Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments
NOTE: use Perl; is on undef hiatus. You can read content, but you can't post it. More info will be forthcoming forthcomingly.

All the Perl that's Practical to Extract and Report

The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
 Full
 Abbreviated
 Hidden
More | Login | Reply
Loading... please wait.
  • I am, frankly, more offended by the clearly false assertion by Jobs that we are not being treated like criminals than I am by the fact that I cannot share the music or burn playlists without limit (except in the case of copying files from shared playlists).

    First of all, the "good karma" limitations being placed on copying media are like the lock on your front door -- it's there to keep honest people honest, not prevent illegal activity. Anyone who wants to illegally copy digital music badly enough wil

    • It is more like Apple putting a lock on my front door and letting me have a key to it, that I can use 10 times a day, in order to make sure I am not letting anyone else use my computer.
    • Locks on houses seem really only to keep the owner out when they forget their keys. Honest people don't go into other people's houses and as you point out, criminals will not be detered by a lock.

      That being said... ;-)

      The real entity treating you like a "criminal" is the copyright owner. When, not if, the AAC protection is cracked it will be the RIAA and not Apple that slaps you with a DMCA violation. When you work around the 10 playlist burning limitation it will be the RIAA who comes after you, not A
      • The real entity treating you like a "criminal" is the copyright owner. When, not if, the AAC protection is cracked it will be the RIAA and not Apple that slaps you with a DMCA violation. When you work around the 10 playlist burning limitation it will be the RIAA who comes after you, not Apple.

        Apple is the one preventing me from doing things with songs I might, as far as they know, have the legal right to do. I am not saying the RIAA gets a pass. The only reason Apple is doing what it does is to appease
  • FYI, the 10 burn restriction is not per-track, it's per playlist. In other words, say that you have a playlist with 10 tracks in it. You can only burn this playlist 10 times. However, you can burn the individual files as many times as you want as long as you keep using different playlists. The goal is to prevent people from mass producing a CD.
  • This was simple, however, any suggestions on how to record non-recordable Real Audio-streams? Is it possible to somehow dump all traffic on a certain connection (specified by being udp, coming from a certain address to a certain port)?
  • I've been looking into this a little more. File order appears to be keyed on Date-Added. If you add the Date added field to itunes, and then stream the files, you can see they continue almost sequencially.

      192.168.1.101:49186 -> 140.247.81.130:3689 [AP]
        GET /databases/35/items/289.mp3?session-id=11720 HTTP/1.1..Host: metadata:1..User-Agent: iTunes/4.0 (Macintosh; N; PPC)..connection: close.. ..

    T 192.168.1.101:49187 -> 140.247.81.130:3689 [AP]
        GET /databases/35/

    • It would be an interesting test to see if iTunes is adding information to the file before streaming it. (for identification, as Pudge suggested)
      This would be possible by doing a binary diff on the two files. I don't have two macs with iTunes 4 installed (yet!, but I intend to install iTunes on the others soon), so I can't test this theory. Any volunteers?


      I already did this when I posted the journal entry, saying "I open it in iTunes and it is a regular ol' MP3. It has the exact same bytecount as the orig