from work. Where as in high school I would have to my computer at home to access any sort of internet. Now I can access the internet almost everywhere I go. It can distract me in class, its available on cell phones and in the library. Certainly, it's convenient and making life a lot easier for traveling, research, and communication but it also proves to be very distracting towards good students trying to work while checking their Facebooks.