January 18th, 2012 is the day that sites like Reddit will go dark in protest to the Stop Online Piracy Act (SOPA) as well as the Protect IP Act (PIPA) that are wondering around in Congress.

PROTECT IP / SOPA Breaks The Internet from Fight for the Future on Vimeo.

The White House has already chimed in against certain parts of SOPA, realizing the bill would hinder innovation and free speech.

I have decided that the main page to Awesomely-Aloof will be a blackout page, but I had previously placed a banner on this blog, as I’m too lazy to blackout the whole site. Of course, I realize on my part it doesn’t matter, but I’m sure others with small sites are joining in with the larger sites that will definitely make for a very interesting day.

The point of the blackout is to show that if the bill passes, this would be what the Internet would become, lots of nothing.

Some large sites, such as the major search engine, Google, will place a link on its homepage in protest. Wikipedia (the large online encyclopedia) plans to shutdown the English portion of its site for the day.

And, if these bills make it through, the blame would be on the usual suspects: MPAA and RIAA (Movies and Music industry).

The article linked below from BusinessWeek had quotes that say sites like Wikipedia and blogs and Social Networking sites would be unaffected by the bill and shutting down a site as protest is nothing but fear. [Honestly, though, I think tech experts know more about the bill and what it'll do than anyone Congressional politician, and it's the lobbying groups of the movies and music industries that are essentially paying them to say whatever they want them to say]. However, I say, if big companies get their way, what’s to stop future legislation on just blocking foreign site altogether? That’s how I see it, and that’s why it needs to be stopped.

Learn more about the Internet blackout: SOPA STRIKE
Google Plans Home Page Protest

As a Netflix subscriber, with the current $9.99 DVD-streaming combo option that will cease to exist come Sept. 1 to current subscribers, I thought I’ll weigh in on what’s going on.

As most people are aware, Netflix made a streaming only option for 7.99, while increasing to 9.99 for having unlimited streaming and DVDs (1 at a time), last November. Going from 8.99 to 9.99 wasn’t a big deal, I think most people understood as it costs money to send out DVDs (you know, postage). Now, with Netflix set to separate their two services, having the already existing 7.99 streaming only, and adding a 7.99 DVD-only, meaning to have both, you add those together to get the $15.98/mo, which is what current $9.99 subscribers will be paying, starting Sept 1, unless they decide one way or another, or as some people (stupidly) are threatening to do, canceling altogether.

I find canceling to be stupid, as Netflix is by far the best paid streaming option out there. Right now, even the paid Hulu Plus has ads, while Netflix doesn’t. The streaming limits of Netflix is why people liked the DVD option. All the other streaming sites have limitations to what they offer, because it’s all a matter of what licensing rights they can get. It’s not Netflix’s fault that Warner Bros. doesn’t want Netflix to even had the DVDs available until 30 days after release date (I believe same goes with Redbox). It’s not Netflix’s fault that HBO and Showtime don’t want their shows available to stream, even after a season has been released to DVD/Blu-Ray and is available to rent in that form. Though, in our eyes, being able to rent the DVD or Blu-Ray out should be seen as the same as streaming, when it comes to studios, they don’t see it that way.

From their fear that streaming is easier to rip (though, DVDs are easy to rip, but whatever), or they think people won’t subscribe to their premium network if they can just stream it, about eight months after the season ended (I’m using True Blood‘s releases as a guide for that number). Well, same can be said if they can rent it as well, but, whatever.

None of these are Netflix’s fault. And, now, their partnership with Starz could be lessened when the contract is up (I believe in January). Right now, current shows from Starz as a 90-day wait period, as Starz is hoping some people would subscribe for the course of a season to what a show now, versus waiting. If this experience shows that people were okay to wait, it wouldn’t surprise me that Starz doesn’t renew any deal with Netflix.

But, if Netflix can phase the option for DVDs out completely (as it is their goal), then funds could potentially go towards purchasing more (or even better) rights to streaming shows and movies. Of course, don’t expect HBO, as they have their HBO Go service, which is only available to subscribers (and not even all, as I know Time Warner customers don’t get it). Would it be nice to allow people who don’t want to pay an arm and a leg for digital cable (which, I think is at least required to even get premiums, so set-top box fees on top of minimum digital cable, it’s just ridiculous).

Worse yet, ISPs aren’t happy with Netflix, which accounts for a good chunk of web traffic in peak hours now. That’s why ISPs experimented and implemented bandwidth caps. This is one reason why we need government regulations to prevent ISPs from jacking up prices while speeds see no improvement. If we can get some good investments into fiber optics in more places, then cable companies will have more competitors, and thus, will have to have lower prices just to compete.

But I’m getting into something else, so back to Netflix. I myself like the DVD option, but like others, I only rent out a DVD about once a week (I work full time, I hardly have time to stream with Netflix). Though I get why Netflix is doing this (phase out DVDs by pushing people to go streaming), I think they could go about it better. If someone makes use of the unlimited DVDs on top of the streaming, then they should essentially pay for the two options (If they squeeze 2 DVDs in a week, that $7.99 a month plan is cheaper than buying from Pay-Per-View (which is about $4 a movie), cheaper than renting from iTunes (again, $4), renting from any Blockbuster or video store that has somehow managed to stay in business (and those require going out and using gas, plus risk of late-fees which apparently plagued people who rented a movie without considering if they had time to watch it that night or couldn’t get it returned in time), and is about that same as the $1 rentals of Redbox ($1 a day, that is, so if you have the movie in your possession for two days before you get to return it, it could add up.

But, if you’re like me, you don’t rent but no more than 4 DVDs a month from Netflix, so, I think it’ll be fair to keep a 9.99 plan with a DVD limit of, say, 2 a month. I think that would be fair.

So, come September 1st, would I drop my DVD side and go streaming only? I don’t know. There is a large streaming library, but, new releases are DVD only and come with wait times as everyone wants to see a new movie. Right now, my DVD Queue has some TV shows not available to stream and aren’t syndicated on any network (I’m watching Night Court now (which I’ve had since Thursday), actually, so I can send it off tomorrow and get a new one Friday (I Am Number Four is next on my list).

I have until September to ponder over it, but for the extra 8 bucks, I would need to squeeze in two a week to justify the increase, which could be possible when hours are cut in the fall (I got Netflix when I was unemployed, and used a lot of it when I got a part time job, but full time, I can afford it better but not using it as much, interesting huh?).

I am the owner of a Playstation 3. I do have an account with the Playstation Network, which recently has been in the news due to an attack on the network that prompted Sony to shut the PSN network down. The last few weeks has been a multitude of news, as everyone’s eyes were on the Royal Wedding (which that overshadowed the serious storm that hit Alabama), and now, with the death of Osama bin Laden, this huge security breach may have yet to reach everyone (though Sony has sent a mass email to customers, but whether all 77 million customers of the PSN, who knows?).

I want to be quick to point out, the last few times I used the Playstation store, it was with funds from a gift card. Plus, I check my account regularly, as everyone should do anyway. When I shop online, or anything in which I may provide a billing/shipping address, phone, and, well, credit card data, I understand risks even if they should have encrypted connections (SSL). My memory of the last time I used a credit card to fund my Playstation Network wallet for use to purchase games and add-ons or TV shows/movies is a bit fuzzy. I want to say that there was a checkbox to allow Sony to store credit card data, if so, I unchecked it. There’s no need for online service to store that sensitive data, unless it’s for regular transactions and is a very trusted company. Even still, one should always be cautious.

Why am I going on like this? Because I don’t have hate towards Sony. Network security can never be 100% secured. There’s no such thing. So while others are saying they are gonna switch to XBOX or whatever, fine. When PSN comes back up, I’ll get my password changed ASAP and continue to use it. People HAVE to remember that nothing is 100%. 99.9%, sure, but never 100%. So, there’s also the chance for the same thing, or something similar to happen within the XBOX network. Not too long ago, there were some “congestion” issues with Amazon servers used for cloud-base computing, causing an outage. Big companies, small companies, it doesn’t matter. If you use a service, at some point, there is gonna be some form of failure. And for the record, I find cloud-computing useful to some degree, but I still prefer things I may need to be stored locally.

April 20 was when PSN was shut down, and almost a week later is when Sony said something. That’s what I’m pissed about. As I tried to log-in, so I can watch Netflix, I just couldn’t sign it. I got some “Maintenance” message. They claimed they waited ’til they had more information, but that was their mistake. They should’ve alerted the public that there was an intrusion as soon as they knew. They could’ve put out that they were still investigating, and to check back on their blog for more info as its known, whatever. Even mentioning that, to go with the “Better Safe, Than Sorry” phrase, warn consumers that credit info could’ve been stolen, so they could’ve immediately taken extra precautions with their credit cards.

A lot of “Should’ve, Would’ve, Could’ve,” another thing a lot of companies seem to go through. Also, with PSN down, it wasn’t until yesterday they shut down Sony Online Entertainment, which operates “EverQuest.” Though it’s a separate service, for safety of the public, it probably would’ve been better to take it down. You know, just to be “safe than sorry.”

So, even if you don’t use any Sony service, especially their gaming networks, you still should always be proactive when it comes to YOUR credit account. The real villains here are the hackers, not Sony (except, their delay with news, they really should’ve mentioned it sooner).

If you have a PSN account, you should check your credit card statements (or check online for recent transactions). For more info, visit Playstation Blog for latest news concerning PSN/Qriocity services, Q&A for other questions you may have (they may have been answered), and/or the Knowledge Center with information of what you can do to protect yourself against possibly ID Theft and other info to how you can check your credit.

With something that seemed to pick up with Comcast limiting that amount of data their customers can access on the Internet, at about a 150GB/mo limit. We thought that was tough, now Time Warner is looking at implementing a measly 40GB/mo limit. The whole point these caps is so companies can meter the bandwidth and charge for additional bandwidth (and honestly, make it fairer to those who just check email and maybe visit a site or two). Could make sense, but 40GB/mo for about $55/mo (an even pathetic amount of 5GB/mo for $30/mo)? Seriously? In today’s world, people use a lot of bandwidth, more than they may even realize. Just from streaming videos on YouTube.com or Hulu.com, or downloading their music and movies on iTunes, or from Amazon, NetFlix, etc. Generally surfing the net, with pages filled with pictures, after a while, these things add up. And if you’re like me, they’ll add up fast. [To give you an idea, a full-length movie from iTunes is about 1-1.5GB in size, more if its a LONG movie. So three movie downloads can easily go over that 5GB plan].

And I have Time Warner, luckily they haven’t implemented it in my area yet, as they will start a test run in two locations in August: Greensboro, N.C. and Rochester, N.Y. Now they seem to still be working on the details, but in a nutshell, Time Warner may be fearing loss cable subscriptions (as they should, since I had cable, and I hate cable, no matter the company. Satellite is just cheaper with more channels and clearer and ALL digital).

Anyway, back on topic, this loss, could be one reason to the caps. Also, the overage charge seems to be $1 for each additional GB (or $2/GB for their cheaper solution of a slower connection (768kbps) and 1GB cap). And for about $150/mo, it’ll be virtually unlimited (so, if a person has the cable, the digital phone, and the internet (which to me is a bad idea, one fails, well, they all fail since its the same service)). Many people talk of the evil ways of Comcast, but their 250GB cap is less than $50/mo. Hmm?

Time Warner Capping Scheme | DVICE

Oh, and to add on to this stupidity, Wired.Com has an article showing that their earnings and such (they have graphs and everything) makes this whole thing make even LESS sense.

I just spent about two hours or so joining a few fanlistings (I have a long list of those I’m in process of joining, mostly all TV related, of course), while looking for some more to join later. I have this weird system set up, where I have, in my Firefox Bookmarks Toolbar, a folder for Fanlistings Joined, then a Need Join folder. Each one is separated into TV, Movie, Music, Etc, and Fanlistings Joined as the Pending folder (recently joined but not yet approved), and Need Join has the Ready to Join (which I will work on maybe next week, or if I get approved of about 4-5 more soon, I can quickly join and add the buttons to my site).

Of course, my site itself (www.awesomely-aloof.net), has the Joined listings pages separated into very simple categories (I don’t feel like separating them anymore with specifics), so they are just either TV, Movies, Music, Actors/Actresses, or Misc, although, I feel like I’m gonna have to split up the TV one, ’cause it’s getting mighty large. Then the home page has the little icons on the side, which I don’t want to take up the whole thing, but I don’t want to take off any I haven’t been approved of yet, ’cause having them right on the front makes it easier to find initially. I wish I just took the time to set up Enthusiast or something, but that’s more of a whole Collective kind of thing, and right now I only own two fanlistings (one for the band Tantric, the other for the song ‘Until the End’ by Breaking Benjamin, and I use BellaBuffs for those (BTW, feel free to join if you like, you don’t need a website, just an email)), for the most part, I just have an addiction to joining listings (I don’t know why, I just do).

Anyway, I’m keeping this post short, since it’s more of a rambling, and I am tired, ’cause a useful PHP script like Enthusiast would probably make the whole joining easier (and keep up with the codes too, I think, or maybe the CodeSort would have to be added?). I don’t know, don’t care.

So here’s to fanlistings, keeping up with people’s love of whatever is out there.

Sure it seems like the thing most people may have nowadays. All the cool kids have them, and all that blah, blah, blah. But you see, my main beef with MySpace, stems from bands now using them as the go-to place for information. It’s a hassle, since lots of people (average joes included), tend to bulk their pages with a shitload of crap. All these dumb widgets that clog up the screen, most very useless, and others downright annoying. I know most official sites to bands and artists tend to have music automatically play, so that’s not the main issue, but all these flash gadgets and hooplah, I guess you could say, makes it harder to find relevant information sometimes. It’s becomes highly congested, and a big waste of space and bandwidth, and my time.

I am forced to check out some from time to time, such as Tantric’s, only because that is their official “site” (the quotes is because anyone that uses MySpace and calls their little “space” a site, is completely misinformed. It, as far as I’m concerned, is nothing more than a page, part of a network of other pages. I site is a singular section on one subject. What I mean by this, you go to a MySpace page, there are links at the top to check other features and such of MySpace, meaning going away from the current subject you are on. I don’t define it as a site.

Anyway, it’s terrible more with non-technical groups. Average people who are most guilty with clogging their page with junk. Also, color schemes become huge problems, as I’m reminded of one from someone I’ve met that has light text and light background. It’s very tacky people. I don’t expect everyone to understand the basic concept of design, but I would like to think people could at least be smart enough to know that contrast is key. Afterall, don’t you want people to be able to, I don’t know, read the damn thing.

My sister-in-law actually signed up for an account, practically against her will, as her little brother and sister have their own and practically begged her to. She’s like me, finds it to be complete nonsense (plus, she’s one of the non-technical people).

Back to the idea of kids all pretty much having their own, this is where real problems occur. They mainly use them in communication with friends, and as long as they don’t allow it to be found to the public, then it’s not all too bad, I guess, but if they don’t know no better, what’s to stop a slip of information to their location. It’s also bad even if they are non-public. Their friends could easily crack their passwords (because it is like totally the hottest guy’s name, or whatever), and put very bad stuff on there. I’m talking nasty stuff that can ruin reputations. So kids, just because everyone else has one, doesn’t mean you need to too.

I went to school in web design, so I don’t need these kinds of services anyway. They were a quick and easy way to put a page up and have this little piece of the world wide web. MySpace is more on social networking, but also getting out there. Like I said, not everyone would or should buy a web host and install something like WordPress (awesome, BTW), and blog their troubles away, but MySpace is also a terrible way to go. When it comes down to it, not everyone should be out there on the Internet, as it is most definitely not for everybody.