Slashdot Mirror
Digital Convergence Likes Hackers (?)
sconeu writes "Wired News has this article wherein they claim that they like hackers, and that the whole thing is overblown. It says that 'Doug Davis, Digital Convergence's CTO, said he applauds the hackers' ingenuity and 'chuckles' at some of the ideas they have dreamed up.'
" Meanwhile, driver sites remain offline and software writers
continue to be threatened. That's how much they like it. C'mon, guys.
First off, I write for a living, mostly non-fiction for magazines and the odd book now and then. I started as a reviewer in 1984. I started off as an embedded-systems programmer, and still write benchmarks and other programs for reviewing purposes...and to have fun.
The golden rule of journalism: Keep business out of editorial--there should be a high wall between your reporters and your advertising salesmen.
According to the Dallas Observer, CueCat partner Dallas TV station WFAA didn't observe that rule when extolling the virtues of the CueCat during an advertising spree during the editorial portion of three nightly newscasts. The Dallas Morning News, another CueCat partner, reportedly did a story that wasn't as balanced as it should be, either. And now Wired has weighed in editorially with a story that was missing more than it said -- another CueCat partner speaking editorially.
Now I don't see WFAA-TV, and I don't read any Dallas newspaper if I can help it.
I expect better of Wired, which is one reason I have offered to write a rebuttal article for that magazine, one that covers the story from the view of the hackers that Digital Convergence seems to so love now. Just because it would be a rebuttal article doesn't mean that I can dispense with fairness and balance -- but the story will cover all aspects, not just those aspects that puts Digital Convergence in the best light.
If you want to see that story written, let Wired know about it. My credentials: hardware reviewer since 1984 for the likes of InfoWorld, Byte, Federal Computer Week, The Net, and other publications. Perhaps my best qualification can be found on this page that describes how I tried to let Digital Convergence provide input to an article I did for Planet IT.
More importantly, I have no ties to Digital Convergence, Inc. other than an interest in their product. After all, like many other people who have commented, I have heard nothing from them when I requested licensing materials a month ago, when the CEO ran the last letter on Slash-dot.
Those cute chimes by CmdrTaco et all are usually bad enough, but they're nothing compared to this gem from Wired:
"The CueCat is a cheapo bar-code scanner that looks like a marital aid and plugs into a computer's keyboard socket."
You know, I was going to hook one of these readers up to some Lego Mindstorms right up until I saw this...
I just can't do it now... I have this sick image of Lego robots trying to mate with each other...
NecroPuppy
---
Godot called. He said he'd be late.
I like you, Stuart. You're not like everyone else, here, at Slashdot.
Funny, I thought Diplomacy was a board game designed by Alan B. Calhamer....
--
"HORSE."
"HORSE."
-Flaming Carrot
I'll be sure to make a trip this weekend.
Umm, believe it or not, there are some of us that don't walk around in black anklepants, white shirt, taped-up horn rimmed glasses, and hair plastered in Brylcreem. And rare geeks like me even shower daily.
Anyone who says "geeks" don't care about looks is a liar. Technical points aside, a flat screen LCD monotor is just sexy.
jX [ Make everything as simple as possible, but no simpler. - Einstein ]
Patents, when granted for truly innovative things like they were in the Good Old Days(tm), seem less offensive. Though in those cases, I'd hope that the company would have cheap licenses so they could benefit society as much as possible. Recoup the R&D money, make a little profit, and then put it in the public domain. That probly makes me a communist.
--
Yes, I know the PS/2 ports have +5V and GND, so hot-swapping isn't necessarily safe, but it sounds you're saying it's more of a problem on the PS/2 port than, say, the old-style keyboard port.
What makes a PS/2 hotswap more risky than swapping an AT keyboard? (Obviously in the case of a serial mouse, there's no +5V supply on the serial port, but there is on a PS/2 mouse/port. But an AT keyboard seems to be the same kind of risk as a PS/2 keyboard, as both connectors have +5V and GND. What's the deal here? I don't hot-swap PS/2 mice, but have I just been damn lucky with my keyboards over the past few years? :-)
Obviously, a search for "hot-swap" and "ps/2" yields nothing but descriptions of boxen with PS/2 ports and hot-swap power supplies. Sigh. So any info on the failure mechanism you could provide would be appreciated. AdvTHANXance
Sounds like slashdot and their default password bug -Brian Peace
They could concievably patent the encryption/decryption process. Granted, Base64 and such are previous art, but you can patent combinations of obvious ideas, if the combination is novel enough. Given USPTO's current definition of "novel", it could probably be patented.
--
The reason stated in the article is that they sent out "notice of infringement"(whatever the hell that is) letters instead od C&D's because they didn't want to come off all "heavy handed". What a load of tripe. The real reason is that without entering into a contract (e.g. clicking "agree"-thanks UCITA!) there is no obligation on the users part. And without using any of their s/w to create new drivers there is no infringing on anyone's IP.
The best way to let them know is to place a notice on your website that any correspondence asking you to cease activities, and that is *not* a "cease & desist" notice will be considered as harrasment and will be filed for later use, if the need arises. They're bluffing, call them on it and force their hand.
eval 'exec perl -p -S `echo $0 | sed "s/.*\///" ` ${1+"$@"}'
if 0;
#
# code2html - convert code to html for posting to slashdot
#
# tchrist@perl.com
# Sunday, December 19th, 1999
BEGIN { print "<TT>\n" }# and the spirit of awk...
# first kill all the tabs
1 while s{ \t + }
{ " " x (length($&)*8 - length($`)%8) }ex;
# then the four standard naughty bits ;nbsp;# this is the most important one ;nbsp;# don't close too early
s/&/&/g;&a mp;a mp;a mp;a mp;nbsp;# must remember to do this one first!
s/</</g;& ; ; ;
s/>/>/g;& ; ; ;
s/"/"/g; # only in embedded tags, i guess
# make lines break where they should
s/^\s*$/<P>/ || s/$/<BR>/;
# make sure spaces aren't squishticated so we
# can do indentation and properly align comments
s/( {2,})/' ' x length($1)/ge;
END { print "</TT>\n" }  ;# ...shall be with us always
(Reality reasserts itself sooner or later.)
Since Digital Convergence likes hackers now, and since they are not going to change their license agreement...Would I hold Digital Convergence responsible if my cuecat at my mouse? After all, they own it...maybe they should train it better.
The anti-salmon
You are under no obligation to believe me, and I encourage you to abide by whatever blanket licenses you believe are in effect for members of the public at large, but I personally am only going to obey contracts that I've explicitly agreed to.
I never got a license forbidding the use of the CueCat for other purposes.
Ranessin
I bow to no one in my own level of geekitude, and now that there's a hardware hack that turns off the encryption I'll probably go get one of the misbegotten things.
So even such a geek as I can appreciate the inherent 'leetness of using the "Red-nosed pussy" (as they call it over at haveblue's site) to find your lady's sweet spot.
But I have to ask: did it occur to you to *ask* her where it is? I bet you could even get her to "talk you in". :-)
-=Maggie Leber=-
"The axiom 'An honest man has nothing to fear from the police'
Why is it that the proponents of "one nation under God" are so eager to get rid of "liberty and justice for all"?
"Just because I give you the Cat scanner, it does not immediately give you the right to go into business against me with my own technology," (Digital Convergence CTO Doug) Davis said.
Yes it does. What the hell is the meaning of the word "give". The cuecat you sent me is mine, and I'll do whatever the hell I please with it, including going into business against you. If you didn't want me to be able to do that, you shouldn't have given me the damn thing.
Don't forget that Friday is Hawaiian shirt day.
How are my consumer rights being eroded? I don't have a CueCat and don't plan on obtaining one... I really see no value in what they are offering as a service and fully suspect the idea will die of it's own accord. Besides, what kind of interoperability do you need with this device to foster competition? All it does is scan barcodes, that is easily accomplished with any number of other competing bar code scanners. You're wasting your time on this issue, it's not important.
Journalism is the art of reworking three or four stories ad infinitum while ignoring the endless stream of new submissions.
/. topic.
This century, Microsoft will be a featured
This month, we feature CueCat
This week we'll cover X-box.
(and we promise not to miss even the most trivial of GPL violations. Hypocrites? No! _Our_ licenses are inviolable. CueCat wanted to be free.)
If you need a bar code scanner, the inconvenience of buying one for $100-200 is that great? What happens if you need a printer, do you spend $99 or do you wait until someone gives one away for free?
Or are you just so enthralled with being able to look up books you already own on Amazon.com by swiping in the bar code off them?
Ohhhhh.... Ahhhhh... I'm so excited.
You're absolutely right, the Digital Convergence business plan is seriously flawed and offers nothing that anybody needs or wants.
I still don't see the point of all of this. I don't have a CueCat, don't want a CueCat, don't need a CueCat and do not intend to obtain a CueCat.
The only inconvenience to my life the CueCat represents is reading a bunch of temper tantrums thrown by children on slashdot.org.
note to friends:
when digital convergence finally wises up and builds a business model based on intelligent uses of the CueCat: (you know, the ones that you came up with), sue them for stealing your "intellectual property."
for fun and excitement visit
www.fear.com
Let's get drunk and delete production data!
While I don't even own a 'Cat, I've finally gotten curious enough about this mishegoss to fire off a note about it.
0 0.html
From: Robert L Krawitz <rlk@alum.mit.edu>
To: ddavis@digitalconvergence.com
Subject: http://www.wired.com/news/culture/0,1284,39139-2,
--text follows this line--
Mr. Davis, you are quoted as stating
"Just because I give you the Cat scanner, it does not immediately give
you the right to go into business against me with my own technology,"
Davis said. "We have an intended use for it."
I, along with many others, am curious as to precisely what legal
theory gives you the right to forbid people from making any use they
please of this device. Your intentions notwithstanding, when you mail
someone an item unsolicited it's theirs to keep and use as they
please, and when Radio Shack "sells" people these devices it is
represented as a sale, not a lease or any other kind of transaction.
You haven't (to the best of my knowledge) claimed any patent on the
device (much less one that would forbid someone from actually *using*
it in any way), and copyright on the software is also irrelevant
because the people using it in ways you have not intended are not
making any use of your provided software. Indeed, the most recent
work involves bypassing the firmware altogether, if somehow that could
be considered an issue. Trademark violations are not an issue if
people do not use your trademark, either. To the best of my (lay)
knowledge, those are the only kinds of IP extant. The device itself
is physical property.
I believe that a lot of people would like clarification on this
matter. I would myself, as it might actually be worth my time to stop
off at Radio Shack to pick one up to use to scan barcodes for assorted
purposes.
Sincerely,
Robert Krawitz
I picked one up at Radio Shack, and couldn't install it because the CD was cracked. Oh well. Nothing on the packaging says I can't do what I want with it, so I guess it's time to have fun with it... Mynn the Museless
Face it, people are stupid, and the internet is the place where they all meet.
DC must think that we don't know a blivit when we see one. You know what a blivit is, don't you..... 10lb's of festering excrement in a 5lb sack.......
> "The CueCat is a cheapo bar-code scanner that looks like a marital aid and plugs into a computer's keyboard socket."
What happens when the keyboard comes home unexpectedly?
--
Sheesh, evil *and* a jerk. -- Jade
Wired is distributing those Cue Cats. I got one w/ my subscription, and have sinced turned it into a flaslight, after throwing it away first (remove circuit boards, add battery essentially). I'm thinking of going to Radio Shack to pick up another one to turn it into something else. Anyway, Wired probably has a vested interest in making sure that the people that pay them advertising $$$ is happy. I honestly wonder if Wired isn't hyping these up and making them sound good to keep their paying advertisers happy. Yeah, I know I sound like a conspiracy theorist. /. must be getting to me.
Do you think DC will sue Wired for suggesting "marital aid" as a new hack for the cc? I can see the porn sites working on it now....
"Do you want them medium rare? Well done? Do you want fries with them?"
--
"May I have ten thousand marbles, please?"
If you need a bar code scanner, the inconvenience of buying one for $100-200 is that great?
.sig and put "Don't do it, then!" into it. That seems to be a good answer to much of the complaints I hear on Slashdot. Don't want to read the temper tantrums -- don't! Besides, if people have nothing better to do with their life than to bitch and whine about CueCat on Slashdot, who are you to judge them?
I don't know about you, but I can easily find a better use for that money.
The only inconvenience to my life the CueCat represents is reading a bunch of temper tantrums thrown by children on slashdot.org
I am seriously tempted to change my
Kaa
Kaa
Kaa's Law: In any sufficiently large group of people most are idiots.
ROTFL!
Kaa
Kaa
Kaa's Law: In any sufficiently large group of people most are idiots.
While I concur with the majority opinion that Mr. Davis doesn't seem to understand what "give" means (someone email him http://dictionary.com), I thought there were some other amusing bits, as well:
... 'There's a whole slew of things we're working on now,' he said. "
"The Uscan project...has already made it possible to scan a book and automatically shop for the best price among 40 online booksellers."
If you have the book to scan, why would you need to price it?
"Thanks to its built-in encryption, the CueCat could become a secure computer passcard reader. Instead of logging on with a username and password, a bar code is scanned before access is granted to a machine."
This is worth repeating. Everyone take a moment to chuckle.
"Indeed, Davis said the company has always planned to add extra functions, such as shopping or package tracking, once a significant number of CueCats have been distributed.
We were planning on doing that stuff too, so you better not do it first. That's not fair! (stomps feet, goes to corner, and pouts)
"[DC plans to hand out] 50 million by the end of 2001."
"The CueCats cost about $10 apiece, Davis said, and the company will spend a significant portion of its $190 million in private financing giving the devices away. "
$10 * 50e6 = $500 million dollars. Yes, I guess that would use a significant portion of their $190 million financing. Is this what they mean by "New Economy"?
-----
D. Fischer
ShoutingMan.com
Indeed, this system would only work if your digital identity was somehow inexorably tied to your person. So here's my proposal. We simply need to force everyone to have their personal CueCat ID tatooed to their body in a visible place, such as in their right hands or their foreheads.
I know what you're thinking - people will simply forge each other's barcodes and get stuff for free. I've thought of this. We just need to pass a law that prevents all people both small and great, rich and poor, free and bond to buy or sell save that they have the mark. Once the importance of the mark has been established, those who create forgeries will simply be punished by death.
I'm sure that there will some who will object to the mark, but once everyone realizes how much easier life will be, I'll think they'll go for it. I'm surprised no one else has thought of this.
So basically you don't want to comment on the story, but just want to piss and moan?
If slashdot sucks so bad, why don't you start your own magazine and spare us your bitching?
Praise the Force Field! Praise the Laser Project! Slackware Loon #19830573
DC wants you to run the scans through their servers so they can keep track of what people are scanning and presumably sell that info.
Didn't the wired article say that these things have unique IDs.
hmmm...
Diplomacy is the art of saying "nice doggie" until you can find a stick.
It looks like Netpliance has given up on their original plan of selling it as a loss leader and requiring a long-term contract. They're now $299, with the service at $21.95/month, cancellable anytime.
-- fencepost
fencepost
just a little off
now that they're in the limelight, it's time to CYA
i love hackers too .... so much ill launch law suits on them, threaten their freedom of speech, and shut down any negative comments they say about me. Common, if anybody buys this for one second they need some serious schooling. Oh hey...this just in.... The RIAA loves Napster Users . Oh and dont forget, Um Hillary Clinton Loves Jewish people and Domestic Abuse victims love their abusers oh wait a minute....they do. um ok
"sex on tv is bad, you might fall off..."
I lost my concept of community when my community lost all concept of me.
Hey hackers- WE LIKE YOU!!! But if you dont take your software off the net, we'll SUE THE PANTS OFF YA!
What a load of bull... It's just a little ploy to save face. If they really did like hackers, then all these site that were out there would still be out there!
-Brandon
Doug Davis went on to say that, "the initial difficulties between DC and the hacker community was due to DC's lawyers being set on the default setting of 'evil'. The problem was not discovered until they had sent several C&D letters out."
Davis noted that, "due to slight oversight many companies forget about default settings in products and only notice the problem once it is exploited."
- sounds reasonable. Even /. is not immune to it.
Gee, Doug, if you're so sure that there's no such "right", why not get your fancy New York lawyers to actually sue somebody? Why not let a court decide whether handing 10 million people a piece of hardware and telling them that it's a free gift doesn't give them the right to do whatever they damn well please with the things? Why not see if you can get a court to overturn the myriad rulings supporting the right to reverse engineer products for purposes of interoperation? Hell, with all the partners listed on that letterhead, those Kenyon boys ought be able to deal with any defense those filthy hackers could dream up!
If you're really protecting the valuable intellectual property of your company, then what's all this pussyfooting around? Clearly your "gentle" lawyer letters aren't working, as plenty of mirror sites are available with all the software anybody could want. If I were one of your board members, I'd be pissed. The "any publicity is good publicity" line is gonna start wearing thin pretty soon here. I want action, dammit!
Chicken.
http://www.flyingbuttmonkeys.com/useofthingsyouown isnowillegal/cue-decrypt/
:CueCat can function as a regular barcode reader-- no serial number, no "type identifier", no descrambling needed. Just a plain keyboard wedge barcode scanner. Pretty cool.
The
You'll need a soldering iron and a little patience. But it should work (I accidentally stepped on mine, so I'm off to Radio Shack to get a new one before I can give it a go, sadly-- do this at your own risk).
Of course, it also includes instructions on how to disable the serial number (if you'd rather go through the whole decoding process anyway, I guess). But that was even covered on Slashdot-- an anonymous poster placed a series of four or five steps to cut the trace to the PROM containing the serial number. I wonder why Slashdot hasn't been sued...
Funny, I thought their asses and brains were located quite close to one another. Maybe having their heads crammed up in there as well has something to do with it...
Yes it does, unless you've patented your technology. Otherwise, there's things called "free market" and "competition" which assume that there exists interchangable products so they can be incrementally optimized by companies trying to gain market share.
And anyway, no one is going into business, nor are the efforts competing with DC's products very much. Most linux hackers want to scan stuff they already have, DC's use is for things that people want to buy.
--
At least they're using the term hacker properly....
Paul Anderson
"I drank WHAT?!" -- Socrates
This weekend I went to my local Radio Shack and asked for their "free barcode scanner". Took it home, hooked it up. Downloaded a cuecat "driver" (not really a driver, just reads data from keyboard port where cuecat is plugged in). Didn't work. Also my mouse stopped responding until I went to a non-X virtual terminal and back. After a while, I realized it wouldn't work under X. I also noticed that the cat's "mouth light" stays on continuously.
Does the "real" driver fix any of this? Will it let me use the cat under X and will it let me shut off the light? If not, this thing is probably going in the trash. I'm not switching terminals (and re-logging in) just to scan an item--especially since I can't then launch any X apps from the data I scan.
--
Non-meta-modded "Overrated" mods are killing Slashdot
(Hey Ryan! Here's your proof!)
My sister in law had a cats who loved a rabbit, he
was so sweet to it that he licked it often. One
morning I found a rabbit's tail while helping her
find her rabbit.
ok fer you lawyers, not lawyers, and postem out there....I went into radioshack one day and I asked for one of the new catalogues, to check on prices through them for something (knowing they were probably most expensive and didn't carry blue LEDs, and never mentioning the cat, got handed one with the catalogue. Free gift. Do I fall under the people who were sent it or the people who asked for it
If D.C. wanted to retain all control over it's precious :CAT then instead of sending out the acutal Cats to people with their subscriptions, they should have sent out coupons for CueCats, and on the coupon they could have printed the EULA and required a signature stating that you agreed to the EULA and wanted them to send you your Free Cat.....
Same with the ones given out at R.Shack, they could have just said, "Read this, and Sign Here." and they would have been covered..
But as you all know, they screwed themselves by not looking into current postal Regs. and figuring out what everyone who knows anything about postal Regs. already knows... In my mailbox, I didn't order it, Hmm IT'S MINE...
They've released probably half of the 1 million to magazine subs. and the other to people at R.Shack stores, So that's 500,000 that are out there that can and will be used for whatever purposes people want to use them for....
Being electronicaly inept, I want some diagrams for hooking this thing up to a Palm Pilot so I can go into buisness against Symbol Tech. and start selling my own bar code reading Palms..... Free Scanner, Just Add Palm....
SpaZ
BarCodes, they aren't just for Breakfast Anymore.
Stupid can opener! You killed my father and now you've come back for me!
As long as the main purpose of this article was to bring about yet another flame war on the topic of intellectual property, I may as well jump in...
Open source, Schmopen Source. The mere concept is a buzzword invented for the sole purpose of sounding buzzwordy and preventing techies from having to use words like "Free" in their discussions with management, since "Free" sounds too much like "freeware", which we all know is lame "shareware", which is a euphemism for "quick hack for one job", which means that all this "Free Software" is basically no good for "Real Computing", especially since you get what you pay for and we didn't pay a damn thing for "Free Software". That said, Free Software is the best software. Not because of peer review, not because I'm a C hacker and can fix bugs with my superpowers. But because it is Free. That's a good patriotic American thing, Freedom is, and I'm all for it.
There are already plenty of Open Source type licenses. I can't imagine that we really need more. Finally, you can't open source license a piece of hardware. You either sell it, lease it, or give it away. Cuecat looks like the latter to me. You can either patent it or not patent it. Cuecat looks like the latter to me. No one has even suggested that there be replica GNU:Cats and thus compete with DC in the hardware arena, which would be a lot more of something to complain about on DC's part.
I do not have a signature
If you do, let us know what happens, 'k? Send it as a story submission or (more likely to get posted) as a response to whatever the DConv story-of-the-day is.
/. poster, but I have a little more respect for the US gov't than for these guys. Not that that's saying much...)
("DConv", because I try not to call 'em DC. This may be shocking from a
LOL! ;)
.NET. Gates is probably watching this little cat fight with great interest. I just bet he'd go for giving away cheap PC's to rope people into .NET. ISPs are already doing deep discounts on PC's to get people to sign up for three years, but at least it is a voluntary thing. What kind of rights do you think we'd have to write and run our own software on a free PC obtained in a .NET agreement?
.NET worry: free hardware that we don't really own (according to DC), a server (in this case tracking demographic info) that is the real profit, and a company slapping people (legal sense only) if they dare do anything but use the free hardware with their software and server. If hackers win this one, we have something for the legal types to use if MS gets cocky with .NET.
.NET, the scarier it gets. The Corel alliance just makes it sound worse. We can laugh at DC. Can we laugh as easily at MS if they create a world where new PC's are free (but can only be gotten with five years of .NET) and any software development using non-MS approved tools for non.NET purposes calls down the wrath of MS's legal department?
Mostly, DC likes hackers to use their database and pay them $20 for the priviledge. We are just lucky that MS is not as innovative, or we'd face legal action for writing programs that can accept input for Microsoft mouses and keyboards using non-MS tools like gcc or Perl (not to mention non-MS OS's like Linux).
Then again, we might just have some similar trouble coming up with MS. Don't forget
Cuecat is our nice little test case. It is the same basic concept as my
I know this issue is getting old, and people are getting tired of it, but stick with it. Slashdot is right to carry this kind of stuff, it is important. The more I hear about
Granted, the DoJ wouldn't go for this scenario. But barring a miracle, legal remedies would be years away. By then, MS might just have turned themselves into a monopolistic utility company, and software into another utility like cable or cell phones.
Artical mentions it being turned into a remote control. Anyone have a link? Chris
Unfortunately, enough Germans survived to produce the nightmare that is SAP.
You make the mistake of thinking you can educate the fundamental stupidity out of people. You can't.
So would anybody care to guess how much WIRED has invested in the :CueCat project so far??
:CueCats, not to mention the marketing investment to their advertisers.
Even if they haven't paid a dime to Digital Convergence, they surely must have expenses involved in the distribution of the
Of course, that wouldn't give them any incentive to candy-coat the issue or anything.
I know I'm just nitpicking, but the original quote might convey the meaning just a bit more ("rock" instead of stick):
Diplomacy -- The art of saying "Nice doggie" till you can find a rock.
-- Wynn Catlin, attributed, by Bennet Cerf in The Laugh's on Me
(Thanks to Merriam-Webster Dictionary of Quotations)
Quidquid latine dictum sit, altum viditur.
I only post comments when someone on the internet is wrong.
It wouldn't be the first time. After all, how many companies keep this close relationship to Microsoft? The case, as I see, is they "like" what hackers do with their *hardware*. I don't see violations of EULA around. A hacker that respects him/herself won't simply bother opening the software pack.
So... what's *their* point? Motorola and other companies may send us the heck for offering our services to develop a driver for their softmodems, for example. Will we be competing disloyally? I *laugh* back at them.
-------------------------------------
I see 57005 people
Only if you can create a Beowulf cluster with NetBSD clients.
Glückwünsche, haben Sie Slashdot ermordet, indem Sie zum korporativen Druck beugten und Subskriptionen einlei
Get yourself a cue cat, a 9-volt battery, and a Sharp Object(c). Taking the Sharp Object(c) firmly in hand, expose the wires on the cue cat's cord. Affix the bare wire to the - side of the battery and any other wire (excluding the evil green) to the + side of the battery. Now aim at the RIAA... oh, right, they're not lasers.
"Work expands so as to fill the time available for its completion."
-C. Northcote Parkinson
http://666pack.org/cuecat/Mirrors.asp Head over here for the site mirrors, pages, and code. There is a zip file with most of this stuff listed there. Grab it and spread it.
Poor little clams! Snap! Snap! Snap! Poor little clams! Snap! Snap! Snap! Poor little clams! Snap! Snap! Snap!
But I have to ask: did it occur to you to *ask* her where it is? I bet you could even get her to "talk you in". :-)
;)
True! One could ask, but it's just not as fun
---
remove SPORK.
Appended to the end of comments you post. 120 chars.
Personally I think arbitrary licenses are bogus, wether it be on hardware or software. For instance: "You can't use this product with any other product than XXX and YYY-suite from company ZZZ."
What terms you should be allowed to put on your licenses should have definite laws backing them up. Especially on "consumer-wares", where people often have no real choice. It should be a clear distinction between an agreement of license and the actual license on the package. Unsolicited mail should perhaps not be allowed to carry licenses. It's a bit sly to send someone a package they didn't ask for, which when opened, you lose your first-born child to the sender.
- Steeltoe
http://www.debunkingskeptics.com/
> 2. Needs to retain basic functionality, but could be extended (eh, this guy doesn't get it, does he?)
This is the same proviso of the Artistic license, actually.
> 3. Reverse engineering is 'infringement'
Pretty goofy, why would you reverse engineer SOURCE CODE? Unless it was some obfuscated nonsense like nvidia pulled.
I've finally had it: until slashdot gets article moderation, I am not coming back.
Roses are Red
Violets are Blue
I want some open source drivers
And hack the hardware too
Won't you let the Cue Cat be mine??
From the article;
The CueCats cost about $10 apiece, Davis said, and the company will spend a significant portion of its $190 million in private financing giving the devices away.
Don't you get the feeling that it's backward? It would make more sense if you put the cuecat in a blister pack for $29.95 and sell it at Office Depot and Radio Shack, and include a cdrom with some open source drivers and open source inventory applications. The purchase price would include the developer license you're charging for now anyway. Maybe include a point of sale app and barcode printing program.
Then they could also sell a subscription web based service that would make it easy to inventory/sort my CD collection. Then I would also pay to link the actual MP3's (or preferably OGG Vorbis) files to those names. Then, you could allow other subscribers to browse my online collection and create a "playlist"
Since I don't listen to my CD's all the time, I would have them available for "check out" for a couple of hours. When I was listening to them I would scan them with the cuecat and they would not be available for further "check out" for a couple of hours.
If the otheer subscriber wanted to "buy" the music for continuous availibilty and be able to ad it to his "subscriber list", he could do a paypal type transaction to whoever owned the music (it wouldn't matter who it was or who the licensing organization was). But first maybe the subscriber would be "whisked away" to the band's music page that could offer additional music or package type deals. I also would be presented with some check boxes that said "Other people who bought this music also bought music from these other artists"
When I was done buying the music, I would be able to downlad some barcodes that I could stick on the CDR's that I could burn . Also, I might would like to buy some barcodes that I could "snail mail" to some other friends so I could "gift" them some music. Or maybe email them as an attachment with a nice ecard. They would be allowed to 'exchange' the barcodes for other music if they wanted to. Heck, maybe they could go to a gift shop if they wanted to.
So, how 'bout it Digital Convergence?? How about letting the "end user" "digitally converge" rather than just big companies that may or may not want to advertise with you. I'd be willing to bet that a steady income stream is more valuable than one that appears "in chunks" any way. And if the end user doesn't see these little 'cue cats' as useful beyond making them marketeer fodder or spam targets, they are not going to stay plugged in very long, and they will end up in the 50 cent bin down at thrift shop.
Don't burn through your 190 mil either. If you want to include any copyrighted music in your database, you will need to buy some lawyers. So it would be a good idea to support that MP3.com legislation also.
If you do "burn through" the 190 mil giving these things away and it still isn't working out like it should, maybe you should keep us open source developers in mind????
If you notice down at the bottom it says "Comments are owned by the Poster." So I claim all patent rights to the ideas in this post (not including those that have been patented already). Since this is formally publishing these ideas, I have one year to file for patents. So if you are a patent lawyer, I need some help in getting these patents filed in exchange for a cut. Contact me at kphil@hotmail.com.
Take the cheese to sickbay, the doctor should see it as soon as possible - B'Elanna Torres, "Learning Curve"
I can just see the interview
INT. Digital Convergence OFFICE, DAY
Wired: So, what do you think of these CueCat hackers?
DC: I love hackers. I think they're great, funny, clever and I can't understand why they're all single.
ENTER: Intern carrying note. He hands it to the CEO, and starts to leave. DC reads the memo...
DC (Explosively): THEY'RE THEY'RE THREATENING OUR PROFITS? SUE THE MOTHERFU*KERS!!!!!
Is that about how it went?
Michael
...another comment from Michael Tandy.
"Goodness me, how unlike the FBI to abuse the trust of the American public." -- The Onion
But that's not how the law works. Nor should the law be made to work the way Mr. Davis wants it.
How do we inform Mr. Davis of this fact? What possible means could we use to drive this point home with him? People have tried hacking, but they get cease-and-infringe letters. Obviously (to me anyway), sending hate mail is not a useful answer. And people have sent him many, many letters threatening his company under postal statutes; made loud noises about outing their idiocy to their shareholders; and other such thumb-their-nose letters.
Does reasoned mail work? Has anyone actually sent him a letter that reads, "Sorry, Mr. Davis, but the law doesn't work your way?" I'd be curious to find out if he's replied to anything but postings of drivers on the web.
John
The Church of the SubGenius -- because somebody had to put all that slack in there...
John
So, for $20, you can get a license that will let you "reverse-engineer" the cuecat, although there are some restrictions (not listed in the article.)
DC said it cost them only about $10/cat -- so they figure they can make $20/cat in licensing. Out of millions of cats distributed, tho, they've only sold 22 licenses. Big suprise?
--
Wooden armaments to battle your imaginary foes!
Of all the freaking nerve!
WIRED needs to fess up that they screwed up on this one and apologize to their readership. Not run self serving PR drivel like this article. Time was when they would have looked into something like this before selling us all down the river.
I remember when WIRED really was about "new thinking for a new medium".
We'd like to know a little bit about you for our files
Are these barcode scanners still available at radio shack? (with the catalogs) I've been meaning to pick one up but thus far haven't had the time.
When I first read this I thought they meant the ID embedded into each Cat. That would be a little better...plug your cat in, scan ANYTHING and it knows what cat to login as. Weak, but still better than what they are proposing.
Okay...so I have a barcode to scan. Wow-they encrypted it so I don't know what the numbers are. So I take the barcode, pass it under another scanner, find out what the bar code numbers are and print up my own with any number of custom programs.
Assuming that it was even worth the trouble and there wasn't a photocopier.
"Yeah...we're cool at Digital Convergance. We're elite....give us warez."
You mean like sticking it up your ass? here and here.
--
"Open source is good." - Steve Jobs
"Open source is evil." - Microsoft
He claims they offer a "mostly open source license" but then goes on to point out:
1. Costs $20 (open?)
2. Needs to retain basic functionality, but could be extended (eh, this guy doesn't get it, does he?)
3. Reverse engineering is 'infringement'
4. Can't compete with DC.
Okay, he's obviously top management as a CTO, so I will cut him some slack based ont eh inevitable brain damage that always seems to follow when one accepts an Executive position, but come on! To even use a reference of open source is ludicrous.
Ah well, ony those who wish to be enlightened can be...
Marc
On September 6th, I had emailed ceo@digitalconvergence.com and ddavis@digitalconvergence.com requesting information on how to obtain a license and so far no one has gotten back to me. Are the 22 present licensees people that know Davis personally or something? If he wants other to "follow suit" then why doesn't he respond to emails?!
Argh, this is all very interesting but since in this side of atlantic the devices are rather unavailable I quess I won't be able to cataloque my CD/Book/Video/Whatever collections as here (albeit industrial grade) universal barcode scanner costs about $400. Which is a tad too much.
I'm wondering on how hard it would be to build one ?
I reckon a bright LED (or laser, leds just are cheaper) and photoresistor is needed for I/O then we need some microprosessor to decode the code and send it as correct keyboard codes to the port.
Sounds easy ? Well I'm pretty sure it isn't, so anyone with experience in electronics have comments on this ??
You just have to make sure the code is released as well. As a matter of fact, you have to release the code even if you're giving it away for free.
Methinks you are being too subtle for the slashdot audience.
Incidentaly, I presume that you are aware that the double bar at the beginning middle and end of barcodes is the same as the barcode for a 6.
Does DC have a right to dictate the use of a product that was given away for free?
At present they have no rights to dicate anything like that, regardless of how much money they sell the product for. They would only have any such rights if they leased such a product.
No doubt in places like the US someone is trying to get a law passed which would allow such activity.
"It was astonishing to us," he said. "We've created a hobbyist cult which we didn't anticipate."
Their legal threats have created a hobbyist cult, dedicated to mocking DC and basically using our hardware to do whatever we want.
"Just because I give you the Cat scanner, it does not immediately give you the right to go into business against me with my own technology," Davis said.
He's absolutely right. DC sending you free hardware did not in any way diminish your right to go into business against DC using the hardware that they gave you for free.
"We have an intended use for it."
not to mention a business plan that would have earned a failing grade in business school. The real world gives out similar grades.
"People can't expect to take one of our devices and run it through their own engine," he said. "There are boundaries.... It must still do what it was built for, but they can extend its functionality."
I wonder if he actually knows that he's absolutely wrong, or if he really believes this. If he's looking for a bunch of kids who are ignorant about copyright and patent law, he came to the wrong place.
"We were trying not to be too heavy-handed," Davis said. "We're hoping to work with (the hackers) instead of against them. But some people don't want to be worked with."
All he did was send a threatening legal letter to dozens of independent software developers, and now, shockingly, the people they threatened don't want to work with him!
A lesson for the new millenium. Don't fuck with the hackers, dipshit.
When I was in grade school, there was a bully who would run up to the other children and push them into the wall. He also used to whine a lot about how he had no friends.
I'm sure he learned eventually, unlike Mr. Davis.
http://www.flyingbuttmonkeys.com/useofthingsyouown isnowillegal/letter-1.jpg
I say you should get serious points for getting a lawyer to use "flyingbuttmonkeys" in a letter
BTW, I tried following your link, but couldn't get to the site. Did you take your site down?
I watch the sea.
I saw it on TV.
No, Thursday's out. How about never - is never good for you?
Ok DC gave us CueCats for one thing..
Supprise.. we want to use it for that one thing...
We aren't compeating with DC or setting up an identical service.
Just writing the software for OUR systems to do pritty much the same thing it dose on Windows...
DC gave it to us and we use it.. Thanks for the GIFT...
Oh wait.. not a gift?
Yeah thats right.. we aren't allowed to use it becouse we don't run the software DC
I may suggest a new agreement... "If you write software to scan our barcodes it must do XYZ" Hay I mean I could scan it with an HP barwand.. why should it be a CueCat hmmm?
You'd be better off in the long run...
Your going after people who are just trying to support you.. Instead of a C&D just send a letter saying "Please make it do XYZ so our services are not bypassed"... hack.. e-mail the code changes you want and I'm sure they'll be more than willing to accomidate you...
(If you lose money we don't get anymore CueCats.. that's nogood for the people who just want to support your product and service)
So please... work WITH not AGAINST if you like the hacks.. then just say "We need thies changes so our product works correctly.. please?"
No begging... just be nice... if you gotta beg then send out the C&Ds...
We want to support you godammit... Let us use your product and service... gezzz
I don't actually exist.
Calm, calm, people! A credit card with a barcode would be just as secure as a credit card with the numbers printed on it. The idea is that you have to keep the barcode just as private as you currently do your credit card (and if your credit card had the barcode...). But the CueCat would make the process of inputting your credit card information into a computer drastically easier, without it being less secure.
Of course, if their encryption is crappy, and the information gets sent to CueCat and they can decode it, then it's not really so good at all.
It's certainly true that CueCat doesn't make barcodes any more secure. But you could use your CueCat to read in, for example, a public key in one fell swoop. It's really all about the fact that bar code readers are a good way to get from real world to digital world, and now someone's ponied up the dollars to make one that can connect to the Internet (and then distribute tons of them). The automatic encryption is just a cherry (and maybe even not much of one).
Yeah, the encryption really isn't that exciting, and the article probably did imply incorrect things, but it's not as bad as some of the above responses are making it out to be.
--
Make mine methylphenidate.
I know why DC is afraid to sue /. They fear it, as well they should. The fear... THE SLASHDOT EFFECT *DUM DUM DUUUUM*
I think Digital Convergence is getting all friendly for the moment because they're about to IPO. Lessee... if we point out all the faults of this company on internet discussion boards and and pull down their initial share price even 10%, that's a $10 million loss for them. I'M ON IT BABY!!!
(Be sure to point out that their demographics database could easily be permanently corrupted by angry hackers feeding them a mass of fake scans. This is an important risk that most investors would overlook.)
That's the only reason I got mine in the first place.
After getting outside of Rat Shack, I tossed everything but the bar code scanner in the trash (opps, was there a lience I was suppose to read?). When I got home, I hook it up, mucked around with it for a little bit, played with the seven line perl script, then procced to tossed it in the corner. Every now and then I'll drag it out, I'll slice wires, jump wires, what ever I hear cool to do with it. It allways come back to one thing, the CutCat sucks. It's a cheap bar code reader which is best suited to filling up a landfill.
MarNuke
It's really all about the fact that bar code readers are a good way to get from real world to digital world, and now someone's ponied up the dollars to make one that can connect to the Internet (and then distribute tons of them).
The CueCat does NOT "connect to the Internet." It's just a plain old cheap-ass bar-code reader that uses a "C++ for Dummies" encryption routine. The software, which is hardly unique, simply allows you to read barcodes and transmits the encrypted (*snicker*) results to DC's website where it is decoded (*chuckle*) and used to lookup a product. That's it. It's really not much different than entering an ISBN number at Amazon to lookup a book except that the reader reads in the number instead of you typing it in. Whoopee....
Ok... that was pretty smug and sarcastic, so I know I'll get flamed all to hell and back if I messed up anything there. That's how I understand the system to work though. Feel free to correct me... with or without your flamethrowers...
It's not enough to bash in heads, you've got to bash in minds. - Captain Hammer
There are many companies that offer bar code scanners that plug into PS/2 keyboard ports and require no extra drivers.
I don't see how wasting your time with this device helps. About the only thing being accomplished is to give Linux users a bad name... once again following the zealotry route that Amiga and OS/2 users did.
Queensryche - kick ass.
/. discussions.
More apropos:
Seven years of power, the corporation claw, the rich control the government, the media the law.
Fits right in with a bunch of
Does DC have a right to dictate the use of a product that was given away for free? Did the product come with a disclaimer that stated how it was to be used? I don't believe that by giving someone a product without prior consent that you can legally dictate how they use it. Does DC have the right to sue if I decide to trash, break, or burn the product?
They're sore because there lame marketing idea has found a better purpose and all that money has gone to waste.
I don't know who actually publishes/distributes Wired, but that is probably who the deal is with.
Doug Davis, the president of the Technology Group at DC, is interviewed and he refers to the developer's license as "mostly open source" because of the restrictions about any scans going through DC servers.
In other words, you can pay $20 for a developer's license to be creative with the Cue:Cat, but DC wants to be able to profit from your efforts by making your software use their servers.
And I thought the allure of open source was the ability to create software for the good of the community...
This is another view of the world.
Ah well. DC needs someone on their side. Might as well be their business partners since everyone else seems to think its a stupid business model.
They like hackers in the exact same way that I like ants.
Let me first off state that I don't mind ants. However when any ants get into my house, or my food, i squash them flat. Sometimes however, I'll see some ants dragging some potato chip crumbs across the floor...Then i chuckle,and I appluad the ants for trying so hard.
Then I squash them flat.
You guys drive me nuts. Take a product that is given away for free. Modify it against the wishes of the company that is trying to build a business model off of that product. Two years from now they'll be out of business and the Slashdot community will put them there.
Maybe if shashdot hackers worked with these people instead of against them they wouldn't be so reactionary.
Beware the wood elf!!!
We can make fake banner ads for it! The robotic marital aid! The colon-cancer detector! Magic wand for curing diseases of sheep!
___________________________
Napster-to-go says "Fill and refill your compatible MP3 player", which is a lie. It's not MP3. It's WMA with DRM.
Heh, What really grabs me about that statement (besides the obviously encryption joke) is how easy it is for someone to simply read a barcode from across the room, jot it down and later use a program to print a copy of it out. I'm reminded of the students reading other peoples social security numbers (teachers and faculty) from barcodes as a form of protest.
"How to Cook Humans"
"How to Cook For Humans"
"How to Cook Forty Humans"
"How to Cook For Forty Humans"
"Destroy science and religion. Science would re-emerge exactly the same; but not religion." - Penn Jillette, paraphrased
Oh, so you were thinking of its being used as a security token. "... is that your :Cue:Cat in your pocket?"
Of course the licence Digital Convergence uses for CueCat is not open source. But - where is the problem with that? We've had lengthy discussions here about what should be open source and what shouldn't and the general conclusion seemed to be that there are still a number of cases where open source is not going to offer a noticeable advantage to the company pracising it. Keeping that in mind, what's so bad about developing new licence-styles that embrace as much of the open-source-idea as possible? While I don't want to imply that the term "open source" may be used lightly, I am convinced that on the long run there will (and have to) be a number of new forms of open or half-open licences. Obviously though, if we want to take part in their design we won't be able to do without some openmindedness.
Basically, I was trying to imply that the CueCat device won't make a scheme requiring a barcode to be scanned to grant access to a specified device any more inherently secure than it already was prior to its introduction. The fact that the barcode is encrypted is trivial, since the encryption happens after the scanning.
----
"A fool does not delight in understanding, but only in revealing his own mind."
I followed your "disable the encryption" link but the screenshots and the actual insides of my cuecat don't match. They must've changed it...
--
Non-meta-modded "Overrated" mods are killing Slashdot
(Hey Ryan! Here's your proof!)
Huh? Pacifist coders? Where the fsck do *you* come from?
War may USUALLY be a waste of time and money (oh, yeah, and lives) but it's occasionally justified; see WW2 for an example. I haven't seen too many of the radical pacifists who'd deny that here or elsewhere.
God does not play dice with the universe. Albert Einstein
Those who fail to understand communication protocols, are doomed to repeat them over port 80.
Isn't Digital Convergence's request to halt 'improper dissemination of its services/information' rather like asking someone not to distribute information on how to get more horsepower out of your Dodge Dart's engine? Once we drive it off the lot its ours, folks. rubberpants http//:www.rubberpants.com
But...if you did outfit a robot with a CueCat, would it be sporting a penis or a pussy? ;)
(Oh, hell. I didn't really want karma anyway... )
Genocide Man -- Life is funny. Death is funnier. Mass murder can be hilarious.
I am very concerned with your product. According to the famous "Wired" magazine your product looks like a marital aid. This of course is of great concern since I actually own the patent on the zippy-fly-teaser. Your product seems to be nothing but a cheap copy of my world renowned self pleaser.
My legal dept. will be in touch, but reverse engineering the shape that took us years of intense study with thousands of subjects is an insult to us! The claim that your product is not designed to provide the same service is propsterous! We take a dim view of attempts to provide products or services based on our hardware!
Sincerly
President of
Zippy marital aid and teaser plasera INC
"Science is about ego as much as it is about discovery and truth " - I said it, so sue me.
Except they didn't notify as to what IP was being infringed upon, funny that.
"People can't expect to take one of our devices and run it through their own engine," he said. "There are boundaries.... It must still do what it was built for, but they can extend its functionality."
Ahh, we're supposed to only use the device in the way they want us to? Okay, then they should only use our private usage information in the way we want them to. (okay, I'm just being inflamatory, but this is fun)
In an attempt to encourage developers, Digital Convergence put together what Davis called a "mostly open-source" license just a few days after the first Linux driver appeared. According to Davis, the $20 license is fairly liberal...
Yeah, and I bet that if they were pressed, they'd give developers $20 just to get them to sign one of these so they could sue them when developers don't do what DC wants. Without such an agreement, it doesn't look like they have a leg to stand on.
--
Hey, wait a minute . . .
Seriously, this idea is about as good as giving a note card with "Hi, my name is _________" scribbled on it, and then requiring that everybody needing access to a high-security facility flash one of those.
----
"A fool does not delight in understanding, but only in revealing his own mind."
It's funny you drag that patent out. I was just thinking about how easy or hard it would be to focus the light from the cue:::cat to make a laser pointer powered by the ps/2 port on my computer. As it is I get about a week's worth of power for those cheap laser pointers, and the cat enjoys chasing the damn things so much I wouldn't want to deprive her of her playtime(BTW this is the best way to keep your young cats from waking you up in the middle of the night, chewing on your feet and wanting to play.)
I'm no EE and I don't have that much experience with lasers, but if someone could tell me what such a conversion entails I'd be happy to detail my experiences on my website, and see whether I get a letter from either DC or the original patent holder.
I know that's not how it's spelled, but they don't deserve to have their name spelled correctly.
While Mr. Fred Durst goes off and sings the praises of Napster, the record company he's a VICE PRESIDENT of joins in on the lawsuit. Can you say hypocrite?
Talking out of both sides of your ass is the corporate way - why not Digital Convergence too?
----------
ah honey, we're all resplendent - Bill Mallonee
"The CueCat ... that looks like a marital aid ...."
oooo perhaps we can scan our girlfriends and map out the path to the infamous `G-Spot`?
---
remove SPORK.
Appended to the end of comments you post. 120 chars.
If its that cut and dried, how about giving these sites that are being threatened by DC some assistance? Tell flyingbuttmonkeys that you are so sure that DC has no case that you are willing to back that claim with legal help if need be. On one hand, you're repeatedly dismissing DC's claims, however that doesn't seem to be preventing them from shutting down the various websites that are making the CueCat useful. Back them up!
I watch the sea.
I saw it on TV.
No, Thursday's out. How about never - is never good for you?
Digital Convergence CTO Doug Davis fired for illegal possession of drugs and paraphenalia at workplace!
"Are Earthlings white or dark meat?" "Cincinnati, racial epithets are a violation of FCC regulations."
"Just because I give you the Cat scanner, it does not immediately give you the right to go into business against me with my own technology," Davis said.
-------
Here's my response:
"Just because you give me the Cat scanner, it does not immediately give you the right to track my every move on the internet using a freakin' serial # and not have the decency to tell me about it."
Suck my white ass, DC.
It is pitch black. You are likely to be eaten by a grue.
Vintage computer games and RPG books available. Email me if you're interested.
Yep, that encryption certainly has proven to be very secure. I feel safer already.
Even if Digital Convergence had built in some form of relatively strong encryption that was much more difficult to crack, and nobody had written third-party drivers that bypass their servers, I'd be willing to wager that they would have been out of business or close to in 12 months or less anyway.
If no one had been able to figure out the cuecat interface protocol, most of us would have thrown them in the trash by now.
If it had "leaked" out that the cuecat transmitted a serial number, I personally would have stomped mine into pieces before I threw it away.
I wish I had mod points right now. My roommate's looking at me like "huh? What the fuck is so funny?"
It's a great way to exercise their lawyers...
Maybe someone should patent it?
--
Chief Frog Inspector
A feeling of having made the same mistake before: Deja Foobar
Gosh, how could I disclose that in public before getting my second patent granted...if USPTO just hadn't such a hard time to search for prior art in that case. Hey anybody out there who dreamt of finding a way of generating revenue through license fees while making people chuckle happily ?
When I submitted this story, I did put a little tongue-in-cheek comment about, "we haven't had a CueCat story in three days", or something to that effect. CmdrTaco edited that one out.
General Relativity: Space-time tells matter where to go; Matter tells space-time what shape to be.
By Digital Convergence saying that they 'like hackers' they're just to going to alienate the people involved in the reverse-engineering projects even more! Anyone who's been reading /. recently will know about the threats that they've made to those publishing alternative drivers etc, so I don't think they're fooling anyone. If only one of those hackers that they love so much could hack the Digital Convergence website, then see how well they get on!
... they taste just like chicken.
BTW, I never saw this one get posted:
Give a rest already with your vendetta against DC.
Nah, she's ugly because she's in a church of God.
I plan on plugging my :CueCat in to my Iopener which is networked to my Websurfer, while I watch Natalie Portman Movies flagged from my Hacked TIVO =P
enrico
If I scan my butt will it take me to the Scott Tissue homepage? Now that;s convergence for ya!
Build Your Own PVR/HTPC news, reviews, &
Wired Magazine is owned by Conde Nast. Wired Digital is owned by Lycos. They spun off into two separate companies long ago.
Hey, I think we all thought this when we first saw the CC. e.g. My comment on flyingbuttcats& lt;/A>.
As for marital aids plugging in to keyboard sockets, fufme's web site appears to be no more. A pity, that.
I didn't realise that my sig was broken, excuse me. I'm sorry to have offended you you Anonymous Coward.
Face it, people are stupid, and the internet is the place where they all meet.
Those cute chimes by CmdrTaco et all are usually bad enough, but they're nothing compared to this gem from Wired:
"The CueCat is a cheapo bar-code scanner that looks like a marital aid and plugs into a computer's keyboard socket."
--
RumorsDaily
Well, the PR release is kinda funny to read, but
the unholy ideas and whatnot that those breaking
the CueCat have come up with more or less embody
the spirit of innovation.
1) Find something (moderately) useful.
2) Find another way to use it.
3) Release this information to the general public.
Now, #3 is the step most people leave out. Everyone wants their patent and trademark and copyright, and exclusive use. It rocks that innovation is still continuing under the shadow of lawsuits and corporate thread.
Let's face it -- the old adage is true: Good programmers copy, great programmers steal. It just shows to go ya that this is as true with hardware concepts as it is software.
-- build a man a fire and he'll be warm all day. set a man on fire and he'll be warm for the rest of his life.
To the PR guys, of course they like hackers. Hackers are clever and good, and slamming us in the press. If they don't get the hackers off their backs, they suffer.
To the Lawyers, the hackers are bad. They are 'violating their IP' or some such.
The management cares about making money. They must weigh if the actions that the PR guys support will cost them more than the bad press from the Lawyers, or vice versa.
--
This message brought to you by Colin Davis
Colin Davis
This is what happens when signals from the brain to the lower body are in some way impeeded. Or, in this case, communication between the ass and the brain seem to be cut off. Consider the legal department whichever piece of the anatomy pleases you most.
"Just because I give you the Cat scanner, it does not immediately give you the right to go into business against me with my own technology," Davis said.
Um...Mr. Davis... everyone already had the right to go into business against you. The fact that you gave them the means to do it doesn't mean you gain any rights or your compeitors lose any.
If people who are displeased with CueCat's method of business emailed Radio Shack regarding their misgivings, the Radio Shack people might listen and a) exert pressure upon CueCat to listen to the vocal Radio Shack customers. or b)drop the CueCat deal as soon as they can.
$var = <STDIN>
$var =~ s/\\$//;
$var = <STDIN>
$var =~ s/\\$//;
this is slashchomp
> them in the trash by now.
Absolutely. These things aren't conveinent at all. It's just as easy for me to find the web site of some product manufacturer (say, Coca-Cola) as it is for me to take the dang thing and scan the barcode and let their software do it for me (Actually, it's easier. Scanning a barcode that consists of unprinted portions on a aluminum can with condensation on the outside of it with these things is an excercise in futility . . .).
The only reason I'm keeping mine is that one of these days, I'll probably take mine and use it to catalog all my CDs and books.
Maybe . . .
----
"A fool does not delight in understanding, but only in revealing his own mind."
Er.. there's something I don't get. If you use a barcode scanner to scan the code on a book, doesn't that mean that you already have the book? It seems like shopping for a book that you are holding in your hand, is of very limited use. (Yes, I'm sure people can think up exceptions ("I borrowed my friend's copy" or "I walk through a bookstore with a CueCat connected to me Palm"))
---
As copyright owner of this comment, I authorize everyone to defeat any technological measure which limits access to it.
Wired has been tired for years. Even the influx of the occasional Stephenson or Sterling article can't save that bloated marketroid trash from a low relevancy quotient.
The CueCat puff pieces are all they sell now--both on the web and in the dead tree version. You shouldn't be surprised they would embrace DC: they're every bit the cute Fetish Wired panders to their target market.
How the hell do you do that? I'd pay 20 bones for a cue cat license in that case.
Catch me on AIM: SigningiS
I prefer a void in conversation to a vacuous one.
my girlfriend thought the cuecat sitting on top of my monitor was cute, but not *that* cute
All I see is stick. Where is the carrot? Why would anyone want such a license, if it doesn't grant them any additional rights they don't already have?
---
As copyright owner of this comment, I authorize everyone to defeat any technological measure which limits access to it.
Why? Their business model is brain dead. Any business model built on the concept of giving away a "loss leader" is at best a risky gamble. Investing money in developing a product designed to be used with some other service, which is then utilized to acquire a profit is, in short, usually a pretty dumb idea.
For example, let's consider the I-opener (sp?) that's been discussed here before. Say the company producing these spends $250,000 planning the device, $750,000 gearing up for manufacturing, and then spends $500 per unit to produce them, and then sells them for $200 a piece, expecting the end user to use their service at $25 a month. (All numbers are made up by me here . . .)
Now, if they go through with the production, initially produce 1,000 boxen, and nobody buys one, they've lost $1.5 million and have nothing to show for it but a bunch of crippled boxen. In this case, they could sell 'em off to somebody else who might use them, in an effort to recover their expenses. If they sell all 1,000 boxen, and nobody uses the service for more than a month (they decide they want a PC or a Mac and AOL, they decide that net access is useless to them, etc), then they've spent $1.5 million and taken in $225,000. They're still $1,275,000 in the hole, and they have no boxen to sell off to regain expenses. At best, all 1,000 users will need to utilize their service for one year before the company ever breaks even. From that point on, they pull $25 a month from every user that is profit for them, but in the real world, they still have to worry about manufacturing new machines for new customers, warranty service, paying their staff, maintaining capital, etc. Sure, it's possible to make a profit with a model like this, but it's also possible to make a fortune in Las Vegas from the slot machines -- but it's not likely. It's risky business.
Digital Covergence's model is even worse than the above, because they invest money to develop and manufacture their barcode readers, develop their software, press their CDs, pay their staff, pay for marketing (all those infomercials), maintain captital, etc. Then, once folk get these barcode readers, even if they all use them, they still don't turn a profit. They still have to market and sell their demographic data.
Iin order for them to really acquire any sort of really useful demographic data, the folks with the barcode scanners have to really think that they are the the "biggest computer innovation since the mouse" and find them conveinent to use. Problem is, they ain't. They don't work well (sometimes it takes me 3-4 times to get a barcode to scan), they're annoying, it's a pain in the butt to answer all the questions you have to answer to get to install their software (Yes, I installed it, just to see how it works. No, I really don't care that they have all sorts of demographic data on me. It's not like I really have much privacy on the net, anyway. If I really wanted privacy, I'd lock myself in a closet with a box of Cheerios and keep the light off). If 90% of the folk who get these scanners hook them up, use them 3 or 4 times and then stick them in a drawer to collect dust (and I believe that's what will happen), then they're not going to get the sort of demographic data they're trying to market, and they're going to go belly up.
So, if they are outta business in two years, the Slashdot community won't be the one that puts them there, nor will it be the Linux community, or any other group of folk on the face of the earth or elsewhere. They might speed DC on their merry way to e-biz oblivion, where they will join the ranks of hundreds of other companies with equally flawed business models, but make no mistake about it, Digital Convergence's course was more or less set before the first barcode scanners made their way off of the assembly line.
----
"A fool does not delight in understanding, but only in revealing his own mind."
So it's one of those "scan, bam, thank you ma'am" kind of appliances? How conveeeenient.
Tongue-tied and twisted, just an earth-bound misfit, I
Learning to fly, Pink Floyd.
Wham! Wham! Wham! Wham! Wham! We Wham! Really Wham! Chuckle Wham! When Wham! You Wham! Mischevious Wham! Hackers Wham! Screw Wham! With Wham! Our Wham! Product. Wham! Wham! Wham! Wham! Wham! Wham! Wham! Wham! Wham! Wham! Wham! Wham! Wham! Wham! Wham! Wham! Wham! Wham! Wham! Wham! Wham! Wham! Wham! Wham! Wham!
"If I have seen further than other men, it is by stepping on their glasses." - Michael Swaine
hmm... if he says he 'gave' everyone the thing, he'll have a hell of a time in court trying to say he really meant "loan" :)
kinda makes you wonder... maybe what he and the ceo are really laughing about is the fact that they're getting paid god awful amounts of money for such a totaly brain dead idea.
Sitting Walrus Blog
MMM inst wired one of the companies that are distributing the cue::cat? It seems kinda funny that they are the ones giving DG the chance to try to suck up to the community it has alianated.. Of course this just a passing thought in my mind
What makes you think it was designed for a woman?
Ranessin
If you are hacked, and find out how you are hacked, then you can prevent it. So, in theory, the more you are hacked, the more secure you'll eventually be.
.sigs??
I used this theory when starting a MUD a few years back. I opened it solely to hackers, had them break it a million different ways, and fixed it so they couldn't do it... after about a month, the mud was, practically, un-hackable.
Of course, this is a simplified theory (since there are hacks that have no known, practical way to fix, and you don't always know how they hacked you), and it only works in certain circumstances.
-- Don't you hate it when people comment on other people's
Good quote, too many chars. Seriously, the slashdot 120 char limit sucks!