Welcome to the MacNN Forums.

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

You are here: MacNN Forums > Software - Troubleshooting and Discussion > macOS > 5F24 "Test Update," or Ethical Dilemma?

5F24 "Test Update," or Ethical Dilemma?
Thread Tools
udecker
Forum Regular
Join Date: Sep 2000
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Aug 5, 2001, 02:45 PM
 
I have software update set to check daily - and around 1pm EST, software update told me I had a "test update" available that was 30Kb and would install in /Users/shared/ as a text file.

The text file contains:
The test update has been installed.

And that's it. (I checked the reciept with lsbom, and that's all that was installed.)

Perhaps Apple is trying to gauge exactly how many people are using 5F24? I assume I'm not the only person who got the update. I can't figure out any other reason for the update... maybe users of other builds did, or did not, get the same test update?


-uD

[edited to reflect actual thread topic]

[ 08-08-2001: Message edited by: udecker ]
     
zos
Forum Regular
Join Date: Sep 2000
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Aug 5, 2001, 03:02 PM
 
Why on earth would you ever even consider using software update on a build you don't have the legal right to use?

Let's just say I've been around many test versions of Apple software and have made a point to never use the software update feature. It's asking for trouble. And the same goes for any other test software you may have lying around.

But the info you give is interesting. I'm sure your deductions about why Apple sent that update are correct.
     
udecker  (op)
Forum Regular
Join Date: Sep 2000
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Aug 5, 2001, 05:35 PM
 
Originally posted by zos:
<STRONG>Why on earth would you ever even consider using software update on a build you don't have the legal right to use?
</STRONG>
I don't see any harm - since I've paid for the beta, the release, and will pay for the update, I can't imagine that my running a random build inbetween these releases will ruffle any Apple feathers - especially since I have no public complaints against it. Also - the install was only 30k, and said in its description exactly what it would do, so I did not expect it to break anything (and if it had, I'd just reinstall - all of my data is backed up.)

And if it dropped some secret apple surveillance app into my machine - the more the merrier. :-) Let apple see what I'm doing - what's crashing, whatever. I have no qualms about it.

-uD
     
klatuu
Fresh-Faced Recruit
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Germany
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Aug 5, 2001, 05:55 PM
 
Originally posted by udecker:
<STRONG>

I don't see any harm - since I've paid for the beta, the release, and will pay for the update, I can't imagine that my running a random build inbetween these releases will ruffle any Apple feathers - especially since I have no public complaints against it.
-uD</STRONG>
So naive ???

You use stolen software and you have no license to use it.

What would you do if you were a software developer and someone spreads your unfinished work over the internet ? Would that be O.K. ???

greetings
klatuu
     
<Carracho>
Guest
Status:
Reply With Quote
Aug 5, 2001, 10:29 PM
 
Get a life. Why is everyone so fast to defend Apple when people that paid for "Finished, Released Software" get OS X 10.0.0 (0.4 now) that doesn't even support basic Apple hardware....we users are the ones that got screwed. So get off your high horse...all these people are trying to do is to get the software they were promised in April 2001. That's why I downloaded it off Carracho and am using it now. 5f24 is a MUCH better product than 10.0 and almost works as advertised as it says on the Mac OS X box that's sitting on my shelf. Let me quote from the box:

"Unprecedented Stability and Performance" = 10.0....yeah right, got some stability at 10.0.4, but the performance stinks.


"Its amazingly efficient Finder is designed to help you quickly navigate and organize the gigabytes of documents, movices and music you store on your Mac"....oh yeah....10.0.4's finder is "amazing" alright.

"Mail is a full-featured, easy-to-use built-in email application..." Mail is full featured?

So give me a break about your preaching about all these people that got sold a bill of goods from Apple. We're just trying to get what we paid for. What was released in April was a second public beta that us saps paid big bucks for. 10.1 is what should have been release in April 2001, so us users are the ones that got screwed. And you know what, I'm sure most of us will be paying the $20 for the updated CDs as well...so there is no downside for Apple by us using Carracho-leaked builds.

Get a life.

     
OwlBoy
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Nov 1999
Location: Madison, WI
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Aug 6, 2001, 12:46 AM
 
Thats the second thread you have posted that in (that I have seen) Carracho.

Get a life? Look hoos talkin.

-Owl
     
mactropolis
Senior User
Join Date: Nov 1999
Location: Milkyway Galaxy
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Aug 6, 2001, 02:31 AM
 
wow, i haven't seen anything in software update on my box.
Death To Extremists!
     
V
Senior User
Join Date: Sep 2000
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Aug 6, 2001, 02:39 AM
 
It's only a test to see if software update is working fine in the different builds they make.

[ 08-06-2001: Message edited by: V ]
     
<addabox>
Guest
Status:
Reply With Quote
Aug 6, 2001, 02:39 AM
 
People seem to be reading the test message as "test update" (of 10.1). Isn't it possible that it's just "test update" (that is, this is a test of the software update function)? Also, I don't understand the "you are a fool to toy with pirated update" posts, since the situation described involves Apples (OS Xs) software update function, which seems to preclude unauthorized anything.
     
<addabox>
Guest
Status:
Reply With Quote
Aug 6, 2001, 02:43 AM
 
People seem to be reading the test message as "test update" (of 10.1). Isn't it possible that it's just "test update" (that is, this is a test of the software update function)? Also, I don't understand the "you are a fool to toy with pirated update" posts, since the situation described involves Apples (OS Xs) software update function, which seems to preclude unauthorized anything.
     
<addabox>
Guest
Status:
Reply With Quote
Aug 6, 2001, 02:51 AM
 
People seem to be reading the test message as "test update" (of 10.1). Isn't it possible that it's just "test update" (that is, this is a test of the software update function)? Also, I don't understand the "you are a fool to toy with pirated update" posts, since the situation described involves Apples (OS Xs) software update function, which seems to preclude unauthorized anything.
     
Codename
Banned
Join Date: May 2000
Location: Reality
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Aug 6, 2001, 02:57 AM
 
Originally posted by &lt;addabox&gt;:
<STRONG>People seem to be reading the test message as "test update" (of 10.1). Isn't it possible that it's just "test update" (that is, this is a test of the software update function)? Also, I don't understand the "you are a fool to toy with pirated update" posts, since the situation described involves Apples (OS Xs) software update function, which seems to preclude unauthorized anything.</STRONG>
That's just too logical to be true.
     
V
Senior User
Join Date: Sep 2000
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Aug 6, 2001, 03:22 AM
 
Originally posted by Codename:
<STRONG>

That's just too logical to be true.</STRONG>
I think that I guest that it might be true?
     
Ruhx
Fresh-Faced Recruit
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: NC USA
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Aug 6, 2001, 03:50 PM
 
Originally posted by &lt;Carracho&gt;:
<STRONG>Get a life. Why is everyone so fast to defend Apple when people that paid for "Finished, Released Software" get OS X 10.0.0 (0.4 now) that doesn't even support basic Apple hardware....we users are the ones that got screwed. So get off your high horse...all these people are trying to do is to get the software they were promised in April 2001. That's why I downloaded it off Carracho and am using it now. 5f24 is a MUCH better product than 10.0 and almost works as advertised as it says on the Mac OS X box that's sitting on my shelf. Let me quote from the box:

"Unprecedented Stability and Performance" = 10.0....yeah right, got some stability at 10.0.4, but the performance stinks.


"Its amazingly efficient Finder is designed to help you quickly navigate and organize the gigabytes of documents, movices and music you store on your Mac"....oh yeah....10.0.4's finder is "amazing" alright.

"Mail is a full-featured, easy-to-use built-in email application..." Mail is full featured?

So give me a break about your preaching about all these people that got sold a bill of goods from Apple. We're just trying to get what we paid for. What was released in April was a second public beta that us saps paid big bucks for. 10.1 is what should have been release in April 2001, so us users are the ones that got screwed. And you know what, I'm sure most of us will be paying the $20 for the updated CDs as well...so there is no downside for Apple by us using Carracho-leaked builds.

Get a life.

</STRONG>
Your kidding right?

Someone did not give you exactly what you wanted so you have every right to TAKE whatever you please? I think the last time i heard that applied in a serious manner it was a 4 year old who decided that the cookie he got was not enough so he took the box.

Apple has the legal right to prosecute you for using 5f24. If you do not know that TAKING things that are not yours is wrong, your in deep ****. The law can make you take responsibility for being a child.

Also about the get a life thing. Try to get out and meet people, deal with society. Apply your principal to the purchase of anything in a store. Then let us know what you have a right to take at your whim.

As for the original post, i'll bet it's a test to find out if updater is working. But your idea of having paid for the others so this one is yours is kind of like saying, i paid for my Mustang and will for the the next i buy so the prototype car shown at the auto show is mine. Not a flame, just a thought.
     
Osirisis
Mac Enthusiast
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Atlanta, GA
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Aug 6, 2001, 04:35 PM
 
I've noticed that many of the people who are flaming the people who have 5f24 have been overlooking the obvious... The product doesn't work as advertised. The box states that certain functionality is included and it is not.

Last I checked there is a legal law on the books like this for cars. It's called the lemon law... I know that doesn't apply here, but I thought it was a comparable point...
     
Ruhx
Fresh-Faced Recruit
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: NC USA
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Aug 6, 2001, 05:53 PM
 
Originally posted by Osirisis:
<STRONG>I've noticed that many of the people who are flaming the people who have 5f24 have been overlooking the obvious... The product doesn't work as advertised. The box states that certain functionality is included and it is not.

Last I checked there is a legal law on the books like this for cars. It's called the lemon law... I know that doesn't apply here, but I thought it was a comparable point...</STRONG>
There are laws providing for satisfaction with this kind of thing. AOL had to pay out many times for not living up to advertised claims. Pursuing that with Apple would be a legal adult way to get satisfaction. Stealing no matter how you justify it is illegal. Pouting and claiming you are getting your due is juvenile and not productive.
     
<Craig Sellers>
Guest
Status:
Reply With Quote
Aug 6, 2001, 06:59 PM
 
Not smart to steal software. [


QUOTE]Originally posted by udecker:
<STRONG>I have software update set to check daily - and around 1pm EST, software update told me I had a "test update" available that was 30Kb and would install in /Users/shared/ as a text file.

The text file contains:
The test update has been installed.

And that's it. (I checked the reciept with lsbom, and that's all that was installed.)

Perhaps Apple is trying to gauge exactly how many people are using 5F24? I assume I'm not the only person who got the update. I can't figure out any other reason for the update... maybe users of other builds did, or did not, get the same test update?


-uD</STRONG>[/QUOTE]
     
OwlBoy
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Nov 1999
Location: Madison, WI
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Aug 6, 2001, 10:59 PM
 
Originally posted by Ruhx:
<STRONG>

There are laws providing for satisfaction with this kind of thing. AOL had to pay out many times for not living up to advertised claims. Pursuing that with Apple would be a legal adult way to get satisfaction. Stealing no matter how you justify it is illegal. Pouting and claiming you are getting your due is juvenile and not productive.</STRONG>
Exactly.

-Owl
     
Toyin
Mac Elite
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Boston
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Aug 6, 2001, 11:52 PM
 
Originally posted by &lt;Carracho&gt;:
<STRONG>"Unprecedented Stability and Performance" = 10.0....yeah right, got some stability at 10.0.4, but the performance stinks.</STRONG>
On my Dual 500mhz G4 OSX is much more stable and performs better than any other Mac OS. Yeah application launching maybe slower, and menus may be a fractionally slower, but when it comes to multitasking OSX runs circles around OS9

Originally posted by &lt;Carracho&gt;:
<STRONG> "Its amazingly efficient Finder is designed to help you quickly navigate and organize the gigabytes of documents, movices and music you store on your Mac"....oh yeah....10.0.4's finder is "amazing" alright.</STRONG>
All a matter of opinion. The design of OSX Finder is (IMHO) more efficient than OS9. I can get to any file on my Hardrives within 3-4 clicks. I can't say the same in OS9

Originally posted by &lt;Carracho&gt;:
<STRONG>"Mail is a full-featured, easy-to-use built-in email application..." Mail is full featured?</STRONG>
What exactly does full featured mean? I've always kept a web-based e-mail systems until OSX. Mail on OSX actually serves my purpose using 3 email accounts.

Originally posted by &lt;Carracho&gt;:
<STRONG>So give me a break about your preaching about all these people that got sold a bill of goods from Apple. We're just trying to get what we paid for. What was released in April was a second public beta that us saps paid big bucks for. </STRONG>
Though OSX isn't what everyone hoped for, I don't think that Apple outright lied. It is the most advanced Macintosh OS on newer hardware. Almost all of my peripherals work (Cannon N650U Scanner, PalmV, Rio PSA MP3 player, Sony Supressa CDRW, Wacom Graphire tablet, Olympus d510z digital camera, Canon Optura PI DV camera, Microsoft Intellimouse) though 3rd party drivers will improve some of the functionality.

Originally posted by &lt;Carracho&gt;:
<STRONG>10.1 is what should have been release in April 2001, so us users are the ones that got screwed. And you know what, I'm sure most of us will be paying the $20 for the updated CDs as well...so there is no downside for Apple by us using Carracho-leaked builds.
</STRONG>
Steve Jobs did say that 10.0x was for early adopters and that should have been stated on the box somewhere (ie "Warning, may not work with some configurations....etc)
-Toyin
13" MBA 1.8ghz i7
"It's all about the rims that ya got, and the rims that ya coulda had"
S.T. 1995
     
spicyjeff
Grizzled Veteran
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: Massachusetts, USA
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Aug 7, 2001, 12:37 AM
 
horay for Toyin, he said exactly what I was going to say.

As for this:
I've noticed that many of the people who are flaming the people who have 5f24 have been overlooking the obvious... The product doesn't work as advertised. The box states that certain functionality is included and it is not.

Last I checked there is a legal law on the books like this for cars. It's called the lemon law... I know that doesn't apply here, but I thought it was a comparable point...
Do you have proof. No you don't. Read Toyin's post.
     
udecker  (op)
Forum Regular
Join Date: Sep 2000
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Aug 7, 2001, 03:07 AM
 
First off, I was certainly not trying to advocate my actions in this post - I realize that 5F24 is an internal build that was never meant to get into the hands of common citizens like myself. But being a user of that (stolen?) software, and finding something interesting to share with other users of it (on a board that obviously takes little concern to its discussion) is certainly not what seems to be the issue here. Since that's taken its turn, I'll continue with the discussion.


Originally posted by Ruhx:
<STRONG>But your idea of having paid for the others so this one is yours is kind of like saying, i paid for my Mustang and will for the the next i buy so the prototype car shown at the auto show is mine. Not a flame, just a thought.</STRONG>
Thanks for you comment not being a flame. Unfortunatly, there is a small problem in your logic. A prototype car at an auto show is a tangible product - something that on it's own, as a manufactured machine, it took a great amount of money to produce. (We're not talking design here, we're talking actual molding of metals and sewing in fabrics, shipping it to the show floor, etc). Taking this prototype from the auto show is certainly a no-no, because of the financial damage that it has to the auto maker by its sudden absence.

Your argument is more akin to my stealing a 5F24 CD off of the demonstration floor at MacWorld to come home and install - in that instance, I would have stolen a tangible that belongs to someone.

In this instance of installing a _copy_ of an OS that I already have license to use (in release form) without removing an irreplacable tangible from Apple, and knowing that my behavior also requires me to pay for the final update when it is released, I know that no real harm has been done to any of the parties involved.

It's not like downloading or copying an OS build from a friend (NDA or not) forces Apple to cease development because I've snagged their one and only prototype. Even with 5F24 installed on my machine, development will continue at Apple, and they will continue to be able to show demos of 10.1 until the day it is released, at which point, I will promptly pay my 20 bucks to have them ship the final to me. On the other hand, with forums like this, what running this build does provide is a chance for Apple to get feedback on the idiosyncracies that it progressively adds to its OS as build numbers increase.

If I were complaining about this build in some way, or misrepresenting that it's an interim build and therefore should be judged accordingly, then I might begin to understand the furvor that this little thread seemed to dredge up.

This wasn't supposed to become an ethical debate. I was just posting an interesting tidbit about my explorations into an un-documented OS update (that will certainly be paid for). Since a great number of us are using it, why not discuss it? By using this build, I am only showing my enthusiasm for what will obviously be a great step in OS X's evolution.

-uD

And thanks... I suppose criticism keeps me on my ethical toes. ...and if any of my software were to make it out to the public during interim builds, I would only hope that they would speak kindly of it. Any publicity is good publicity.

[edited when I realized the confusion about the thread title]

When I said "5F24 Test Update" it kind of made it sound like 10.0X users might find a test update to 10.1 in their software update panels. Which must be why non-users of 5F24 came in to discuss the philosophy of stealing pre-release software! ;-) Obviously, what I meant was that as a user of 5F24, I recieved a software update test either to see if it was working in this build, or to gauge how many users of 5F24 were out there in the ether. Sorry for the consufusion for the undoubtedly more moral crowd who came in to see what I was talking about.

[ 08-07-2001: Message edited by: udecker ]
     
Spheric Harlot
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Nov 1999
Location: 888500128, C3, 2nd soft.
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Aug 7, 2001, 05:01 AM
 
Originally posted by udecker:
<STRONG>Thanks for you comment not being a flame. Unfortunatly, there is a small problem in your logic. A prototype car at an auto show is a tangible product - something that on it's own, as a manufactured machine, it took a great amount of money to produce. (We're not talking design here, we're talking actual molding of metals and sewing in fabrics, shipping it to the show floor, etc). Taking this prototype from the auto show is certainly a no-no, because of the financial damage that it has to the auto maker by its sudden absence.

Your argument is more akin to my stealing a 5F24 CD off of the demonstration floor at MacWorld to come home and install - in that instance, I would have stolen a tangible that belongs to someone.</STRONG>
Why are you specifically *not* talking about design - that's precisely what intellectual property and copyright are about!

The whole point - the worth - of a prototype lies *not* in its material value but in the developmental/design process that it's intended to illustrate! That's why these floor prototypes are often only partially functional. (oooh - another parallel, huh?)

Getting 5F24 off Hotline or Carracho and using it is like taking pictures of the auto show prototype, building your own copy, and driving around in it.

The company may not care too much - if they ever find out at all - but they have every right to slam you against the wall for it should they choose to.


That said, I don't think they will. But just be aware of the legal circumstances surrounding your actions, and don't try to justify them away.

-chris.
     
Smircle
Forum Regular
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: Berlin, .de
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Aug 7, 2001, 06:31 AM
 
Originally posted by Spheric Harlot:

Why are you specifically *not* talking about design - that's precisely what intellectual property and copyright are about!
[..]

Getting 5F24 off Hotline or Carracho and using it is like taking pictures of the auto show prototype, building your own copy, and driving around in it.
You are a bit over the top in your reasoning. What *is* wrong is uploading Software to Hotline if you are not allowed to. Downloading and using it is somehow like finding internal documents in a dustbin and reading them. Not nice, but certainly a lot different from actually stealing them.

I can see nothing wrong in taking fotos of a car and building my own in my garage - if I keep it private. Distributing the car would be illegal of course. Or would you say it was a copyright violation to take a foto of a painting for your private pleasure?
     
udecker  (op)
Forum Regular
Join Date: Sep 2000
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Aug 7, 2001, 06:48 AM
 
Originally posted by Spheric Harlot:
<STRONG>

Why are you specifically *not* talking about design - that's precisely what intellectual property and copyright are about!

The whole point - the worth - of a prototype lies *not* in its material value but in the developmental/design process that it's intended to illustrate! That's why these floor prototypes are often only partially functional. (oooh - another parallel, huh?)

Getting 5F24 off Hotline or Carracho and using it is like taking pictures of the auto show prototype, building your own copy, and driving around in it.

The company may not care too much - if they ever find out at all - but they have every right to slam you against the wall for it should they choose to.


That said, I don't think they will. But just be aware of the legal circumstances surrounding your actions, and don't try to justify them away.

-chris.</STRONG>
Unfortunately, much more like getting the designs and building it to spec in your garage and admiring it. If I were giving public expositions of it, I agree I should be held responsible for that. But just keeping it in my garage until the real thing comes out does nothing to the car company. (Ok ok... how about driving it around my private estate out of the public eye?)

I agree - your example is much more realistic. I was thinking more of a different example though:

Dean Koontz is writing a sequel to one of his novels (or, maybe a programming book author is revising a previous edition) and I get a copy of the text, before it is released (say, I'm a friend of a reviewer who got early access to it, or perhaps I found it on a server or some sort). Intellectual property law assumes that I cannot, in any way, make money off of it, which of course I am not. Now, if I were to publish the work under my own name, or have a public reading of it (or likely even re-distribute it in any form), I would get in serious legal trouble. However, if plot twists that the author has publicly announced get discussed in a public forum, I can't see how it can cause any trouble. (Or a question about how the margins are laid out... no spoilers or anything.)

Now, I can see that it's pretty sneaky of me to try and read an unfinished manuscript, but if I'm a big fan of the author, and will actually go out and buy his finished work when it is published, no harm has been done.

I agree that it is hard to make parallels to how the software industry works - and I would feel terrible if someone snagged the build that is the update and failed to pay the author for it (like I'm sure some folks did with 4K78 back in the day). I'm not advocating software piracy. I think playing with pre-release builds is a completely different issue (in terms of actually owning a license for the release versions surrounding them). However, if legal ramifications are in order, I and everyone else using pre-release builds are liable. No denying that. Since I performed the software update described above, Apple has my IP. I hope they appreciate why I have the build - interest and appreciation. No harm is intended. Honestly, no harm is forseen. (If I'm being naive here, please enlighten me).

I appreciate your comments... they certainly make for a lively discussion.


-uD
     
proceedNeXT
Forum Regular
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: the chair in front of my Mac
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Aug 7, 2001, 06:52 AM
 
Downloading MacOS X final is evil, if you haven't bought MacOS X final.
Downloading a version MacOS 9 is evil, if you haven't bought this version of MacOS 9.
Downloading MacOS X.1 is evil, if you haven't bought the X final.
Downloading MacOS X.1 is evil, if you haven't bought the X final and will not buy the X.1 final.
Downloading MacOS X.1 is not evil, if you have bought the X final, and will buy the X.1 final.

Downloading Office for Windows is not evil, but downloading Office for Mac is.
However, nothing of this is legal and Apple or Microsoft in the later case are free to activate their lawyers, but since Apple does not try to shut down the sources, it seems to be obvious that they want their interessted customers to use their software. Apple is reponsible for it's customers, like a government is responsible for it's state. And they have to care for them, because their customers are dependend on Apple as well as Apple depends on the customers. As often said Mac and NeXT users are the most loyal users for a commercial firm, sometimes even more fanatic than Linux useres.

But that's just my oppinion. The one who *never* downloaded some MP3s, shall throw the first stone. And yes: my English is bad.
     
asagoo
Forum Regular
Join Date: Apr 1999
Location: London, UK
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Aug 7, 2001, 07:19 AM
 
Originally posted by udecker:
<STRONG>
In this instance of installing a _copy_ of an OS that I already have license to use (in release form) without removing an irreplacable tangible from Apple, and knowing that my behavior also requires me to pay for the final update when it is released, I know that no real harm has been done to any of the parties involved.
</STRONG>
Why do you think there is a prototype license agreement?
I'm not saying you shouldn't use development builds if you have them (I wouldn't mind giving 5F24 a try), but you have to be aware that you are using a piece of confidential software and it's in Apple's interest that you don't disclose any info about it. It impacts greatly on their marketing whether the general public knows about a product or not. Imagine the Aqua interface had leaked (nice metaphor!) before it was unveiled. Of course, 10.1 is a different matter, because it's publicly promoted anyway, but you generally don't seem to understand/accept why confidentiality about prototype software is crucial.

Amar
     
<MacFan>
Guest
Status:
Reply With Quote
Aug 7, 2001, 08:44 AM
 
Putting aside whether or not using 5F24 is legal or not.

For Apple to spend ANY time going after anybody using such a build is ludicrous. For people to say that Apple would are naive IMO

The builds are there for those to download if they know where to go and how to do it. Probably a small percentage of Mac users know where to go or how to do this.

10.1 will be what Apple should have put on the shelves in March. It IS what I have ALREADY paid for and now will probably be forced to PAY for once more as Apple apparently does not want to pony up for the extra bandwidth required to distribute it across the web. They can do this, but they are choosing not to.

I appreciate what Apple's OSX team has done and praise them every chance I get.

$20.00 dollars is not a lot of money. It's more the principle of the thing for me. If Apple had charged $150 and then gave this update for free I probably would not be to unhappy. However to pay what I thought was the final price and then to have to pay for updates is not the way to keep myself and other Mac users happy. Where does it stop? Am I or others to pay for other updates that are "to large for Apple to appropriately distribute" Looks to me like the beginning of a bad trend and perhaps something that the gang at Redmond would try.

I am sure that Apple is getting heavy flak for this decision and to see the Mac community so split on it's stance on this topic is definately something to see.

I am not happy about it. I'll pay it THIS time although I am not happy about it which is not a good thing for Apple, because the next time they do something like this perhaps I'll use HL or Carracho to get whatever it is rather than supporting Apple and those hard working development teams.
     
Spheric Harlot
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Nov 1999
Location: 888500128, C3, 2nd soft.
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Aug 7, 2001, 09:11 AM
 
Actually, &lt;MacFan&gt;, the discussion here is not so much about the actual 10.1 update (which, it being free - as in beer - I doubt anybody would have qualms about copying and passing on), but about the use of *unreleased*, internal testing builds.

The distribution of these is quite definitely illegal, though whether it's morally o.k. to actually use them is in some debate - or rather, apparently largely a matter of personal gusto.

Some very interesting points have been made - I'd just like to say I appreciate the civil and interesting discussion.

Thanks, all!

-chris.
     
Sven G
Professional Poster
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: Milan, Europe
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Aug 7, 2001, 09:35 AM
 
Oh my god (lower-case, of course!)...

So, those who use "pirated" software - in order to have a ***legitimate*** preview of what they will eventually get!!! - should be "juvenile" types, while those who - like stupid sheeps - lick Big Business' ***holes should be the "adult" (!) ones...?!?

Well... that explains many things of today's trend towards a subtle, "mediatic" (!?!) fascism (see, for example, the recent "G8" (!) Genoa police raids)!!!

Steve Jobs himself wouldn't have approved that ***-licker approach...

But today, I guess that he and his generation's guys have somehow f�cked things up again - unless...

P.S.: I have never used Hotline or Carracho... but I really understand those ***Mac enthusiasts*** who Apple doesn't really care for, so they are "forced" to do everything by themselves -. which, anyway, is definitely not a bad thing, lacking other ways... Apple should really begin to be a more "democratic" company, in order to also gain the "geeks"' - on which, indeed, *many* things will depend on, in the future! - confidence .

[ 08-07-2001: Message edited by: Sven G ]

The freedom of all is essential to my freedom. - Mikhail Bakunin
     
udecker  (op)
Forum Regular
Join Date: Sep 2000
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Aug 7, 2001, 11:30 AM
 
Originally posted by Spheric Harlot:
<STRONG>The distribution of these is quite definitely illegal, though whether it's morally o.k. to actually use them is in some debate - or rather, apparently largely a matter of personal gusto. </STRONG>
Chris - to whose personal gusto are you referring?

Originally posted by Spheric Harlot:
<STRONG>Some very interesting points have been made - I'd just like to say I appreciate the civil and interesting discussion. </STRONG>
Agreed. I'm absolutely amazed at just how civil this thread turned out to be. I personally think it's a great thing to be able to debate this type of topic - we get a lot of folks on here that have actually thought through most of these issues. I. for one, am glad to hear the opinions. Nothing enlightens a person more than the opinions of others.

I need some sleep though - Sven's post made very little sense to me. Something about adult ass-licking?

-uD
     
Sven G
Professional Poster
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: Milan, Europe
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Aug 7, 2001, 02:36 PM
 
Oh - there's not that much to explain: in a few words, adult ass-licking = cynicism = the prevailing (egocentric) attitude of most people today (and especially young ones, regrettably!). Period.

And what is primarily lacking in today's discussions are *passions*: there is almost no trend towards a common synthesis in most opinion sharing (everywhere!), today - and, thus, there is also a sloooooow "progress" in ideas, if not a backwards-going attitude. (And, yes, I'm making some assumptions, here: today's ideology is indeed a form of "Qualunquismo", i.e. non-committalism towards anything "wider" than your own backyard...)

So, it should be "adult" to second anything that might happen - whatever it may be, - while it should be "juvenile" (what a compliment, by the way...) to have a wider opinion on what happens...?!?

Actually, I think that the only positive meaning of "adult" is a fully self-managed and democratic person, i.e. critical towards any attempt of authoritarianism/servilism - and Apple, BTW, has still a loooong way to go, before it can be called a truly democratic company.

(But of course, I know that for many of you this is only idealistic BS...)

The freedom of all is essential to my freedom. - Mikhail Bakunin
     
zos
Forum Regular
Join Date: Sep 2000
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Aug 7, 2001, 03:43 PM
 
This has quickly turned into an argument about software piracy and theft of all kinds.

Firstly I'll say that my experience with F24 is documented in the "Info" thread, but my original post in this thread didn't come off as clearly as I'd have liked. There's a fine line between exchange of information on prerelease builds and complete and total arrogance and disrespect. Years ago you never saw public and high profile forums being filled with the information we're seeing on prerelease versions of OS X. Without getting too much into 'back in the old days' talk I'd like to say that I'm seeing a whole lot of arrogant amateuristic statements being tossed around and the line has not only been crossed, but it's been trampled and torn. If you don't have the sense to tell when you're taking things too far and doing more harm than good then I hope you enjoy when the accessibility to software like 5F24 becomes nil, or worse, you wind up having your computer confiscated. Those are the cold, hard legal ramifications - like it or not. Thanks to software programs like Hotline and Carracho software like 5F24 can be had by novices and it's brought about a lot of arrogance and poor decisions amongst them. Just as when something like getting your email was once not for the squeamish (using archaic programs from within a CLI) now ftp and software propogation has become almost as easy as using a modern email program. But where email never really had readily apparent illegal uses the exchange of copyrighted software always has. A generation of people who have only ever heard of mp3's in the same sentence as "Napster" is going around downloading illegal software and they're making some terrible choices in how to use and how to exchange information about it.

It's also exposing a lot of really awful ethical ideas in general. In this digital age whether you want to admit it or not, information and software code is a tangible product. When you take it without paying for it you are committing a crime that will be enforced in a tangible court room and you can and will go to a tangible prison. Show some respect.

Bottom line: you're doing far more harm than good.

Oh, and to all of those unregistered users tossing around their thoughts on the issue: get some balls. Either create a valid account or switch to your full-time account before you start throwing around insults and acting so arrogant. Become a little bit more accountable for what you're doing and it will lend your arguments more creedence.
     
Cooter
Dedicated MacNNer
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: Atom Bomb, USA
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Aug 7, 2001, 10:51 PM
 
my 2�.....

To all those that piss and moan about downloading 5F24, you are weenies . Its a pre-release beta. No one is using it to make a living, host web-sites, or write the great american novel. They're DLing to see what progress Apple has made on 10.1. Maybe you weenies are happy to mindlessly shell out $3500 for the latest and greatest from Cupertino, but some people want more solid proof than SJ standing on stage and crashing the DVD Player and completely locking up the GUI in ImageCapture as proof tha Apple is moving forward. Maybe Apple should be more open with information and quit treating their customers like they're the enemy.

You are probably the same people that drive 5 mph over the speed limit in the fast lane and refuse to yield to faster traffic because you're going "fast enough!" "Damn whipper-snappers, driving their fancy sports cars!" "Back in my day, we rode mules.... and we liked it!"

Please, loosen up. We don't need more RIAA and DCMA fans like you fellas to protect the free flow of ideas.

[ 08-07-2001: Message edited by: Cooter ]
"People who sacrifice essential liberty for a little temporary safety deserve neither." -Benjamin Franklin
     
zos
Forum Regular
Join Date: Sep 2000
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Aug 7, 2001, 11:30 PM
 
My 2 cents:

It's not about using it or not, or downloading it or not, it's about not making an ass out of yourself on a high profile forum. It's about not asking how to install it on MacNN, or using Apple software update servers with a stolen build, or flaunting it brazenly when your IP is there for the taking. Stop ruining the chance people have to preview this software or future software and act older than 12. It's about protecting your own ass and your future. Show MacNN and software developers and, yes, even Apple some respect publicly. Napster was the RIAA's whipping boy and Hotline or Carracho could be the next to die now that the floodgate to amateurland is open wider than I've seen it up to this point.

The arrogance and thoughtlessness is astounding.
     
Ruhx
Fresh-Faced Recruit
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: NC USA
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Aug 8, 2001, 01:25 AM
 
my third cent here...

Download it if you have the opportunity. Understand though, first you have no you rights involving it. You've taken it without the permission of the owner. Tangible or not it's taking property owned and implemented by another.

Next enjoy what you get out of it, this may not in anyway reflect the final 10.1. The release maybe slower, have less, have no relation to this... etc. This is the underpinnings being tested by developers to find what needs to be changed. Those needs are what will be met as well as comments about the previously released product.


Lastly the whole thing about comforming vs. rebellling. Well here's the thing. If you feel it is ok and it affects me or another who feels it isn't we need to know who's right. Well guess what, that's where laws come from. Or maybe you live in a world of reasonable adults who don't want it perfect, now, and for nothing? Please you think things are bad now, imagine what society would be without reasonable agreed upon ways of dealing with things.

[ 08-08-2001: Message edited by: Ruhx ]
     
Sven G
Professional Poster
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: Milan, Europe
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Aug 8, 2001, 06:32 AM
 
Ruhx, the problem is not really conforming vs. "rebelling" (and I also deliberately made my post as "provocatory" as possible, in order to see some possible reactions - but, probably, that was not the best thing...): the real matter is to *move beyond* the current state of affairs - and the very bases of democracy are indeed *very* threatened today, also in our (mostly materially) "rich" western world. "Rebelling" is only productive if there is *both* a "destructive" and *constructive* simultaneous attitude (being constructive is the most difficult thing: it's easy to be "against", but it involves great responsibilities to really plan something new and better!); and, indeed, I find that most "laws" today are mostly made to protect Big Business' interests (the so-called "Free Market", regrettably, is only an inexistent abstraction: in real capitalism, by its very structure, "competition" only tends to create new, even more centralistic and hierarchical mono- and oligopolies - see M$, for example).

Anyway, my point was - besides also reacting to some "authoritarian" things in previous posts - to show that Hotline and Carracho (how do they work, BTW? Are they something like Napster/LimeWire/Gnutella?) - of which I know basically nothing - aren't all that evil, if they're used based on *enthusiasm for Apple's products*; and, of course, Apple just can't continue to behave as an "armour-clad", "secret" company: Mac users are way too important for Apple to inhibit them from actively participating in new developments.

The freedom of all is essential to my freedom. - Mikhail Bakunin
     
Spheric Harlot
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Nov 1999
Location: 888500128, C3, 2nd soft.
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Aug 8, 2001, 07:15 AM
 
Originally posted by Sven G:
<STRONG>Actually, I think that the only positive meaning of "adult" is a fully self-managed and democratic person, i.e. critical towards any attempt of authoritarianism/servilism - and Apple, BTW, has still a loooong way to go, before it can be called a truly democratic company.</STRONG>
What kind of deluded statement is that!?

Newsflash:
Apple is a *business*.
Their sole responsibility is towards their shareholders. The only difference to - ahem - "other" companies is that they are somewhat more ethical in their business practices, and that they sell better (IMO) products.

They are not a democracy. They are a business organization led - as they should be - by a CEO who has the final word regarding business decisions.

They have the right to do whatever they feel is necessary - within the limits of the law - to protect their property, their rights, and their financial interests.

They have no "obligation" to you, the individual user, in choice of products to release, or in listening to your opinion. They will make choices according to how they think they will make the most money - perhaps short-term, perhaps long-term.

If you can't accept that, then go enshrine the accidental hero Linus Torvalds and use his software projects' descendant code.

But realize that much of what makes Apple so "special" only happened because the company works the way it does.

-chris.
     
Sven G
Professional Poster
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: Milan, Europe
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Aug 8, 2001, 07:42 AM
 
Hmm... I don't think so - but we'll see what happens in the next years...

And actually, if hierarchical companies had never existed in mankind's history, we would probably be much more evolved and advanced, today; but I'm certainly not going to persuade people of the "rightness" of my points: the best possible thing in order to widen one's mind above the "Business Clouds" is to be curious and try to think a little more deeply about why things are as they are, also reading some books, etc. - then, one might discover that all that glitters isn't gold!

Apple certainly has no obligations - but they *could* be more open than they are now!!! (And thank you very much - but I already use Linus' OS, *together* with Classic, X, and even Windows and DOS, so there's no need to "move to the other side"!)

Of course, most people are afraid of freedom because it involves greater responsibilities than simply doing "as usual"; but if, say, Apple opened its new OS a little more and were more collaborative with its "customers" (what a terrible concept, BTW), many things could proceed much better and faster than today! (Of course, I don't share the prevailing opinion that open source development is too slow and dispersed: it may be so many times because of many factors - but if it were the prevailing means of software development *in a more democratic world*, then it would work much better than today's centralistic approach.)

The freedom of all is essential to my freedom. - Mikhail Bakunin
     
Spheric Harlot
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Nov 1999
Location: 888500128, C3, 2nd soft.
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Aug 8, 2001, 07:58 AM
 
I just want to clarify that my mentioning of "things that make Apple special" was in no way intended to put down Linux - I realize full well that Linux equally has its merits, and that these are of course due to the way the Linux community functions (in the same way that Apple's merits are determined by how the company works).

No offense intended, Sven!

And you're probably right that Apple could benefit from becoming more open (their tentative steps towards the open-source idea - with Darwin - show that they're definitely experimenting with the idea), but they need to be very careful as to what they relinquish control over and how the movement into and out of the system will work.
Else, they risk losing the edge that has defined their very own specialness in the past.

And I don't think that they should start setting examples by passing out these experimental builds left and right, as you seem to imply...like I said, they need to be careful.

-chris.
     
Sven G
Professional Poster
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: Milan, Europe
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Aug 8, 2001, 08:41 AM
 
Yes: the important thing is that Apple *tries* to gradually open itself - then, there will probably also be some powerful feedback from developers, end users, and even other companies.

I guess they are so careful about what steps they take also becuase of the intrinsic "instability" of capitalistic "competition", as monopolies and oligopolies tend to "swallow" smaller companies, however innovative they may be!

Let's hope well for the future!

(P.S.: I defended Hotline and Carracho users only for a question of principles: it's waaaay too exaggerated to say that using a partial "leaked" OS build is "theft" - there are indeed *much* worse forms of thefts in this world, and at much "higher" levels, throughout society!)

The freedom of all is essential to my freedom. - Mikhail Bakunin
     
tomatohead
Fresh-Faced Recruit
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Toronto
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Aug 8, 2001, 08:42 AM
 
Good and evil are subjective measures. Legal and illegal are proxies for such measures, with specific penalties, when the laws can be reasonably enforced.
However, the enforceability of these laws (if they even apply in this case) is extremely low. If you bear with me and allow me to take this discussion beyond just OS X.1, but to all file sharing over the Internet (via limewire, hotline, carracho, etc.) you will have to conclude that at the consumer level, enforcing piracy guidelines is just about impossible. Therefore, the force of the law in these regards is weak.
We can debate about good and evil here, but neither we, nor the police can prevent people from doing what they choose to do in their own homes. (the corporate world is another story where enforcement is possible).
Anyhow, my point is simply that both the debate over whether this is good or evil, and over whether it's legal or illegal are both moot as there will be no recourse taken against those who do it anyhow.
     
Spheric Harlot
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Nov 1999
Location: 888500128, C3, 2nd soft.
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Aug 8, 2001, 08:56 AM
 
tomatohead:

Point taken.

However, as someone else has mentioned, if enough people refuse to exercise good judgement in dealing with, er, "sensitive" material, and enough people get the feeling that they are being harmed by this, then they *will* see to it that Hotline and Carracho are broken up - witness the death of Napster for a great example of this.

You see, the big companies don't *need* to go after each and every individual.

-chris.
     
udecker  (op)
Forum Regular
Join Date: Sep 2000
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Aug 8, 2001, 09:52 AM
 
Originally posted by Spheric Harlot:
<STRONG>However, as someone else has mentioned, if enough people refuse to exercise good judgement in dealing with, er, "sensitive" material, and enough people get the feeling that they are being harmed by this, then they *will* see to it that Hotline and Carracho are broken up - witness the death of Napster for a great example of this.
</STRONG>
Chris,
Looks like you reiterated my earlier point. In defining "good judgement" in terms of using pre-release software, where should we, as potential users of the software, draw the line?

That's one of the reasons I'm defending the use of pre-release software - because I fail to see the damage that other posters insist are inflicted upon the software developers. Of all the online actions that a person can do involving the aquisition and installation of software, I personally believe that people should refuse to do anything that inflicts damage, beit financial or otherwise, to the makers of that software. But in this particular instance, is damage being inflicted?

Perhaps users' overzealous downloading of software will indeed be the demise of centralized services like Napster. However, since many non-centralized, distributed networks continue to evolve, with no real way to limit or shut down, it is probably becoming quite prudent to re-evaluate how we as a society deal with these types of issues. Both for the individual when one decides whether to perform any of these actions, as well as law enforcement and intellectual property holders in terms of exactly how one can efficiently control the distribution of that property.

In today's evolving information distribution network, I think people should begin proposing alternative methods for distribution and rights retainment. I personally am working on services that would greatly benefit from any of these new forms of intellectual property. How can we most efficiently both propogate our own works and recieve compensation for its use?


-uD
     
ppmax
Dedicated MacNNer
Join Date: Nov 1999
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Aug 8, 2001, 12:08 PM
 
udecker--

i appreciate a sane discussion of these issues. i have posted here many times about software piracy, pre-release software issues, etc. i work for a very large software company so you can see where my bias may come from.

in essence your point is that you dont see any damage done, financial or otherwise. have you considered that you may not be in a position to assess that damage? how would you ever know? it's presumptuous to claim that you or anyone else on these boards is qualified to make these judgements.

i agree with you that peer to peer networking makes it quite difficult for authorities to take action against intellectual property violators--after all its much easier to take action against a group or large entity as opposed to an individual. but this doesnt mean that the fundamental issues involved in intellectual property violation are any different; enforcement is and will always be a practical matter. thats why new services like kazaa exist, and will likely thrive where napster died--because it is impractical to enforce the laws. dont confuse issues of practicality (how easy is it to enforce) with legality (whether you are damaging some other entity).

im sure most people here will gladly pay for the update when it is officially released (well, not all!), so i dont think the OS X pre-release software fever is motivated by "stealing." its obvious that people are anxious and excited for the update. but this seems rather sophomoric; i remember sneaking around before xmax trying to find presents. as i got older i found that i could wait until the xmas morning. the simple fact is that apple will release it when its ready, and we will all benefit when they do.
     
Ruhx
Fresh-Faced Recruit
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: NC USA
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Aug 8, 2001, 12:37 PM
 
Originally posted by Sven G:
<STRONG>Ruhx, the problem is not really conforming vs. "rebelling" (and I also deliberately made my post as "provocatory" as possible, in order to see some possible reactions - but, probably, that was not the best thing...): the real matter is to *move beyond* the current state of affairs - and the very bases of democracy are indeed *very* threatened today, also in our (mostly materially) "rich" western world. "Rebelling" is only productive if there is *both* a "destructive" and *constructive* simultaneous attitude (being constructive is the most difficult thing: it's easy to be "against", but it involves great responsibilities to really plan something new and better!); and, indeed, I find that most "laws" today are mostly made to protect Big Business' interests (the so-called "Free Market", regrettably, is only an inexistent abstraction: in real capitalism, by its very structure, "competition" only tends to create new, even more centralistic and hierarchical mono- and oligopolies - see M$, for example).

Anyway, my point was - besides also reacting to some "authoritarian" things in previous posts - to show that Hotline and Carracho (how do they work, BTW? Are they something like Napster/LimeWire/Gnutella?) - of which I know basically nothing - aren't all that evil, if they're used based on *enthusiasm for Apple's products*; and, of course, Apple just can't continue to behave as an "armour-clad", "secret" company: Mac users are way too important for Apple to inhibit them from actively participating in new developments.</STRONG>
Sven, i knew it was provocative and didn't try to rise to the slight but instead tried to outline why the way i defined as adult was the way we needed to handle it. As for free market and capitalism being a sham... Well here is the corporate view. You react to what the consumer wants based on the information you gather. You need also, and here is where Apple is successful, to try to innovate and anticipate. It's much like the economy, it is driven by society. If people believe it is doing well they do the things that make that happen.

Here you make a point that i agree whole heartily with. People are way to into the "i don't want to know" mode because they feel powerless. They then feel impowered by these little diversions. "I took 5f24 so i have given Apple a little what for" Well no they haven't. It's cheating (like in school) or taking a shortcut to a deadend. Not only haven't they made a difference they have quelled there need to because they got a fix. So now they don't pursue the free market idea of being in charge because they are to intent on a quick fix.

Now competition is a wonderful thing. Yes huge companies swallow up the choice ideas, BUT the idea of competition has already happened. We got something better, faster, and maybe cheaper. The giant just claimed it. Now what to do about the giant. Can we stop using microsoft stuff? Well not likely, but i can honestly tell you that if something cheaper with the ability to be implemented came along, over time (if the new product/company could survive over the needed time) big business would choose it. They just won't throw their dollars at things that may fall apart. There has to be support, innovation, and usability over the long term.

So in my opinion free market and capitalism work. Society with the need for instant gratification is what is broken.
     
Sven G
Professional Poster
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: Milan, Europe
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Aug 8, 2001, 02:27 PM
 
Capitalism may work well from a purely functional/utilitarian point of view (but even then, not so well at all, if you dig a little more into things) - but certainly not from a human solidarity point of view: just think about all the victims of Big Business all around the (thirld) world, where extreme exploitation is "normal" (men, women *and* children who are paid almost nothing for their "robot-like" work: see Nike, Coca Cola, and many other multinationals).

So there are indeed enormous problems within the very concept of our "developed" world's exploitative laissez faire "free" market capitalism - and they will be more and more serious as time goes on (see also the recent G8 summit farce, where politicians pretended to be interested in the world's "global" problems, while at the same time authorizing extreme police violence towards peaceful demonstrators!)...

On the other hand, returning on topic, if Apple and other "innovative" companies were part of a free federation of self-managed "cooperatives" (or ".org"s) - as could begin to be in a more democratic society, - things would probably have been quite different, and perhaps there would now have been terahertz computers, or even some totally different form of communication media between people (futurology was very popular until some years ago: does that mean that people see no future for them today, so powerless as they have been? Indeed, your statement that people feel powerless today is quite correct - but why are they without power? Who expropriated it?)...

So, the real ethical dilemma is probably this: what future do we want to live in, beginning from today? One in which a few giant corporations dominate everything with their concentrated power - or one in which every human being has full access to the share of distributed power belonging to her/him...?

The freedom of all is essential to my freedom. - Mikhail Bakunin
     
<How Hotline Works>
Guest
Status:
Reply With Quote
Aug 8, 2001, 02:47 PM
 
Originally posted by Sven G:
<STRONG>[...] Hotline and Carracho (how do they work, BTW? Are they something like Napster/LimeWire/Gnutella?) [...]</STRONG>
Basically, someone decides to run a server off of their machine, and people connect directly to them. There's no centralized server, so it's impossible to shut down.
     
Lerkfish
Registered User
Join Date: Jul 2001
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Aug 8, 2001, 03:36 PM
 
many people discuss ethics but use measurements of opportunity and punishment to define it.
Ethics are whether something SHOULD happen, not whether something is physically possible to do (files easily passed around on carracho and elsewhere), or whether its easy or hard to catch and prosecute those who do.

I've always found those interesting sidetrips that dont really intersect with ethics. However, those two things, opportunity and punishment, DO intersect with legality. So, in these discussions, if we understand that, we can argue these things separately, for example:

ETHICS: If I can access a build that was not sent to me personally, and I post information indiscriminantly on message boards, is that right or ethical?
Well, that's a valid question, and can be dissected by such subcategories as:
1. Responsibility -- do I have a responsibility to honor the agreement the real recipients of the build agreed to, even if they do not? (one possible question). Does the fact that my actions could in fact make the legitimate releases of seeded builds dry up for the community as a whole have any bearing on my behaviour? which leads to:
2. Consequences

LEGALITY: what is the legal agreement in place when the seeded builds were distributed? to whom were the recipients liable legally, and under what exact circumstances, if any, would a transfer be acceptable to a broadband distribution. Are those who download that build equally bound as the original redistributer, and to what extent?
under this heading you'll find such things as:
1. Feasibility of detection
2. Willingness of the owner of the software code (Apple) to negotiate or bring about legal sanctions of one kind of another


etc.

anyways, I'm only saying that if you say it would be hard to find and prosecute you, that doesnt make it ethically right to do this. And, if you say the product is shoddy enough to make it your right to do this, that is not an ethical argument, but a legal one. It might help to make this distinction in your minds, and it might be easier to see why sometimes a mixed argument of ethics/legality makes little sense.

and, like, wow, that's way too serious for me, sorry!
     
<the tomatohead from home>
Guest
Status:
Reply With Quote
Aug 8, 2001, 09:15 PM
 
Summarizing the posts up til now:
1) we don't have agreement on whether it's ethical.
2) we don't have agreement on whether it's legal.
3) we all pretty much agree that nobody can do anything about it.
Without casting any judgements, this is like the debate about homosexuality. Some people feel it's immoral, some legislators pass laws against sodomy, and nobody can prevent homosexuals from practicing.

The reality is that corporations have to deal with the fact that selling software to consumers is becoming a profoundly less attractive industry than it used to be. The technologies of file sharing over the internet and CD-burners make all of the forces of the software industry less attractive: consumers have a substitute to buying software or music CDs that bypasses the traditional players (record companies, software companies and retailers.)

Given that this is a mac board, I'd just like to point out that this is good for Apple, because they generate their revenues primarily from selling bundled HARDWARE and software. This is bad for record companies and software companies such as Microsoft, because they sell only software and their industry is being transformed adversely very quickly. (Don't get your hopes up too high that MS will be destroyed, their primary customers are businesses and there is a lot of legal recourse they can seek against businesses that don't pay for software).

Microsoft's reaction, and they're a smart bunch of business people, is to embed software activation keys in their software. This may work, but it also may not as hackers are pretty good at cracking these sorts of things. The record industry cannot employ such a solution because the CD standard of music does not support it.

So, if I get out my crystal ball, I predict the following:
Record companies are fncked in a big way. Recording artists will still have lucrative (although not as lucrative) careers through live performances, merchandise and of course the perqs such as countless young women being willing to have sex with them.

Software companies catering to businesses hold on to their existing business model.

Software companies catering to consumers fight a losing battle against pirates (read ordinary people).

At apple, nothing changes, except they maybe sell a few less upgrades of OS X or iMovie 3.0, or whatever else they release for consumers. But given that they bundle most of their consumer software with hardware, there isn't really anything to lose. Apple, and the rest of the PC industry, benefit from people using computers to download "free" software and music.

Why am I making this point? In order to address the question being asked in this group. Since Apple is hardly harmed, downloading OSX is not particularly unethical. The legality of it is moot because of the absence of enforceability. If you want to run current and future versions of X you have to buy a new apple computer. Apple is happy.
     
Cipher13
Registered User
Join Date: Apr 2000
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Aug 8, 2001, 09:50 PM
 
Doing it, and justifying it are two different things.

If you're gonna do it, fine, but don't try and justify your actions.

Just because you paid for OSX 10.0, you have zero right to take it upon yourself to get a pre-release update - Apple has not deemed it as a public release. Obtaining it and using it IS illegal. You have no rights whatsoever to the software.

As for the "software update test" thing, given my paranoid nature, they're gauging how many people have 5F24
Whether to determine the desire prevalent in the community to get an update, or what... but hey, its probably just an innocent test.
     
 
Thread Tools
 
Forum Links
Forum Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Top
Privacy Policy
All times are GMT -4. The time now is 12:15 PM.
All contents of these forums © 1995-2017 MacNN. All rights reserved.
Branding + Design: www.gesamtbild.com
vBulletin v.3.8.8 © 2000-2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.,