how-to block ads
|
|
Share Topic
 |
 |
|
|
 Augustus IIIIf Only Rome Could See Us Now....
join:2001-01-25
Gainesville, GA | reply to zod5000
Re: The Internet is going to end up completely encrypted. said by zod5000:The more laws they pass, the more people are going to encrypt their traffic. I think all this money they waste on trying to enforce it, is a waste of taxpayer dollars. It's like developing DRM, you spend millions developing it, and someone thwarts it in days. That and I think they inflate dollars lost. They still base losses on the assumption everything downloaded is a lost sale. When the truth is people have budgets and financial constraints. If they had to pay for the product, there would be a finite amount they could buy, or they might value an alternative product as a better value for their finite budget. Not every download is a lost sale, because free gets you a lot more stuff, then paying. So I think the whole industry way over inflates how much they lose, because people don't physically have enough money to buy everything they pirate (nor would be willing if they did). The average person has no idea about encryption. They are just going after the average kid that woke up one day and decided they will get something. They cannot touch the rest of the "market".
Of course it is not revenue lost. The way they calculate it is they count the volume of works transferred and put a price tag on each. So.. say x shared 40000 copies of something to XYZ. well, 40000x40$ = a big number. It doesn't take into account that in real life, only 4 out of those 40000 transfers would be actual purchases.
In reality their loss is 4x40$, not 40000. But the bigger number looks better. | |
Reviews:
 ·Shaw
 ·TELUS
| said by Augustus III:said by zod5000:The more laws they pass, the more people are going to encrypt their traffic. I think all this money they waste on trying to enforce it, is a waste of taxpayer dollars. It's like developing DRM, you spend millions developing it, and someone thwarts it in days. That and I think they inflate dollars lost. They still base losses on the assumption everything downloaded is a lost sale. When the truth is people have budgets and financial constraints. If they had to pay for the product, there would be a finite amount they could buy, or they might value an alternative product as a better value for their finite budget. Not every download is a lost sale, because free gets you a lot more stuff, then paying. So I think the whole industry way over inflates how much they lose, because people don't physically have enough money to buy everything they pirate (nor would be willing if they did). The average person has no idea about encryption. They are just going after the average kid that woke up one day and decided they will get something. They cannot touch the rest of the "market". Of course it is not revenue lost. The way they calculate it is they count the volume of works transferred and put a price tag on each. So.. say x shared 40000 copies of something to XYZ. well, 40000x40$ = a big number. It doesn't take into account that in real life, only 4 out of those 40000 transfers would be actual purchases. In reality their loss is 4x40$, not 40000. But the bigger number looks better. Yah but if they really try to crackdown, the software will slowly add encryption by default.. people won't have to know about it, i'll become integrated. | |
Augustus IIIIf Only Rome Could See Us Now....
join:2001-01-25
Gainesville, GA | said by zod5000:said by Augustus III:said by zod5000:The more laws they pass, the more people are going to encrypt their traffic. I think all this money they waste on trying to enforce it, is a waste of taxpayer dollars. It's like developing DRM, you spend millions developing it, and someone thwarts it in days. That and I think they inflate dollars lost. They still base losses on the assumption everything downloaded is a lost sale. When the truth is people have budgets and financial constraints. If they had to pay for the product, there would be a finite amount they could buy, or they might value an alternative product as a better value for their finite budget. Not every download is a lost sale, because free gets you a lot more stuff, then paying. So I think the whole industry way over inflates how much they lose, because people don't physically have enough money to buy everything they pirate (nor would be willing if they did). The average person has no idea about encryption. They are just going after the average kid that woke up one day and decided they will get something. They cannot touch the rest of the "market". Of course it is not revenue lost. The way they calculate it is they count the volume of works transferred and put a price tag on each. So.. say x shared 40000 copies of something to XYZ. well, 40000x40$ = a big number. It doesn't take into account that in real life, only 4 out of those 40000 transfers would be actual purchases. In reality their loss is 4x40$, not 40000. But the bigger number looks better. Yah but if they really try to crackdown, the software will slowly add encryption by default.. people won't have to know about it, i'll become integrated. There are issues with doing that. You can't just broadcast encrypted at random and actually make it readable. You need to establish and encrypted link via normal packets. So.. they got you at this point. If it really goes that far... | |
 El Quintron... a faint odor of kerosenePremium
join:2008-04-28
Etobicoke, ON
kudos:2
·TekSavvy DSL
 ·voip.ms
 ·WIND Mobile
·TekSavvy Cable
| said by Augustus III:There are issues with doing that. You can't just broadcast encrypted at random and actually make it readable. You need to establish and encrypted link via normal packets. So.. they got you at this point. If it really goes that far... Not as many as you think.
The trend for most P2P software (limewire and freenet being two examples I know of) are going darknet; in essence you have no idea who you're downloading from.
So traditional means of acquiring evidence against file sharers are being eliminated.
If the above becomes common enough, everyone will know about encryption eventually.
--
Never attribute to malice that which can be adequately explained by stupidity.
| | |
|
|
