Two unrelated topics:

[House of Mustard]

So, CNN reported two things that I thought were interesting, but I'm too lazy to make two threads.

The first is that Scotty, from the original Star Trek, has died.

The second, is this cool article about hyperfast internet -- 100 megs per second.

http://money.cnn.com/2005/07/20/technology/broadband.reut/index.htm?cnn=yes

[Legion]

The first is that Scotty, from the original Star Trek, has died.

.....i still needed to be beamed up

[Maxwell]

we all did...
but sooner or later it had to happen...
Scotty: beam me up god.
God then beamed him up thusly and lo it twas groovy ever more...

[The Jade Knight]

Looking at internet options in Montréal, I already have (reasonably priced) access to speeds of 3-5 mbps, which almost gets into T2 territory.

100mbps is crazy, though.

[fuzzyoctopus]

But I have no use for internet that fast other than piracy.  Do they wish to make piracy easier for me?

[Legion]

Its only considered piracy when you share copyright items

[The Holy Saint, Grand High Poobah, Master of Monkeys, Ehlers]

so it's jsut simple theft when you take them? Is this like Bill Clinton and his definition of "sex"? (Ie, Monica had sex for what she did to him, but even though he got the pleasure, he wasn't having sex?)

[42]

Let us just be honest with ourselves. It's only illegal when someone else does it.

[Legion]

actually they can not press charges for people downloading the information it is only when you let others upload it that allows the police to take actions

[The Holy Saint, Grand High Poobah, Master of Monkeys, Ehlers]

now, I've not looked at the law, but that sounds very much like Internet hearsay. When you download a song or file, you are making a copy of it. Thus while someone has made it available for you, YOU are the one actually duplicating it. The reason legal action is rarely taken is because arresting one song downloader is a waste of resources when you can hit the "dealer."

[Legion]

It is not just that, I studied Economic Crime Investigation and have written some papers on peer-to-peer file sharing, nothing major, but I did learn a lot.  There reason why they go after the dealers and not the people downloading it is because it would be too easy to prove the following things for the defendant:
1) They own the original and what to have a back up copy (this is legal)
2) It was not me some one spoofed my IP or MAC address
3) It was not me I was not home, some one else was on my computer doing it
4) A hacker hijacked my computer and did it.

For these reasons it makes it A LOT easier to go after the person who is letting others download it from them.  No you can not use #1 and #4 as excuses.  #2 and #3 are now harder to prove because they police are tracking where it is coming from, and can then hold the own of the computer responsible even if they are not the one doing it.

[fuzzyoctopus]

Which is all well and good, but no one answered my question.

My husband answered it for me though.  If super-broadband became widely used, I could see Blockbuster or some other startup offering movie downloads for rental.  You know, pay $1, download this file and it will delete itself in 24 hours.  With internet that fast it would be faster than going to the store.

Maybe more people would start posting tv shows online too.

[Legion]

that is a good point, maybe soon television will be come out dated

[The Holy Saint, Grand High Poobah, Master of Monkeys, Ehlers]

well, that doesn't make it legal to do it though. Just unenforceable. It may sound like a semantic, but when you start talking ethics and morals, it becomes important.

[Legion]

never said it was legal. Just said that no police action is taken when people download