Slashdot Mirror


Jon Bringing WMV9 to Linux

julie-h writes "DVD Jon has done it again. This time it wasn't Apple the target, but Microsoft's WMV9 video format. There is as always a working Proof of Concept program with screenshots."

467 comments

  1. How does Jon by cdgod · · Score: 5, Funny

    sit in his chair with those two big brass ones?

    --
    This .Sig is left intentionally humourless.
    1. Re:How does Jon by physicsphairy · · Score: 5, Funny

      Well, the chair produces an induction in his... "Ooh! Tingly!!!"

    2. Re:How does Jon by Stevyn · · Score: 5, Insightful

      He's just a front for a large group of hackers. He's talented, but he doesn't just sit around and do all this by himself.

    3. Re:How does Jon by Karma+Sucks · · Score: 1

      Can someone explain the above comment?

      --
      (Please browse at -1 to read this comment.)
    4. Re:How does Jon by mcleodnine · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Yeah - but he's the one who get his "brass ones" nailed to the Inquisition chair every time some DMCA twit gets a knot in his gonch.

      --
      one better than mcleodeight
    5. Re:How does Jon by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      big brass cannonballs

    6. Re:How does Jon by Sein · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Oh, I dunno. the last time they tried that 'round these parts the Økokrim prosecution got slapped down by the courts. Since it appears to be a solution based around the VC-1 standard, and not using anything proprietary as far as I can tell, the likelyhood of Økokrim trying for a second charge is ... well, I'd say low, but not non-existent.

      Their chances of getting a conviction if they try approach zero though.

    7. Re:How does Jon by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      " two big brass ones?"

      Good thing he is not from Moosejaw Sask or you might hear ding ding when he sits down on his chair. MS will just have to change the codec again, and hope that Jon moves to Tucktoyucktuck, where every code monkey can lose their brass ones!

    8. Re:How does Jon by cdgod · · Score: 2, Informative


      B B B

      Big Brass Balls

      Guts

      Brave

      Courageous ... shall i go on?

      --
      This .Sig is left intentionally humourless.
    9. Re:How does Jon by Karma+Sucks · · Score: 1

      Yeah, he has balls, hahaha.

      Now what does big, brass or cannon have to do with that?

      --
      (Please browse at -1 to read this comment.)
    10. Re:How does Jon by Karma+Sucks · · Score: 1

      Hah. What do you know, I think I finally get it. :)

      --
      (Please browse at -1 to read this comment.)
    11. Re:How does Jon by LnxAddct · · Score: 2

      Wow DVD Jon is amazing, if he's reading this, thank you very much for all that you've done for us. It is so cool and so appreciated.
      Take care,
      Steve

    12. Re:How does Jon by Bitsy+Boffin · · Score: 0, Offtopic

      http://www.snopes.com/language/stories/brass.htm

      --
      NZ Electronics Enthusiasts: Check out my Trade Me Listings
    13. Re:How does Jon by 320mb · · Score: 0

      he does get alot of help from us hackers..........

      --
      === 'Kernel Panic' no sig found:
    14. Re:How does Jon by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      that's unrelated.

    15. Re:How does Jon by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      german hackers too

    16. Re:How does Jon by Kjella · · Score: 1

      Yeah - but he's the one who get his "brass ones" nailed to the Inquisition chair every time some DMCA twit gets a knot in his gonch.

      Twit, but not DMCA twit. So far, just some toothless twits, in fact. Unfortunately Norway (along with all of EU) will pass their implementation of the EUCD soon. Call it Euro-DMCA if you like, it is as bad or worse...

      Kjella

      --
      Live today, because you never know what tomorrow brings
    17. Re:How does Jon by aldoman · · Score: 0

      Norway isn't in the EU, fool.

    18. Re:How does Jon by HvitRavn · · Score: 4, Informative

      That is correct, however Norway is a member of EØS, think of it as a quasi-EU for those who didn't want to join EU but still wants a part of the fun. Basically most of what applies to EU countries applies to EØS countries as well. But not everything. For the interested norwegian, Odin provides a good read on this.

    19. Re:How does Jon by amorsen · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Norway tends to stay aligned with most EU directives. It is possible that they will resist the Euro-DMCA, but I wouldn't bet on it.

      --
      Finally! A year of moderation! Ready for 2019?
    20. Re:How does Jon by Orgazmus · · Score: 2, Insightful

      If you call paying without the possibility of changing anything "part of the fun", you are correct.

      --
      The system had the verbosity of HTML combined with all the readability of compiled assembly viewed as bitmap images
    21. Re:How does Jon by Zorilla · · Score: 1

      Fukenhacken!

      --

      It would be cool if it didn't suck.
    22. Re:How does Jon by plj · · Score: 4, Informative

      A little clarification for us non-Norwegians may be useful here: EØS means EEA in English.

      --
      “Wait for Hurd if you want something real” –Linus
    23. Re:How does Jon by dagur · · Score: 1

      That is why that here in norway we just call him GUI-Jon.

    24. Re:How does Jon by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      So you have helped crack what WMA9, DVD, Apple's AAC wrapper?

    25. Re:How does Jon by Bitsy+Boffin · · Score: 1

      How observant of you.

      --
      NZ Electronics Enthusiasts: Check out my Trade Me Listings
    26. Re:How does Jon by russint · · Score: 1

      Norway is actually the country that follows EU's rules the most. More than any EU-country (according to some swedish newspaper a couple of months ago, no link).

      --
      ^^
    27. Re:How does Jon by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Fearless would be a better word choice. If you place your all on the line that's brave because you've something to lose, but when your all is made of brass there's no risk; hence fearless rather than brave.

    28. Re:How does Jon by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yes, envious kiddies in Norway who can't tell the difference between VB and C/C++ do call him that.

    29. Re:How does Jon by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That is a claim which is repeated every time there's an article about him, and every time there is zero evidence presented.

      Yes, DeCSS was indeed a team effort by MoRE, a group which has never been "seen" releasing anything since (DeCSS was released 5 years ago).

      DVD Jon's recent work has been released under his own name. Are we supposed to believe that a group of hackers are feeding him stuff to release and telling him that they don't want to be credited?

      Please!

    30. Re:How does Jon by arlandbayes · · Score: 1

      DVD Jon reminds me of the renegade heating technician, Harry played by De Niro, the film Brazil The state views him as a terrorist but to the average person he's a freedom fighter.

  2. Nice... by Zen · · Score: 4, Funny

    Thanksgiving night, and there's still enough of us sitting around doing nothing better than looking at /. that the pictures are already down.

    1. Re:Nice... by FrYGuY101 · · Score: 4, Funny

      Hey, some people watch football, we sit around harassing poor server admins.

      Everybody has hobbies!

      --
      "If we let things terrify us, life will not be worth living."

      - Seneca
    2. Re:Nice... by DJTodd242 · · Score: 1

      Mostly because us superiorly connected Canadians already had our Turkey Coma. :)

    3. Re:Nice... by isolationism · · Score: 1

      No kidding. I figured I was in like Flynn with only a handful of replies to the thread. Maybe the American readers are too turkey-stuffed to type but can still manage to nudge a mouse around?

    4. Re:Nice... by ricewind · · Score: 1

      Not all of us live in your timezone or country.

    5. Re:Nice... by arlandbayes · · Score: 0, Redundant

      Thanksgiving night?

      Many slashdot readers don't live in the USA and hence don't celebrate thankgiving, heathens that we are.

    6. Re:Nice... by Wizarth · · Score: 0, Offtopic

      That or Microsoft has already taken their revenge, DMCA'd them, had the FBI take down the servers, and are now combing the logs to find out who to go after next!

    7. Re:Nice... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      /. has always had a US slant because guess what (I bet you'll never guess) it's based in the US!

    8. Re:Nice... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yes, because a US slant makes all your users US.

      All he said was that not all Slashdot users are from the US. This is true. Why argue?

    9. Re:Nice... by mr_exit · · Score: 3, Funny

      I dont know what kind of wacky "time zone" you are caught in, somewhere where it is night already! here it's just a normal old friday afternoon.

      What colour is the grass in your world?

      --

      -------
      Drink Coffee - Do Stupid Things Faster And With More Energy!
    10. Re:Nice... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Flamebait

      Because all the whining about US-centrism is annoying!

      Slashdot isn't some UN program or something, it's a fricken website owned by an American company and run by Americans!

      It is US-centric, but geez, get over it.

      It's about as internationalist as Americans get so just be happy.

    11. Re:Nice... by JanneM · · Score: 0, Troll

      The only whining I see in this thread is from you.

      Nobody is complaining about it; they are merely responding to the parent poster regarding possible reasons people are surfing slashdot even though it is thanksgiving night in the US.

      Grow a skin.

      --
      Trust the Computer. The Computer is your friend.
    12. Re:Nice... by empaler · · Score: 1

      Actually, they're having a heathen celebration. It has nothing to do with christianity.

      And, AFAIR, it represents one of the minor groups of settlers. But never mind that...

    13. Re:Nice... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You could have watched the Bears/Cowboys football game.

      Then again, it's probably more fun to stare at an empty browser window.

    14. Re:Nice... by log2.0 · · Score: 0, Redundant

      Not everyone in the world is American :P

      --
      Can your karma go above being Excellent?
    15. Re:Nice... by ricewind · · Score: 0, Offtopic

      Hold on a second. You accuse me of whining because I think that slashdot readers outside the US can cause a Slashdot Effect? The original poster appeared to find it strange that a site could be /.ed on thanksgiving night. I was merely providing him with a reason why this might be.

      And I'm the one who needs to 'grow a skin'? "Chill, Winston."

    16. Re:Nice... by B'Trey · · Score: 2, Informative

      Uh, some of us sit around broswing Slashdot while we're watching football. I have the WVU/Pitt game on right now.

      --

      "The legitimate powers of government extend only to such acts as are injurious to others." Thomas Jefferson.

    17. Re:Nice... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What coulouour is it in yours eh?

    18. Re:Nice... by mibus · · Score: 1

      It's Friday afternoon for me too...

      Guess the grass is greener on his side of the world? :-)

    19. Re:Nice... by ryepup · · Score: 1

      "in like Flynn" is one of the best phrases I've heard in a long time.

    20. Re:Nice... by toddestan · · Score: 1

      What else is there to do while the parent's PC slowly downloads a service pack over 56k?

    21. Re:Nice... by Lord+Kano · · Score: 1

      Dinner's over.

      What else is there to do?

      LK

      --
      "Hi. This is my friend, Jack Shit, and you don't know him." - Lord Kano
    22. Re:Nice... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You misspelt colour ;)

    23. Re:Nice... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Not all of us live in your timezone or country.

      No shit Sherlock. What are we only supposed to limit thoughts, ideas, and emotions to things that are mutually acceptable, understood, and accepted by all? Give me a fucking break. Get over yourself.

    24. Re:Nice... by Almost-Retired · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Uh, some of us sit around broswing Slashdot while we're watching football. I have the WVU/Pitt game on right now.

      That includes me, experimenting with Ingo's new RT linux kernel patch. Unforch, there enough over head that tvtime loses a frame several times a second, duly reported in the log of course, so now its thursday and I have a 58 megabyte /var/log/messages.

      Yeah, even us old farts take a chance on bleeding edge occasionally.

      OTOH, tvtime is running 10x smoother than it does without the patch. The box is stable, and snappier than I expected, and snappier than if it was running a normal kernel by quite a bit.

      Cheers, Gene

    25. Re:Nice... by stoborrobots · · Score: 1

      I suspect that JanneM was accusing the AC of whining in responding to you - the AC was the one who was accusing you of whining about US-centrism (which you didn't mention).

      I guess we'd all best chill...

    26. Re:Nice... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      there enough over head that tvtime loses a frame several times a second

      OTOH, tvtime is running 10x smoother than it does without the patch.

      These two statements don't seem compatible to me... how can it be smooth if it's missing frames several times a second...?

    27. Re:Nice... by cammoblammo · · Score: 2, Funny

      All your users are belong to US!!!

      Mate, I've got to get a life...

      --

      Cogito, ergo sig.

    28. Re:Nice... by anzip · · Score: 1

      Grass? There is snow on the ground!

    29. Re:Nice... by Erik+Hollensbe · · Score: 0, Offtopic

      I'm not trying to be rude, but Canadians celebrate thanksgiving? I mean, it's a very US-centric holiday, after all.

      Or do Canucks just like to eat a lot of turkey?

    30. Re:Nice... by tuple · · Score: 2, Informative

      Taken from: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thanksgiving.
      "In the United States, the holiday is celebrated on the fourth Thursday in November. In Canada, where the harvest generally ends earlier in the year, the holiday is celebrated on the second Monday in October, which is observed as Columbus Day or protested as Indigenous Peoples Day in the United States."

    31. Re:Nice... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I dont know what kind of wacky "time zone" you are caught in,
      GMT+0200

      somewhere where it is night already!
      it's still before noon, because i just got to work, and this week i get here extremely early.

      here it's just a normal old friday afternoon.
      normal? yes. friday? yes. afternoon? no.
      and we don't even celebrate thanksgiving!

      What colour is the grass in your world?
      White, and we call it snow. Why?

    32. Re:Nice... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yeah, snow on the ground here also.
      And thanksgiving was back in October too!

    33. Re:Nice... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I mean, it's a very US-centric holiday, after all.

      The first recorded thanksgiving wasn't even held in the US. So what makes it US-centric? Other than everything is US-centric to American's ;)

  3. two words... by youknowmewell · · Score: 1

    jock strap

  4. Why? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Funny

    The critical question is: why? There's no legitimate reason to want WMV.

    1. Re:Why? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

      To watch porn, duh.

    2. Re:Why? by way2trivial · · Score: 4, Insightful
      um, lots of web content is only offered in WMV?

      I have a mother in law who is Hungarian, when she visits, she watches hungarian language programming, offered only in, windows media format.

      --
      every day http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Random
    3. Re:Why? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You should have never married a Hungarian...

    4. Re: Why? by Alwin+Henseler · · Score: 3, Insightful
      1. MSFT said to people: "WMV9 is good!"
      2. DVD Jon comes along
      3. MSFT says to people: "WMV9 is not so good anymore, but now there's WMV10"
      4. ???
      5. Profit!
    5. Re:Why? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny
      I have a mother in law who is Hungarian, when she visits, she watches hungarian language programming, offered only in, windows media format.

      I think, you might have missed, a few, commas. I know Wil Wheaton posts to Slashdot, but I didn't know about Shatner.

    6. Re:Why? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

      Yeah... his children will be way smarter than him... always a pain.

    7. Re:Why? by commodoresloat · · Score: 1

      Haven't you heard? The terrorists want WMV!!

    8. Re:Why? by kidgenius · · Score: 5, Funny
      I have a mother in law who is Hungarian, when she visits, she watches hungarian language programming, offered only in, windows media format.

      What nationality is she when she isn't visiting?

    9. Re:Why? by caino59 · · Score: 1

      Tell that to saddam....

      I mean, Jon's a hacker and all, so that must mean he's a terrorist, right? Of course he'd want WMD.

      oh! WMV!

      Man, I gotta get some sleep, the /. titles are getting to me...to much tryptophan.....

    10. Re:Why? by ONOIML8 · · Score: 1

      "um, lots of web content is only offered in WMV?"

      Sure. And most of it is either pay per view or on a site that is advertising supported. So I simply email the webmaster and remind them that their content is in a format that can't be viewed by all. I further remind them that by limiting the number of viewers they limit their possible income.

      Sure, I don't get a lot of response to that but I have had a couple of sites reply and then change their content.

      It's not much of a "world" wide web if the world can't see your content.

      --
      . Quit playing Monopoly with Bill. Switch to one of many non-Microsoft products today.
    11. Re:Why? by subStance · · Score: 1

      Yeah - especially all the comedy central Daily Show clips of Jon Stewart. That alone is enough to keep my machine a dualboot win/linux box, instead of linux only.

      --
      Servlet v2.4 container in a single 161KB jar file ? Try Winstone
    12. Re:Why? by BrainInAJar · · Score: 1

      My girlfriend's family is Yugoslavian when they're here (in Canada), and Croatian when they go there...

    13. Re:Why? by DaneelGiskard · · Score: 1

      ...comas would have been more appropriate when talking about shatner... ;-)

    14. Re:Why? by NanoGator · · Score: 4, Funny

      "The critical question is: why? There's no legitimate reason to want WMV."

      You're right. Linux is so much better off with fewer capabilities.

      --
      "Derp de derp."
    15. Re:Why? by MORB · · Score: 1

      I didn't know you could program in hungarian language... And that people were shooting videos of it, and offering them on the net.

    16. Re:Why? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "I further remind them that by limiting the number of viewers they limit their possible income"

      And i'd reply, that i dont mind loosing 1% income if it saves me 10% dev time :-)

    17. Re:Why? by malfunct · · Score: 1

      If web content isn't a good reason for having the wmv9 codec on windows then HD DVD's will be a good one. Most of the options in contention right now have the wmv9 codec at the center of them (I think) and so it would be very valuable if linux was able to decode that video.

      Of course the next step will be getting around the enevitable DRM that will encumver those DVD's.

      --

      "You can now flame me, I am full of love,"

    18. Re:Why? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Congratulations. I wondered how long it'd be before some Linux fanatic said "Why do we even need this, it's shit". The first was you, visible post #12. =P

    19. Re:Why? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Hey, I got news for you (and them):Jugoslavia doesn't exist anymore. So they're Croatian both in Canada and in Croatia proper.

    20. Re:Why? by BrainInAJar · · Score: 1

      Yes, well... it's a matter of nationalism...

      If they call themselves yugoslavian here, it means that they didn't agree with the civil war.

    21. Re: Why? by superpulpsicle · · Score: 1

      4a. DVD Jon comes along again
      4b. MSFT has WMV11
      4c. DVD Jon comes along again
      4d. MSFT can't win, so they hire DVD Jon
      4e. DVD Jon eats donut and collect check
      5. MSFT profit!

  5. Google Cache LinK! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Informative

    http://www.google.com/search?q=cache:DgkoyrLRgNUJ: www.nanocrew.net/blog/+&hl=en

  6. whats the difference between. by Man+in+Spandex · · Score: 2, Funny

    wmv9 and a slashdotted site?

    One's a sick duck... I can't remember how it ends but your (you slashdotters) mother's a whore.

    1. Re:whats the difference between. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      wmv9 and a Man in Spandex?

      Nothing, both make for poor viewing.

  7. OH man by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Funny

    ./ 'd already !

    It that a record ?..hehehe

    Or were Bills lawyers watching ?

  8. Slashdotted already by Joel+from+Sydney · · Score: 5, Informative

    When will people learn not to get links to their blogs on the main page of /. ?

    Here's the Google Cache link.

    1. Re:Slashdotted already by Zen+Punk · · Score: 3, Insightful


      When people who didn't get permission from the site owners stop posting stories. Oh, and when the editors start informing site admins before they post stories and link to mirrors if their site can't handle the load.

      --
      Sleep is futile.
    2. Re:Slashdotted already by cerebis · · Score: 2, Funny

      Bah, there are too many bloggers with too little to say anyhow. Considered /. an evolutionary mechanism. :)

    3. Re:Slashdotted already by NiTr|c · · Score: 1

      Now you see. This is a perfect opportunity to use the new Blog Torrent idea Then we could see pretty pictures.

      --
      Try actually thinking for yourself. It's quite refreshing.
    4. Re:Slashdotted already by Mulletproof · · Score: 1, Offtopic

      Oh, so it's taboo to link to another person's site without their permission? And how many times have you done that yourself again?

      More times than you can possibly count, more than likely.

      --
      You need a FREE iPod Nano
    5. Re:Slashdotted already by the+angry+liberal · · Score: 1

      Now you see. This is a perfect opportunity to use the new Blog Torrent idea Then we could see pretty pictures.

      That would be cool, but I'm guessing a large percentage of /. viewers are at a workplace which forbids the use of P2P or unauthorized serving.

    6. Re:Slashdotted already by eloki · · Score: 1

      Oh, so it's taboo to link to another person's site without their permission?

      I think he just means posting /. stories, not links in general. Obviously linking in general is fine, but it could be a nice courtesy to request permission before slashdotting someone's site.

    7. Re:Slashdotted already by Zen+Punk · · Score: 1

      I don't maintain any kind of website, so fewer times than you think. And no, I didn't get permission, but then I never posted them on the front page of an extremely high-traffic website, the whole point of which is to click the links and then discuss. Don't you think it would be appropriate for Slashdot to contact, if possible, the maintainers of the sites they link to and set up mirrors if the site can't handle it?

      The Slashdot effect might make for some great(read: redundant) jokes, but it hinders the experience of us all; we can't talk about a web page we can't see. I know the editors probably have their hands full posting stories constantly, but maybe Rob could delegate the responsibility of contacting admins and making sure there are working mirrors to one or two people. It would certainly smooth out the recurring issue of "smoked" servers linked in the story.

      --
      Sleep is futile.
    8. Re:Slashdotted already by Mavakoy · · Score: 1

      >And how many times have you done that yourself again?

      Yes, I've linked to many sites before without permission. The difference is, if I do it, their server doesn't suffer meltdown 5 minutes after the page is updated!

      Maco
      xxxx

    9. Re:Slashdotted already by hummassa · · Score: 1

      I am putting on my transparent proxy that any referred-by-slashdot pages are to be fetched via Coral or something. I really think /. should Coralize ALL front page links and de-coralize them by request (like, hey, please, I saw a link to me in the fp, link directly so I can get some ad hits.

      --
      It's better to be the foot on the boot than the face on the pavement. ~~ tkx Kadin2048
    10. Re:Slashdotted already by Finuvir · · Score: 0, Offtopic

      Bah, there are too many bloggers with too little to say anyhow. Considered /. an evolutionary mechanism. :)

      What, killing the ones that have something to say?

      --
      Why is anything anything?
    11. Re:Slashdotted already by Captain+Segfault · · Score: 0, Offtopic

      maybe more bloggers should do what somethingawful does.

      That is, if the referrer is slashdot, referred gets goatse'ed.

    12. Re:Slashdotted already by ThousandStars · · Score: 0, Offtopic
      It's not taboo to link to another person's website without their permission, but it is polite to notify that person in advance if you're going to direct an avalanche of traffic that their server is unlikely to handle.

      Linking to CNN is one thing; linking to Joe's Weblog, average daily hits 150, is another.

  9. support? by Renraku · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Is it going to support those annoying-as-piss instructions in some files that open IE and point it to random websites?

    --
    Job? I don't have time to get a job! Who will sit around and bitch about being broke and unemployed then?
    1. Re:support? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Probably not since the VC-1 standard is for video streams only -

      " Microsoft has given the impression that its WMV9 and SMPTE's VC-1 are one and the same, but there are differences. Windows Media includes many things that are not part of VC-1, including digital rights management, metadata, a playlist and a user interface. VC-1 is purely a video compression algorithm. "

    2. Re:support? by empaler · · Score: 1

      It's a feature.
      That you can't control.
      Some would say that this feature, coupled with the rampant security flaws in IE, could pose a security risk.
      They are, of course, not completely wrong.

      But it is a feature, nonetheless.

    3. Re:support? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Ooo, yeah DVD Jon, port IE over to Linux, so it can open porn on Renrakus desktop!

    4. Re:support? by CaptnMArk · · Score: 1

      If the feature activates URL's automatically, it's about as annoying as popups and will be hated just as much.

  10. Re:Links Dont Work by MyLongNickName · · Score: 1

    Yes, it is a record. Just like the other five million stories that have had links dead in 0-20 comments.

    --
    See my journal for slashdot ID's by year. Mine created in 2005. http://slashdot.org/journal/289875/slashdot-ids-by-year
  11. Go Jon! by Tokerat · · Score: 5, Funny


    It's people like DVD Jon who make me feel like a total sham everytime someone calls me a "computer genius". What's he got for us next?

    --
    CAn'T CompreHend SARcaSm?
    1. Re:Go Jon! by geekoid · · Score: 0, Flamebait

      maybe it's a sham. Maybe you just like to be around the computer scene and pretend. Or maybe not, but the only way to find out is to do something.

      Personally, I would lay odds that you are no dumber the Jon. wait, that didn't sound right...

      --
      The Kruger Dunning explains most post on /. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect
    2. Re:Go Jon! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What's he got for us next?

      He's going to bang some hot chicks and make us all want to kill ourselves.

    3. Re:Go Jon! by Tokerat · · Score: 2, Interesting


      Well, i guess I wasn't very clear seeing as i got modded +5 Funny and also judging by your response...

      I've been working with computers for a while, I haven't done much recently due to unfortunate situations in my life. What I meant was this kid is cracking the DVD encryption, writing WMV codecs and the like...way beyond what my skill level ever was. I really am impressed.

      (People like my parents who have trouble with using their digital cable box are the ones who say "computer genius", btw..I'm not award-winning or anything, by any means.)

      --
      CAn'T CompreHend SARcaSm?
  12. Mixed feelings by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful

    I suppose I'm pleased that this will give me access to a wider range of material playable on my Linux boxen. On the other hand, I feel uneasy, knowning almost certainly that this isn't legal (C'mon, this is DVD Jon!). While I might disagree with the law, isn't Linux still trying to regain respectability after the SCO accusations? They may have been false, but claims of pirated software in Linux wrt this are almost certainly true.

    1. Re:Mixed feelings by TravisWatkins · · Score: 1

      Well, you might as well get rid of all those MP3s you have too then. Oh, and all those AAC and MPG files. It wouldn't surprise me if someone could find a patent that covered the ogg work too.

      --

      "But I'm still right here, giving blood and keeping faith. And I'm still right here."
    2. Re:Mixed feelings by mrchaotica · · Score: 1
      They may have been false, but claims of pirated software in Linux wrt this are almost certainly true.
      Does it use Windows .dlls? If not, then it's merely a DMCA violation. [IANAL]
      --

      "[Regarding the 'cloud,'] ownership was what made America different than Russia." -- Woz

    3. Re:Mixed feelings by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      <mjg59> http://linux.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=130849&c id=10921679 is great
      <AJ> FFS
      <AJ> mjg59: How did you find that?
      <AJ> I JUST FUCKING POSTED THAT

    4. Re:Mixed feelings by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Oh no, you just made me read Slashdot for the first time in years. :(

      QUIT SLASHDOT TODAY
      http://www.cs.washington.edu/homes/klee/mis c/slash dot.html

    5. Re:Mixed feelings by arlandbayes · · Score: 5, Insightful

      If not, then it's merely a DMCA violation.

      What DVD John has done might be legally dubious, but it is certainly not immoral or unethical.

    6. Re:Mixed feelings by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

      1) Well, you may never be able to play wmv files if it weren't for DVD Jon.

      2) All you want is to be able to view a file that is freely downloadable.

      3) If MS wants their royalities, then they should develop a version for the *nix folks. But as you know, they won't develop anything for Linux / BSD because it could eventually lead people away from their base product Windows (cash cow).

      As a side note: I think the term for cash cow is a little mis-leading for MS. Should be more like cash elephant.

      JMHO.

    7. Re:Mixed feelings by mrchaotica · · Score: 1

      Oh, definitely! I didn't say otherwise, did I?

      --

      "[Regarding the 'cloud,'] ownership was what made America different than Russia." -- Woz

    8. Re:Mixed feelings by Almost-Retired · · Score: 5, Insightful

      It wouldn't surprise me if someone could find a patent that covered the ogg work too.

      Go ahead, bet the farm on it, and I'll cover a tenner of it, betting on ogg being clean. That gauntlet was thrown down 2+ years ago by the ogg/vorbis folks who after the mp3 camp claimed there had to be an infringement AIUI, mailed a copy of the code to the fahnhoffer (sp, please, I'm american and I couldn't spell that right if it was painted on the friggin wall) legal folks and dared them to find an infringment. 2 years later, there has been no further saber rattling by the fahnhoffer people.

      Besides, if you'll take a 192 kilobit mp3, and compare it to an about 160 kilobyte variable rate ogg, about a g7 quality, I challenge you to an a/b test where you have no idea which is which. BUT, you'll very reliably pick the ogg as the best sounding of the two, and do it well over 95% of the time.

      Hell, my ears are 70 years old and I wore out 3 rifle barrels before I ever bought any earmuffs, so they aren't cherry ears by any means (Carhart notches 120 db deep for instance), but I did that comparison and picked the ogg nearly 100% of the time.

      Gawd I get tired of hearing winderz sheeple claim the linux camp is nothing but a bunch of thieves. Is your copy of winderz legal? More than likely its a bit of a grey market from some cloner. If I had any M$ on site, it would be 100% legal, but I've never owned an M$ product other than whats in the roms of some of my vintage computers, and I don't intend to expand that, ever... If I need dos for something, its drdos-7.03 that gets booted.

      You may have intended that to be sarcasm, but it wasn't taken that way.

      No Cheers, Gene

    9. Re:Mixed feelings by LnxAddct · · Score: 1

      My understanding is that this is completely legal if your using it for compatibility reasons (isn't that why he won that last law suit, and why Real can support ITMS?) Microsoft isn't releasing a wmv product for linux so technically this is the only way to make it compatible.
      Regards,
      Steve

    10. Re:Mixed feelings by emrysk · · Score: 1

      I agree completely, since no pirated software runs on any other operating system.

    11. Re:Mixed feelings by TravisWatkins · · Score: 1

      Ouch, next time I'll remember to use the tags. :)

      --

      "But I'm still right here, giving blood and keeping faith. And I'm still right here."
    12. Re:Mixed feelings by EverStoned · · Score: 1

      This is one of the greatest moments in 0wn4ge history.

    13. Re:Mixed feelings by benna · · Score: 1

      What are you talking about? Does that mean that if somebody does something illegal on windows that makes windows illegal too? That logic just does not hold any water.

      --
      "It is not how things are in the world that is mystical, but that it exists." -Ludwig Wittgenstein
    14. Re:Mixed feelings by Alsee · · Score: 3, Funny

      192 kilobit mp3, and compare it to an about 160 kilobyte variable rate ogg

      Well I certainly HOPE a 1280 kilobit ogg would win :D

      -

      --
      - - You can't take something off the Internet! That's like trying to take pee out of a swimming pool.
    15. Re:Mixed feelings by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It is completley legal for whatever you want to use it for. Just make sure to licence the patents from Microsoft.

      Basically DVDJon did some free programming for Microsoft. Nothing much to see here.

    16. Re:Mixed feelings by euxneks · · Score: 1

      What a sad day when something legally dubios is not immoral or unethical. What sort of law system have you made for yourselves? (I say you, because I am Canadian, and in so far as I can see, we have a few more rights)

      --
      in girum imus nocte et consumimur igni
    17. Re:Mixed feelings by Almost-Retired · · Score: 1

      Oh Fudge. Obviously. Chalk it up to typing while a bit pissed off. Of course I meant a 160 kilobit encoding, and unsaid also, but from the same, preferably live source. Or an audiodat of it maybe, one of my friends has a couple of those things. Ripping from a cd, as its only 16 bit, just doesn't cut it. The cd isn't always that good by the time the engineers get through 'adjusting' it.

      Cheers, Gene

    18. Re:Mixed feelings by slavemowgli · · Score: 1

      Since you asked for the correct spelling: Fraunhofer.

      --
      quidquid latine dictum sit altum videtur.
    19. Re:Mixed feelings by Almost-Retired · · Score: 1

      1) That doesn't look right, the 'r' is the odd man out, and 2) theres no mention of their mp3 patents or encoders on either the US site or the German site.

      So, I went googling, and the spelling is correct after all, but its the Fraunhofer Institute, at

      Googling just for fraunhofer only gets you some laser company. Apparently not connected to the Institute.

      Cheers, Gene

    20. Re:Mixed feelings by slavemowgli · · Score: 1

      Googling for "fraunhofer mp3" yields this as the first hit: http://www.iis.fraunhofer.de/amm/techinf/layer3/

      --
      quidquid latine dictum sit altum videtur.
    21. Re:Mixed feelings by ttys00 · · Score: 1

      If you really are 70, all I have to say is I'm impressed. I hope I'm still as 'with it' at 50 as you are now. Respect++.

    22. Re:Mixed feelings by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It may actually be the case that hearing damage can make it easier to tell codecs apart, since some of the masking effects one codec counts on (e.g. a loud tone at a high frequency) may not be audible to you, so that any noise/inaccuracies in the remaining frequency bands will be more obvious to you than to someone with normal hearing.

    23. Re:Mixed feelings by Asic+Eng · · Score: 2, Insightful
      What DVD John has done might be legally dubious, but it is certainly not immoral or unethical.

      As far as I understand it's not legally dubious in his jurisdiction. He is not bound by US law in any way. Whether people in the US are allowed to use his work is another matter, but that's really not his problem.

    24. Re:Mixed feelings by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      He's Norwegian. There is no DMCA in Norway, and attempts to impose American law there have failed miserably (see DVD Jon's previous cases).

    25. Re:Mixed feelings by arevos · · Score: 2, Informative

      On the other hand, I feel uneasy, knowning almost certainly that this isn't legal (C'mon, this is DVD Jon!).

      IIRC, in Norway reverse engineering is perfectly legal, and there is no DMCA-esque law.

      Remember that the Norwegion courts have ruled before that DVD Jon has not done anything illegal. If he had, you can be sure the movie industry would be on Jon like a tonne of bricks.

      So you can rest well, knowing that DVD Jon's actions are probably quite legal, at least in his country. What other people do with his work in countries that have different laws, is hardly his problem.

    26. Re:Mixed feelings by evilviper · · Score: 1
      Personally, I convert all the audio files I download into Vorbis right away, if they aren't already.

      MPEG-1 is patent-free by now, so you can safely use it for anything you want. It's actually a pretty decent codec IMO. VP3 (on which Theora is based) is also free and clear, if you want something on-par with MPEG-4 to re-encode your videos into.

      It wouldn't surprise me if someone could find a patent that covered the ogg work too.

      How cynical you are is hardly a legal basis.
      --
      Slashdot gets worse every day... Pipedot: News for nerds, without the corporate slant
    27. Re:Mixed feelings by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

      Hell, my ears are 70 years old and I wore out 3 rifle barrels before I ever bought any earmuffs

      Now those pesky kids go some where else to play their modern music.

      Well, those that are left that is.

    28. Re:Mixed feelings by arlandbayes · · Score: 2, Interesting

      There is no DMCA in Norway, and attempts to impose American law there have failed miserably

      Wait until the Norway-USA FTA is imposed. Such an agreement will be sure to address Norway's appalling lack of anti-copyright-circumvention laws.

    29. Re:Mixed feelings by Almost-Retired · · Score: 1

      Well, the last time I did the math, based on Oct 4th 1934 for a birthdate, thats what it said :-)

      Born in my aunts house at 2518 Adams St, Des Moines IA, I spent a lot of time there over the first 15 years. Its where my seemingly natural bent for electronics started. My uncle used to fix radios for beer money, I was about 7 or so, and I asked him what was wrong with the part he was replacing, and I was hooked forever when he could not tell me what was wrong, only that it wasn't doing what it was supposed to. "I" wanted to know what was actualy wrong with it. Mother got me some books from the library, and I told him what was wrong with it half a year later. But alcoholism was set in by then and I'm not sure he understood what this child was trying to tell him.

      Cheers, Gene

    30. Re:Mixed feelings by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      From now on, this sort of post should be phrased thus, for brevity's sake:

      Ogg better than MP3 in almost all ways.
      Get Ogg for your players.

    31. Re:Mixed feelings by Tim+C · · Score: 1

      Well, your ears may be 70 years old, but with the references to "winderz" and "M$", I'm having trouble believing that your brain is.

      Gawd I get tired of hearing winderz sheeple claim the linux camp is nothing but a bunch of thieves.

      Me too - but then I also get tired of the open sores lunix hippies* harping on about stuff too at times.

      (* That's funny too, right?)

      Is your copy of winderz legal?

      Yes thanks, bought and paid for from a reputable supplier. Not all of us "winderz sheeple" steal stuff either.

    32. Re:Mixed feelings by Almost-Retired · · Score: 2

      Open sores hippies... Chuckle. While I don't claim to be a hippie (well not since the late 70's anyway, I haven't had a toke in 20 years, nor a regular cigarette in 15 & I sold my last motorcycle about 4 years back when I realized my reflexes weren't as sharp as they once were) I do find the image a bit amusing. And I'm well aware that dyed in the wool windows folks find us a bit tiresome. But, all those viri that self-replicate from M$ box to M$ box? I see them as mail attachements to be auto-sorted to the JunqueMail folder and deleted about once a day, before they fill up my /root partition.

      Yes thanks, bought and paid for from a reputable supplier. Not all of us "winderz sheeple" steal stuff either.

      Thats great. But the instances of the other side of the coin are at least as numerous as there are p2p users divided by 10. Or at least thats the impression one gets from copying the mail here on /. :-)

      And now I'm catching it because dinner is ready... And if theres anything I hate worse than being called too late for supper...

      Cheers, Gene

    33. Re:Mixed feelings by empaler · · Score: 1

      Currently Norway is sort of silent partner of the EU and they have large quantities of oil... (our oil, I might add*)

      They're set for economic independence until the US suddenly realizes they have a king (who therefore must be a despot) and kill half the population and expropriate the oil...

      *: It was Danish until some drunk foreign minister signed it off to them. Yes, that has happened.

  13. slashdotting... by |bazop| · · Score: 5, Informative
    1. Re:slashdotting... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

      Damn his desktop looks nice.

      My fedora desktop looks like garbage.

    2. Re:slashdotting... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      My fedora desktop looks like garbage.

      Set your "Session" options to "GNOME" instead of "KDE", and you'll alleviate that problem.

  14. Spandex? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

    Flanders: It's like I'm wearing nothing at all... nothing at all... nothing at all...

    1. Re:Spandex? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      stupid sexy flanders

  15. Gnome and Fedora by darkninja2000 · · Score: 5, Funny

    Heh, DVD Jon uses gnome and fedora! Noob! ... no wait...

    1. Re:Gnome and Fedora by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yeah he should be using ObscureLinux using the ShitloadOfMissingFeaturesWindowManager instead!

      Then he would be leet!

      Him and Alan Cox are such pussies I bet they can't even install Gentoo!

    2. Re:Gnome and Fedora by cbiltcliffe · · Score: 1

      No, but he does have security patches that haven't been applied.... :)

      --
      "City hall" in German is "Rathaus" Kinda explains a few things......
    3. Re:Gnome and Fedora by Saeger · · Score: 5, Funny
      What? You'd rather have him dicking around wasting time with some elitist MoreArcaneThanThou-OS, than writing useful code that gets something done?

      Better laugh at me too now - I run KDE w/ SuSE so I must be a EuroN00b. Blah. kiddies and their ricer OS's.

      --

      --
      Power to the Peaceful
    4. Re:Gnome and Fedora by JoeLinux · · Score: 1

      humor
      Pronunciation: 'hyü-m&r, 'yü-
      Function: noun
      Etymology: Middle English humour, from Middle French humeur, from Medieval Latin & Latin; Medieval Latin humor, from Latin humor, umor moisture; akin to Old Norse vokr damp, Latin humEre to be moist, and perhaps to Greek hygros wet

      1 a : that quality which appeals to a sense of the ludicrous or absurdly incongruous b : the mental faculty of discovering, expressing, or appreciating the ludicrous or absurdly incongruous c : something that is or is designed to be comical or amusing

    5. Re:Gnome and Fedora by jonnystiph · · Score: 1

      What? You'd rather have him dicking around wasting time with some elitist MoreArcaneThanThou-OS, than writing useful code that gets something done?

      Fair point, however, remember that those MoreArcaneThanThou-OS's are training a whole new breed of sys admin's that will be the ones maintaining the health of your systems, whilst you are busy coding.

      For some new is good, for other's old is better.

      --

      If we don't make light of everything, we are just stumbling in the dark - Blank

    6. Re:Gnome and Fedora by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Um.. right. Because sysadmins just love to spend time individually customizing each machine.

      And they certainly don't want to run something which is commercially supported, say, in case they end up with a problem they can't solve.

      What kind of shop are you running, anyway? Have you actually done systems administration? On a set of diverse hardware?

    7. Re:Gnome and Fedora by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      So, then, if I use OpenBSD I am too l33t to be 4 r34l?

      Mmm. OpenBSD goodness.

    8. Re:Gnome and Fedora by Saeger · · Score: 1
      Depends on your age.

      If you're over ... ~35, then you're old enough to have grown up the BSD-way before linux (killed you), and so you're obviously not choosing a (dead) OS for the sake of going against the grain. :)

      --

      --
      Power to the Peaceful
    9. Re:Gnome and Fedora by jonnystiph · · Score: 1

      I was not speaking of Gentoo, or customizing every single line of the OS. Perhaps I mis-represented myself, or perhaps I am being lumped in with the typical /. crowd.

      I am speaking from more of a slackware point of view. Rather than being reliant on a set of Wizards and GUI-Tools for systems administration, I would rather know the configuration files. Where they are located, how they are formatted, being able to edit them by hand.

      I think this is vital of systems administration to know how the OS works. In my opinion systems like Red Hat, tend to have wizards that work at higher level.

      To answer you question, yes I am systems admin, I work in a lab of about 60 Red hat boxes, from X86 to IPF (depends how you define diverse hardware), when I need to makes changes, I use /dev/hands. Sure I use scripts and other tools to automate my job, but I am very thankful that I can edit the config files by hand if need be.

      I am not going to say that I would install Slackware on every enterprise level machine either. However, to cut the teeth of budding sys admins, the more they know about the inner workings of Linux (or what have you), the better off they will be when shit hits the fan.

      So I hope this explains my position a little more clearly. It's about using the arcane-OS as a teaching tool, not what should be implemented on every piece of hardware.

      --

      If we don't make light of everything, we are just stumbling in the dark - Blank

  16. Outrageous by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Funny

    DVD Jon belongs in Gitmo for committing crimes against American businesses.

  17. What he did last time wasn't illegal by hayden · · Score: 2, Informative
    On the other hand, I feel uneasy, knowning almost certainly that this isn't legal (C'mon, this is DVD Jon!).
    It wasn't illegal even when you take into account the crappy copyright regime currently being imposed.
    --
    Nerd: Derogatory term typically directed at anybody with a lower Slashdot ID than you.
  18. Re:Links Dont Work by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Hmm... Since your comment is #10921664 I guess by your numbers that each story only gets an average of 2 comments...

  19. What happened here? by natrius · · Score: 5, Interesting

    From the article linked to the blog post, it seems that he got the reference decoder for the VC-1 standard, which is compatible with WMP9, to work in VLC. The headline makes it look like there was some sort of reverse engineering done here, but after actually reading the article (gasp), it doesn't seem like that's the case.

    1. Re:What happened here? by mrchaotica · · Score: 1

      That's good, but what I really want to know is, does it play DRM'd ones (the ones that error with "the hardware license for this content is inconsistent" on my Mac)?

      --

      "[Regarding the 'cloud,'] ownership was what made America different than Russia." -- Woz

  20. Is This a Big Deal ? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Since VC-1 is based on WMV 9 is it really a big deal getting the VC-1 codec to play a basic WMV 9 stream ?

  21. why not? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    not sure this is the same, but i've been playing wmv/wma under linux with xine for over a year now..all i did was download the full codec pack from mplayers site, install them, and go..it has ma9dmod.dll wmadmod.dll wmspdmod.dll wmv8ds32.ax wmv9dmod.dll wmvdmod.dll wmvds32.ax as far as wm* codecs go, which have played any wmv/wma i've thrown at it, and with a small plugin 75% of the vids on sites will play without no intervention, the other 25% just require saving the vid first, then opening the player, and playing..

    1. Re:why not? by gseidman · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Gee, that's great. Fantastic. Except I have Linux running on a PowerPC. What's that? I'm SOL because those closed-source DLLs are for a different processor? Darn. Maybe this is a good thing after all.

    2. Re:why not? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I did the same thing, and included the mplayer plugin, which allows me to see wmv9 videos embedded in Konqueror and FireFox.

    3. Re:why not? by jx100 · · Score: 1

      I believe the difference is that those plugins are merely hacked versions of the Microsoft codecs. Not only is this illegal, but it means that the codecs are *not* portable, and can't go anywhere but x86. The codec DVD Jon is apparently his own code, and can do whatever he wants.

    4. Re:why not? by ophix · · Score: 3, Informative

      this appears to be using the vlc and vc-1 source code to give vlc wmv support. no dlls needed and it should compile and work just peachy on your platform (might require some #ifdef work to take care of the endian differences, but should be a relatively trivial operation)

    5. Re:why not? by gseidman · · Score: 1

      I believe you missed the parent post to which I was responding.

  22. SCORE -1: THIS IS A US SITE by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Because we invented the Internet we get to have all the best sites, and our Mars probes don't always crash too.

    1. Re:SCORE -1: THIS IS A US SITE by Truth_Quark · · Score: 1
    2. Re:SCORE -1: THIS IS A US SITE by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Hey, everyone knows Al Gore is an alien, hence not an American.

    3. Re:SCORE -1: THIS IS A US SITE by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yep, by 1% so STFU. :D

    4. Re:SCORE -1: THIS IS A US SITE by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Nope, but your comet probes do :P

  23. Re:Bringing WMV9 to linux by St.+Arbirix · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Of course, noone in the linux community give a ripe fuck about whether or not the code they run is legal.

    Fool!

    That's all we care about. Why do you think we make so much of an issue about companies making exclusive deals to release video and audio in formats that don't have any sort of official support from the format creator? It's not like we own DVD-audio players and our music only comes in SACD; the ability to play WM9 is only several hundred lines of code away and yet we're expected to purchase a completely different operating system to be able to play them.

    The sad story about using "illegal" code in Linux (isn't libdvdread still like this?) is that it is often more useful than the a) hard to find b) not that great altenative. I personally find that where there is both a commercial and free version of a linux program ported from Windows, the commercial version acts like cripple-ware.

    --
    Direct away from face when opening.
  24. Re:Links Dont Work by MyLongNickName · · Score: 1
    --
    See my journal for slashdot ID's by year. Mine created in 2005. http://slashdot.org/journal/289875/slashdot-ids-by-year
  25. Source code? by betonme · · Score: 2, Interesting

    So it is running in a GPL program (VLC) using an open (VC1) standard. Details? Anyone? Link to the source? Hello?

  26. Re:Bringing WMV9 to linux by Deliveranc3 · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Just not legally. Of course, noone in the linux community give a ripe fuck about whether or not the code they run is legal.

    You got modded flamebait but you raise a valid point, Linux previously did try and adhere to legality whenever possible. There was the whole not including a mp3 codec debacle.

    I have proposed a Black Hat Linux, it will come with a windows installer on the same DVD and a bunch of closed source apps.

    Unfortunatly I also believe in the Linux movement, the idea of freeing all software may be forwarded more rapidly by creating free alternatives and having them widely adopted to the extent that no one will WAMT to pay for software, (as opposed to everyone agreeing to steal it and driving the closed source companies out of business). Either way would accomplish the same purpose.

  27. Now... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

    Take me to your source....
    So I can make tee-shirts out of it....
    Then make a song, poem and even a music video from the same code... :)

  28. VC-1 and Windows Media DRM by News+for+nerds · · Score: 4, Interesting

    According to the blog, it seems it uses VC-1 reference decoder to play WMV9 on Linux. IIRC VC-1 is open source now after it was submit to SMPTE for the review. Is there any difference between VC-1 and WMV9 except for four CC code and other trivial things?

    Also, at the first glance at the headline of this story, I'd thought DVD Jon cracked DRM on WMV9 and delighted, but he didn't apparently, so non-Linux people don't have much to rejoice about this story anyway. If I'm mistaken and this story can be related to Windows Media DRM somehow, please point it to me as I'm happy if that's true.

  29. Media Companies Should Support Linux by Synbiosis · · Score: 4, Insightful

    The worst thing about this is that if software companies actually *supported* Linux, they would never have to deal with any of this. They are forcing people to crack copy protection so they can view media that they purchased online. I don't really understand it. There's Windows Media Player for Mac OS X and its market share is roughly equal to that of Linux. It really wouldn't be that hard for Microsoft to release a generic codec pack for Linux.

    1. Re:Media Companies Should Support Linux by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      There's Windows Media Player for Mac OS X and its market share is roughly equal to that of Linux.

      IME (and despite Microsoft's claims to the contrary on the download page) the latest version of Windows Media Player for the Mac does not support any DRM'd media.

    2. Re:Media Companies Should Support Linux by mattjb0010 · · Score: 1

      There's Windows Media Player for Mac OS X and its market share is roughly equal to that of Linux.

      It doesn't support all the codecs the Windows Windows Media Player does. VLC handles the wmv files better. I also like VLC because it supports region-free DVD playing, unlike the standard Apple-supplied software. Go VLC! :)

    3. Re:Media Companies Should Support Linux by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      The worst thing about this is that if software companies actually *supported* Linux, they would never have to deal with any of this.

      You mean "if they supported open, unencumbered standards". At least a lack of support can be written off as neglect; an encumbered Linux binary would be hard not to read as malice.

    4. Re:Media Companies Should Support Linux by has2k1 · · Score: 1
      With the open source community and minds like Jon, the media companies can go hell and not support linux.

      linux will always support their software.

    5. Re:Media Companies Should Support Linux by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      But VLC (or Mplayer for OSX) don't support wmv3...

      If I could find a wmv3 player for my Mac I would be a happy chappy :)

      (and no, I'm not installing Microsoft's Media Player again - I installed it once, and could no longer access my Temporary Items hidden folder or my 50x folder which is incredibly nice for saving Quicktime and other streams. I had to uninstall it, and clean out the crap files it left behind to get my Mac back under my control)

    6. Re:Media Companies Should Support Linux by Stephen+Samuel · · Score: 5, Funny
      It really wouldn't be that hard for Microsoft to release a generic codec pack for Linux.

      It would also be really easy for President Bush Jr to release the Nuclear Launch Codes to Al Qaeda.

      The difference is: You never know what Bush will do tomorrow.

      --
      Free Software: Like love, it grows best when given away.
    7. Re:Media Companies Should Support Linux by dfiguero · · Score: 1

      I don't think it's a matter of technical complexity but rather MS not trying to make publicity for it's #1 enemy.

      Once your non geek friends start reading about Linux directly from MS they start wondering what it is and where do they get it.

      --
      My penguin ate my sig
    8. Re:Media Companies Should Support Linux by upsidedown_duck · · Score: 1

      It really wouldn't be that hard for Microsoft to release a generic codec pack for Linux.

      Once their stock price has hit $1, half the executive staff has been replaced, they are arm-pit-deep in debt, and the analysts have nothing good to say about them, only then will they port stuff to Linux. They only reason Microsoft has conceded to recognizing UNIX and Apple is that they all grew up together, sort of like going to the same school in a small town, but that Microsoft was the poor geeky kid that was beat up on until he found superpowers and used them to destroy his enemies later in life.

      --
      -- "Makes Little Debbie look like a pile of puke!" - Moe Szyslak
    9. Re:Media Companies Should Support Linux by Megane · · Score: 1
      1) There is indeed a version of Windows Media Player for OS X that plays WMV9 files... but only in .WMV (and maybe .ASF) files. It refuses to support the "archaic" .AVI format which the Codec-of-the-Week crowd is in love with. (The non-streaming AVI file format may suck, but it's still a staple of the DivX world.)

      2) The only existing "open source" code for playing WMV9 files (at least until now) has been x86 only.

      Result: .AVI files with WMV9 encoding can NOT be played on a Mac. Even with VLC/mplayer. And yes, I have quite a few files like that. About 1/4 of the un-subtitled anime I download these days is in WMV9.

      --
      #naabhaprzrag, #sverubfr-000, #agi-fcbafberq, negvpyr[pynff*=' negvpyr-ary-'] { qvfcynl: abar !vzcbegnag; }
    10. Re:Media Companies Should Support Linux by JW+Troll · · Score: 0, Troll
      It really wouldn't be that hard for Microsoft to release a generic codec pack for Linux.
      It also wouldn't be worth their time to diddle around making a codec that only 1% of computer users would use. And they sure as heck aren't going to provide the source, because Microsoft doesn't believe in free (as in the FSF def'n of free) software. What's the point?
      Then after you factor in that binary compatibility isn't worth a damn in the Linux world, and even if MS released a binary codec for Linux it wouldn't work for long (assuming the usual upgrade cycle), I'd say that the Win32 codecs we've got right now are perfectly OK.
      Not to mention that it's almost impossible to make a program run nicely on each of the billions of distros out there anyways. Maybe I'm just a little bitter after all..
      --
      just like the humble blood clot... turboporsche@telus.net
    11. Re:Media Companies Should Support Linux by amorsen · · Score: 1
      It would also be really easy for President Bush Jr to release the Nuclear Launch Codes to Al Qaeda.

      With the talent that the administration has so far shown when it comes to finding weapons of mass destruction, I would be surprised if they managed to find their own.

      --
      Finally! A year of moderation! Ready for 2019?
    12. Re:Media Companies Should Support Linux by canavan · · Score: 1

      Al Qaeda probably already knows them: they are all zeroes.

    13. Re:Media Companies Should Support Linux by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'm sure Cheney and the Cabinet members switched the code book with a coloring book just in case...

  30. Re:Bringing WMV9 to linux by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    That's a classic case of YHBT.

  31. Re:That's why no one takes Linux seriously by nukem996 · · Score: 1

    Its runs on BSD as well. Plenty of people do take linux seriously thats why its the #2 OS on the market. Most apps that run on FreeBSD are originaly made on linux and then ported to BSD. Just a few people do some things you dont agree with dosnt mean there a script kiddie.

  32. Re:Bringing WMV9 to linux by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

    There is no such thing as illegal code.
    Only illegal laws.

  33. MPlayer? by OblongPlatypus · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Hasn't this been possible all along, with MPlayer? Their codec status table lists "Windows Media Video 9 DMO" as working. Is that not the same thing as the WMV9 referred to here?

    --
    -- If no truths are spoken then no lies can hide --
    1. Re:MPlayer? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Informative

      "Windows Media Video 9 DMO" is simply using the windows dll for playback, this on the otherhand is an open-source implementation so it is much faster as it doesn't need any translation of library/system calls. This is probably better for non-x86 based PCs as they cannot use dll's that were built for an x86.

    2. Re:MPlayer? by evilviper · · Score: 4, Informative
      While MPlayer (and Xine) have supported playback of WMV9 through Microsoft's DLLs, it's not the perfect solution to the problem...

      Using the DLLs is very slow, which makes a huge difference when you're trying to play 1080 videos on your system. Actually, using the DLLs via mplayer is faster than Media Player on Windows, but with source, it will get MUCH FASTER. A good example is when ffmpeg got native SVQ3 support:

      The decoder is currently unoptimized, but it already outperforms the original binary DLL (which is a shame on Apple, but what did we expect?).
      http://www.mplayerhq.hu/homepage/design 7/news-arch ive.html


      Plus, you will have less problems with bugs, the ablity to playback on non-x86 systems, and the potential for encoding support in the future.

      --
      Slashdot gets worse every day... Pipedot: News for nerds, without the corporate slant
    3. Re:MPlayer? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And there are also people who do not like/trust binary codecs running on their computar. (who knows that there isn't an accidental buffer overflow which will allow for arbitary code execution for a specific "illegal video stream"). Source only please.

      P0rn Downlodarz!

    4. Re:MPlayer? by esbjerg · · Score: 1

      The dll's are for 32bit x86 only which means that all those who run on PPC, UltraSparc etc. are out of luck. This actually helps the x86 monopoly.

      With access to the source it's possible to at least port the codec to new architectures (in most cases).
      That's why opensource matters more than most care to think.

    5. Re:MPlayer? by maq777 · · Score: 1

      Some users on linux, like me, isn't running on x86. Therefor it's hard to use 32bits x86 codecs from 'The Proprietary Company '. Even in MPlayer.

    6. Re:MPlayer? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Using the DLLs is very slow, which makes a huge difference when you're trying to play 1080 videos on your system.

      if you are trying to play them all simultaneously...

    7. Re:MPlayer? by julianmayer · · Score: 1

      >The decoder is currently unoptimized, but it already outperforms the original binary DLL (which is a shame on Apple, but what did we expect?).

      it's sorenson and not apple who wrote the SVQ3 (and SVQ1) codecs.
      it's a shame that even the ffmpeg people don't get that right...

    8. Re:MPlayer? by evilviper · · Score: 1

      Well, Apple still deserves the blame. They are the ones that bought the codec, and they are the ones distributing it as a core component of Quicktime.

      My CD-Burner is crap. Should I blame Sony (the name-brand on it), or Lite-On (the company that actually made it)? IMHO, the distinction is unnecessary.

      However, if you want to nit-pick, you made a mistake yourself, as it was the MPlayer people who wrote that blurb, not the ffmpeg people.

      --
      Slashdot gets worse every day... Pipedot: News for nerds, without the corporate slant
  34. Amazing by StormReaver · · Score: 0, Redundant

    This guy never ceases to amaze me. I wouldn't even know where to begin deciphering a codec. If I accomplished it at all, it would be only once. And then it would be blind luck.

    My hat's off to Jon.

    1. Re:Amazing by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting

      He didn't crack the WMV9 codec, he used the VC-1 reference codec which is based on WMV 9 video streams. I don't think it's that big a deal ...

  35. What's the fuzz about? by thedj_sd · · Score: 5, Informative

    People people.... Jon just has access (legally this time) to the VC1 reference codec and sources. He simply decided to look at how easy it was to use this in VLC. From what i remember (this was more than 6 weeks ago or something) it was half a days work. Mind you that he didn't release anything. He doesn't need to. He said that the VC1 licensing terms are less strict than MPEG4 and Jon can just use the sources after the VC1 codec is 100% final, which isn't too far off. (btw. MPEG group should really get their act together, cause VC1 truly has better licensing atm and people are getting fed up with the MPEG mess).

    1. Re:What's the fuzz about? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Finally, someone who RTFA before they posted !

    2. Re:What's the fuzz about? by thedj_sd · · Score: 1

      I was in the same IRC channel as jon when he was doing this :)

    3. Re:What's the fuzz about? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      May I touch you?

    4. Re:What's the fuzz about? by TheCIA · · Score: 1
    5. Re:What's the fuzz about? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If there is an EASY way to do it, why should he get into the trouble of reverse engineering WMV?????
      Just so you would admire him????

      The RESULT IS THE SAME: open sourced code for decoding WMV9.
      The METHOD is irrelevant. In fact it would have been very stupid to go and reverse engineer WMV when he can use VC1!

  36. I don't care about the source... by julie-h · · Score: 0, Offtopic

    ... I want to know, how to get those girls in the screenshots! =)

  37. If you want to watch your WMV now in linux... by tearmeapart · · Score: 3, Informative

    It does not seem that DVD Jon has completely released his project yet, so if you are want to play WMVs in linux now, try using xine. Quote from the xine site: "...It also decodes multimedia files like AVI, MOV, WMV, and MP3 from local disk drives...". With the small collection of trailers and a few movies from lmule (it's like emule), I have not experienced one problem with xine.

    1. Re:If you want to watch your WMV now in linux... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

      WMV9 is a fairly new codec that does not have native support for anything but Windows. If you have it working in Linux, that's because you're running x86 and are using the Windows dll to decode it. If you're not running on x86 or aren't using a closed source library, you're not watching WMV9, but an older WMV codec.

      Personally, I'm quite happy to see this. For one thing, using the dll is slow; too slow to run on my Epia. For another thing, an open source decoder means it should eventually make it to VNC on my Mac. A fast cross-platform decoder. Yes, please!

    2. Re:If you want to watch your WMV now in linux... by Doctor+Crumb · · Score: 2, Informative

      Except that Xine's UI is annoying and it somehow never plays movies loud enough. I much prefer VLC for playing my movies. I'll agree with most other posters here in saluting DVD Jon; the guy is a machine!

    3. Re:If you want to watch your WMV now in linux... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      good thing that xine is really a library.

      $ apt-cache search xine media
      gxine - the xine video player, GTK user interface
      kaffeine - xine-based media player for KDE 3
      kaffeine-mozilla - mozilla plugin that lanches kaffeine for supported media types
      python-pyxine - interface to the xine media player for Python
      totem-xine - A simple media player for the Gnome desktop based on xine
      xine-ui - the xine video player, user interface

    4. Re:If you want to watch your WMV now in linux... by damiam · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Yeah, xine and mplayer can do it, but it's not native. They load the windows codecs from MS's dll files, which is a) probably illegal, b) slow, and c) only works on x86 processors. This new open-source implementation should work with all architectures.

      --
      It's hard to be religious when certain people are never incinerated by bolts of lightning.
    5. Re:If you want to watch your WMV now in linux... by bubkus_jones · · Score: 1

      gxine's interface is MUCH better. Give that a shot.

    6. Re:If you want to watch your WMV now in linux... by Doctor+Crumb · · Score: 1

      hooray! I will give some or all of those a shot. :D

    7. Re:If you want to watch your WMV now in linux... by shadowjk · · Score: 2, Insightful

      WMV the file format is not WMV the codec. The WMV file format, sometimes goes by the extension of asf, but precisely the same thing, is just the container.

      You can put, for example, XviD and mp3 inside wmv, and it will be perfectly playable with MPlayer on almost any platform.

      wmv9, the video codec, however, has no open source implementation. Thus, xine and mplayer will at most only play such files on x86 machines.

    8. Re:If you want to watch your WMV now in linux... by amorsen · · Score: 1
      They load the windows codecs from MS's dll files, which is a) probably illegal, b) slow, and c) only works on x86 processors.

      As long as you own a copy of Windows and don't use that at the same time (i.e. you dual-boot or something), you are probably not breaking the law. You may be in breach of contract (the Windows EULA) though.

      --
      Finally! A year of moderation! Ready for 2019?
    9. Re:If you want to watch your WMV now in linux... by m50d · · Score: 1

      How big is this WMV which the dll is too slow on? My 800mhz duron, hardly a speed demon, can play every wmv9 I've thrown at it without a hint of slowdown except while loading it, and doesn't seem to be going anywhere near 100% cpu.

      --
      I am trolling
    10. Re:If you want to watch your WMV now in linux... by 13Echo · · Score: 1

      Weird. I could play back most WMV movies on a PC with a P3 450, through MPlayer or Totem, without too much of a problem. The key is to have MPlayer set up with a graphics card that can use XV overlay support.

      It's actually faster than it is on Windows, even with Windows DLLs on Linux.

    11. Re:If you want to watch your WMV now in linux... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Unless you downloaded the DLLs from the mplayer project who are distributing those DLLs illegally.

      That they're legally available from microsoft.com isn't relevant, since (almost) everyone gets them illegally from the mplayer project instead.

      After all, if it was easy to get and install them from microsoft.com (it isn't), there wouldn't be any need for the mplayer project to illegally distribute them.

  38. I can do that by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I can get WMV9 video screenpcaps on linux too.....well, ok, its with photoshop but still.

  39. Rawr by Renraku · · Score: 2, Interesting

    If Microsoft could allow images to run code when viewed, I guess video files are no different. Watch out all you porn viewers using Windows Media Player.

    Your modem is about to disconnect and dial The Czech Republic.

    --
    Job? I don't have time to get a job! Who will sit around and bitch about being broke and unemployed then?
    1. Re:Rawr by TheSpoom · · Score: 1

      WMV files can already pop up a browser window.

      --
      It's better to vote for what you want and not get it than to vote for what you don't want and get it.
      - E. Debs
    2. Re:Rawr by Tony+Hoyle · · Score: 1

      WMV files can already pop up a browser window.

      I caught one trying to install spyware the other day. It was DRM protected so you had to visit their site and install their spyware before the DRM would decrypt.

      I deleted it.

    3. Re:Rawr by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If Microsoft could allow images to run code when viewed, I guess video files are no different. Watch out all you porn viewers using Windows Media Player.


      How typical this gets modded up.

      Linux is just as vunerable as Windows to buffer-overflow exploits. Unless you're running SELinux, which still isn't bulletproof.

      If you're going to expound the 'many-eyeballs' theory here, perhaps you should also know that the JPEG buffer-overflow exploit originated in the Independent JPEG Group's open source implementation, which is libjpeg under Linux, and also used by Microsoft in Windows.

      Certainly it was fixed faster in Linux, and that's good. But it doesn't mean either that Linux or open-source is invunerable to this.

  40. it's Christian according to Declaration by TheoMurpse · · Score: 1, Offtopic

    George Washington, America's first president, signed Thanksgiving Day into existence...he made it obviously a Christian day of thanking God..it originally was NOT the "yay settlers!" day it has become

    i think the most relevant statement in his 1789 Thanksgiving Proclamation when he created Thanksgiving Day is:

    "And also that we may then unite in most humbly offering our prayers and supplications to the great Lord and Ruler of Nations and beseech Him to pardon our national and other transgressions"

    there is literally NOTHING in his proclamation of thanksgiving about the Pilgrims, or any other settler group...TAKE THAT MY ELEMENTARY SCHOOL TEACHER!!

    1. Re:it's Christian according to Declaration by Reducer2001 · · Score: 1, Offtopic

      Washington and most of the other founding father's were diests.
      They believed in God, but were not Christians.

      --
      When you get to hell -- tell 'em Itchy sent ya!
    2. Re:it's Christian according to Declaration by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Washington and most of the other founding father's were diests.
      They believed in God, but were not Christians.


      ...and you quite obviously don't know what you're talking about.

    3. Re:it's Christian according to Declaration by jtmas83 · · Score: 1

      Dittohead...You've been listening to Rush Limbaugh, haven't you?

      I got bored while driving 9 hours yesterday, started flipping through the radio stations, fell upon Rush, and decided, "What the heck...can't find anything else to listen to." What I heard (before I decided to stop being masochistic) was him ranting about exactly what your post was about...well, that and explaining how you should charge all of your liberal friends a fee in order to eat Thanksgiving Dinner...

    4. Re:it's Christian according to Declaration by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      A better link to deism would be:
      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deism
      Another interesting article on George Washington's deism is here.

    5. Re:it's Christian according to Declaration by moof1138 · · Score: 1, Offtopic

      Unfortunately, the link is down, here's the Google Cache.

      Your story is incomplete and slightly inaccurate. First, George Washington was probably not a Christian, but a Deist, and while there are spiritual overtones to that proclamation, he clearly avoided any Christian references.

      While Washington did devote a day in November to Thanksgiving, it was not a continuing holiday. It was Lincoln who established Thanksgiving day as we know it.

      While there is no language in the proclamation regarding the Pilgrims, the Pilgrims' had a day of thanks after their struggles, and when the day of thinksgiving was announced there was some discord among the colonies, with many feeling the hardships of a few Pilgrims did not warrant a national holiday. It is clear that Washington's proclamation was an echo of the Pilgrim's Thanksgiving. So your elementary school teacher was actually correct.

      Read more about it here

      --

      Hyperbole is the worst thing ever.
    6. Re:it's Christian according to Declaration by TheoMurpse · · Score: 2, Insightful

      now THIS post will probably get me a justly-deserved flame-bait rating, but

      i don't listen to that guy...how does the joke go?

      what's the difference between rush limbaugh and the hindenburg??

      one's a big fat nazi windbag, and the other's a blimp

      if this message came across as 'w00t g0d' or something like that, it was not supposed to...

    7. Re:it's Christian according to Declaration by bdbolton · · Score: 1

      woah! so much anger about this holiday. Be happy if you get off work and just eat some food. Maybe do it with family... or do it with slashdot.

      BTW, I feel like Im part of the most hated social group on /. Im a southern american. Thank god Im not republican, then it would really be the end of me.

    8. Re:it's Christian according to Declaration by Jah-Wren+Ryel · · Score: 0, Offtopic
      George Washington was probably not a Christian, but a Deist, and while there are spiritual overtones to that proclamation, he clearly avoided any Christian references.

      Indeed. Not only in that proclamation (which congress voted for requiring him to make with religion as its basis) but in all of his writings, Washington never once makes reference to Jesus Christ or any other figure of Christian mythology. Instead the only deity he ever refers to is "our lord the creator," "the great almighty," etc, which is sufficiently generic enough to be a shade of agnostic.

      Furhtermore, fundamentalist christians tend to cite Washington's Washington's Farewell Address, 1796 as proof that Washington believed that church and state should not be seperate. The passage they refer to is:

      Of all the dispositions and habits which lead to political prosperity, religion and morality are indispensable supports. In vain would that man claim the tribute of patriotism, who should labor to subvert these great pillars of human happiness, these firmest props of the duties of men and citizens. The mere politician, equally with the pious man, ought to respect and to cherish them. A volume could not trace all their connections with private and public felicity. Let it simply be asked: Where is the security for property, for reputation, for life, if the sense ofrelig ious obligation desert the oaths which are the instruments of investigation in courts of justice? And let us with caution indulge the supposition that morality can be maintained without religion. Whatever may be conceded to the influence of refined education on minds of peculiar structure, reason and experience both forbid us to expect that national morality can prevail in exclusion of religious principle.

      The more self-aware of such advocates often leave out the phrase which I have bolded, probably realizing that it significantly detracts from their argument. Essentially, Washington said that for the people who really can't think things through, which compromise a majority of the population, religion is necessary to keep them in line.

      Not quite what most people would consider a ringing endorsement for religion.
      --
      When information is power, privacy is freedom.
    9. Re:it's Christian according to Declaration by CrewChief · · Score: 1

      "often expressed by the metaphor of the "Divine Watchmaker" who created a mechanism so perfect as to be self-regulating."

      Great metaphor, but I would change the second half to read "who created a mechanism so flawed that he just stopped caring"

    10. Re:it's Christian according to Declaration by kamapuaa · · Score: 1
      According to Wikipedia, your Elementary School teacher was right - Pilgrims did Thanksgiving, it persisted as a regional holiday and as a one-shot deal for a long time (for instance, a Thansgiving Day was declared after 1812). Eventually Lincoln formalized it into an annual event on the last Thursday of November, that was changed to the 4th Thursday of November.

      Washington didn't start the tradition, nor finalize it. He was the first president to declare Thanksgiving only because he was the first president.

      --
      Slashdot: providing anti-social weirdos a soapbox, since 1997.
    11. Re:it's Christian according to Declaration by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Huh? Southern Americans can read and write?

    12. Re:it's Christian according to Declaration by Jah-Wren+Ryel · · Score: 1

      Whether he was or not doesn't negate the fact that he shared similar beliefs and did not mind that other people who may have been more Christian than he would practice their religion in the public schools.

      Prove it.

      Let's see just one verifiable document from Washington where he explicitly advocates christianity be taught or endorsed in the public schools. You won't find it.

      But you will find numerous writings where he advocates religious tolerance of ALL faiths. A concept that is completely at odds with the idea of teaching one particular faith in the public schools.

      --
      When information is power, privacy is freedom.
    13. Re:it's Christian according to Declaration by Jah-Wren+Ryel · · Score: 1

      I didn't say teach religion in public schools. I said practice.

      I said, teach or endorse.

      Define "practice." Specifically, demonstrate how your definition of "practice" is not endorsement.

      --
      When information is power, privacy is freedom.
    14. Re:it's Christian according to Declaration by Jah-Wren+Ryel · · Score: 1

      So your whole argument is that kids ought to be allowed to pray in school on their own?

      Big fucking deal.

      No, really.

      You won't find a single person of any political orientation who disagrees with that. You also won't find a single public school that prevents it. If for no other reason than it would be impossible to enforce.

      But what you will find banned are:

      1) Prayer as part graduation the official graduation ceremonies. You seem to kind of think that ought to be ok. Think about it harder. Would you mind it if instead of christian prayer, there was a Muslim prayer? Maybe a Sikh prayer?

      2) "Student lead prayer." You didn't spell it out, but you kind of hinted at this one too and it is such a standard talking point so I'll shoot it down while I'm at it. The same reasoning that forbis prayers at graduation prevents student led prayer over the PA system or in a classroom during school hours. After all, would you want your tax dollars paying for a Muslim prayer group on school time using school facilities? How about those 5 goths who think they are satanists - do they get to "lead" a prayer over the PA?

      If the gov't wants to practice religion then that is okay too. Even if the gov't endorsed one it is in no way forcing anyone to have the same religion.

      Woah. I didn't read this initially. Ok, you are just knucking futs. You let me know when you will be OK when the government of the USA starts spending tax dollars so satanists can have black masses all over the country. Any arguing that whatever religiion is shared by the majority of the population should be the state-sanctioned religion instead of satanism is to completely miss the point. What if George Bush is secretly a devil worshipper? He is, after all, a member of skull & bones and they have some nasty history. He gets elected by the "christians" and then decides to change the state religion. Can't happen? If your whole margin of safety relies on that, then your argument is meaningless.

      --
      When information is power, privacy is freedom.
    15. Re:it's Christian according to Declaration by Jah-Wren+Ryel · · Score: 1

      If the atheists removed all religion from the gov't do you think that would somehow make the gov't force everyone to become atheist?

      Forgot this one. Removing religion from the government does not make the government atheist. No more than a car without a fish bumper is sticker is an atheist car.

      A government that "practices" atheism is what China has today and what the USSR was and those gvoernments are and were all about enforcing that atheism to the point of killing "believers" if they won't deconvert.

      --
      When information is power, privacy is freedom.
  41. Must suck to be you by empaler · · Score: 1

    if you don't get to do stuff like that

  42. How about DVR-MS next? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    This is the format that Windows Media Center records it's shows in, I'd love to watch recorded shows on my iBook.

  43. Well it's not open source per se by Sycraft-fu · · Score: 5, Informative

    At least not how you are thinking of open source. It's an open standard, controlled by SMPTE, that you can license. Thus it's probabaly illegal to use this without paying the license fee. So it's open in that anyone can get it, it's controlled by a standards body, not MS, but it's not OSS.

    Now VC-1 and WM-9 are pretty much the same, and at this point it's not a huge streatch to take the VC-1 code and develop it to a full blown WM-9 player (which he seems to have done). However MS could chanve the WMV format at any time they like, and break compatibility. VC-1 will remain what ti is and they can't change it without SMPTE's approval (which makes the changes available to everyone), however WMV isn't necessiarly going to be the same thing.

  44. Isn't WMV supposed to be a "standard" for HD-DVD? by surajrai · · Score: 1

    I am a bit confused by the status of WMV ...

    I thought WMV and H.264 were supposed to be standards for the next generation of High Definition DVD video and that the specs for WMV had been released out in the open no? If the specs are out there, why hasn't somebody written the codec for it?

    S.r.

  45. This is what Americans get wrong *all the time* by empaler · · Score: 1, Insightful

    The president is not appointed by god, and just because the president says stuff about god doesn't make it true...
    I'm too tired for real examples, but think of how often Dubya invokes God - very unsavory, if I should say so (see sig)

    1. Re:This is what Americans get wrong *all the time* by empaler · · Score: 1

      Crap. Forgot I'd changed the sig from
      "I have excommunicated the Sun for the heresy of adhering to the heliocentric system"

      Blah.

    2. Re:This is what Americans get wrong *all the time* by HermanAB · · Score: 0, Troll

      What is your problem? It is a warring president calling on the main war god - nothing wrong with that - it is in perfect harmony with 1679 years of christian tradition and about 1000 years of jewish and greco-roman tradition before that.

      --
      Oh well, what the hell...
    3. Re:This is what Americans get wrong *all the time* by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What the hell are you talking about, and what does it have to do with George Washington's statement?

  46. Re:Bringing WMV9 to linux by St.+Arbirix · · Score: 0, Offtopic

    Wow. I had to look that up. I've spent so many years thinking a troll refered that ugly guy under the bridge. I knew it was like a subtle flamebait comment, but it makes more sense now...

    YHBT: You are quite likely to see this if you respond incautiously to a flame-provoking post that was obviously floated as sucker bait.

    Yeech.

    --
    Direct away from face when opening.
  47. Re:Bringing WMV9 to linux by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The sad story about using "illegal" code in Linux (isn't libdvdread still like this?) is that it is often more useful than the a) hard to find b) not that great altenative.

    Bah, Windows isn't that hard to find.

  48. Re:Isn't WMV supposed to be a "standard" for HD-DV by Ironsides · · Score: 3, Informative

    WMV9 (a.k.a. VC-1) and H.264 are not yet in the standard for the HD-DVDs. They were sent to SMPTE for approval as standards in the HD-DVD standard. Microsoft apparently did some futzing and might have WMV9 disqualified due to some fibs told to SMPTE.

    Currently there is a codec for WMV9, Microsoft owns it. Some other companies have liscensed it. The standard might be available but it takes a long time to work out an efficient codec that gives a good picture. In a few years it may be at a quality where TV stations will use it for interstation to air broadcast. But that is whith proffesional coders working on it.

    --
    Fly me to the moon Let me sing among those stars Let me see what spring is like On jupiter and mars
  49. Re:Nice... backyard brawl by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    WVU/PITT - not much of a brawl this year.

    Pitt just can't seem to get a drive together this year, but at least they're still in the game after 3 quarters. I hope it goes to overtime.

  50. Traditions change by ppanon · · Score: 0, Offtopic

    The date for Christmas was chosen to be in late December to not differ too much from existing pagan solstice rituals and help win more converts. But most Christians believe it's just to celebrate the birth of Christ even though he probably was not born in December. Nobody's seriously suggested changing the date.

    There's a few possible alternative reasons why the Thanksgiving Proclamation may have focused on religious aspects.

    a) a number of indian tribes sided with the British during the War of Independence, so maybe it wasn't as politically popular at the time to focus on the indian contribution to the formation of european settlements,

    b) maybe he and key supporters had a personal religious agenda and his proclamation differs from the actual bill, or

    c) maybe there was a political compromise to get the bill passed, whereby it was agreed to provide that official justification even though some other supporting groups preferred a different interpretation,

    d) all of the above

    In the end, you live in a country where you can interpret it your way and let others interpret it in their own ways, all of them positive. That's truly something to be thankful for.

    --
    Laissez lire, et laissez danser; ces deux amusements ne feront jamais de mal au monde. - Voltaire
    1. Re:Traditions change by Curtman · · Score: 1

      a number of indian tribes sided with the British

      What do the citizens of India have to do with Thanksgiving?

      Native Americans are not from India you insensitive clod.

    2. Re:Traditions change by ccady · · Score: 0, Offtopic
      --
      J'aime mieux les méchants que les imbéciles, parce qu'ils se reposent. -- Alexandre Dumas
    3. Re:Traditions change by DreamMaster · · Score: 1

      Maybe it's a carefully crafted clue leading to the Templar treasure. :)

    4. Re:Traditions change by AntiOrganic · · Score: 1, Offtopic
      While I appreciate your ability to plagiarize George Carlin's "Brain Droppings" almost word-for-word, this is not entirely founded in fact. Here's an article from The Straight Dope addressing this very issue:

      http://www.straightdope.com/mailbag/mgenteindios.h tml

      Dear Straight Dope:

      What's the truth about the origin of the term "American Indian"? Schoolchildren have long been taught that Columbus thought he had reached the Indies, and therefore called the inhabitants "Indians." But lately I've been hearing the story that: (a) The Indies weren't even called the Indies at the time, but Hindustan; (b) Columbus didn't call the locals "Indians" but referred to them as "una geste in Dios", meaning "a people in God"; (c) somehow this caused people in Spain to start using the term "Indians"; and (d) Europeans then started using the geographical term "Indies" through back-formation. This explanation sounds like wishful thinking to me, with (c) and (d) particularly hard to swallow. Yet I've seen this stated as fact on some Indian Web sites, and it's doubtless being taught as fact in some schoolrooms. Is it possible to find the truth in this matter? --Steven Doyle, Atlanta, Georgia

      SDSTAFF George replies:

      The best way to determine the truth in cases like this, Steve, is to go to the source--in this case, Columbus's original letter, through which word of the new lands and their inhabitants was disseminated throughout Europe (see links below). In this letter Columbus repeatedly refers to India and Indians, and says nothing whatever about "a people in God."

      First, let's get the supposed phrase right. The Spanish word for people is gente, not geste. Note that the supposed derivation requires Columbus to have made an error in spelling, since "in" in Spanish is en; the word in doesn't exist in the language. I'll have more to say on this point later.

      Second, let's dispose of the notion that India was called something else at the time. The name, derived from the Indus River (from Sanskrit sindhu, "a river"), goes back to antiquity. Alexander the Great referred to the Indus (Indos), and to the region's inhabitants as Indikoi, as early as the third century B.C. The name passed from Greek into Latin and thence into other European languages, the earliest citation in English being in 893 A.D. by King Alfred the Great. At the time of Columbus's voyage, "India" or "the Indias/Indies" was often used to refer to all of south and east Asia. Columbus carried with him a passport from Ferdinand and Isabella of Spain, written in Latin and dispatching him "toward the regions of India" (ab partes Indie) on their behalf. Martin Beheim's globe of 1492, which predated the voyage, clearly labels the region as "Indie." "Hindustan," also derived from the Indus River, is a much later term, not appearing in English until 1665. In any case, in Spanish that name is not Hindustan but Indostan.

      Third, let's look at what Columbus actually said. The admiral wrote a letter, in Spanish, detailing his discoveries while off the Azores during his homeward voyage. He forwarded this to the royal court, then at Barcelona, shortly after his storm-driven arrival in Lisbon on March 4, 1493. The original manuscript has not survived, but a printed copy made shortly after its receipt has. In the first paragraph Columbus says "In 33 days I passed from the Canary Islands to the Indies" (en 33 días pasé de las islas de Canaria a las Indias). His first reference to the inhabitants comes in the second paragraph: "To the first [island] which I found I gave the name San Salvador . . . the Indians call it Guanahaní" (A la primera que yo hallé puse nombre San Salvador . . . los Indios la llaman Guanahaní). In all he makes six references to India or the Indies, and four to Indios. Nowhere in the letter does he use a phrase resembling una gente in Dios. He says little of the spiritual beliefs of

    5. Re:Traditions change by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      in Spanish, "en" becomes "in" when it follows a terminal "e"

      No it doesn't. And one wouldn't say "en Dios," but rather "de Dios" or "con Dios."

    6. Re:Traditions change by rsidd · · Score: 4, Informative

      Total rubbish. India was known as India long before. Hindustan was never a word used by the British. Columbus genuinely thought he had found India: that's why the Caribbean islands are known, even today, as the "west Indies". As others have pointed out, your "in dios" explanation is totally bogus, but it's typical of slashdot that you'll get a +5 informative for it.

    7. Re:Traditions change by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Mode the parent up.

      In Spanish there is no "in" and it's just BS that "a" + "en" = "in".
      It's jus sad when people talk about languages without really knowing them.

    8. Re:Traditions change by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I really prefer 'aboriginal'. Indian pertains to India as I see it...

    9. Re:Traditions change by Space+Coyote · · Score: 1

      Funny, I would have thought the "preferred term" would be whatever they want to be called. In canada the usual term is "first peoples" or "first nations" which is easy enough. But using the name of the actual group of people you are referring to is always better if you can. And I'm 99.99999% sure the Wampanoag were _not_ Xtian back at the time of the first Thanksgiving.

      --
      ___
      Cogito cogito, ergo cogito sum.
    10. Re:Traditions change by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Someone that says something like: []...'"En dios", or "in God", referred to their lack of clothing; in Spanish, "en" becomes "in" when it follows a terminal "e"...[]', shows a total lack of knowledge of the spanish language (and I am NATIVE spanish speaker, so don't bother trying to convince me on the contrary).

      And Columbus was trying to reach "las Indias Orientales" (the _Eastern_ India), although through the west..., and if I recall properly from the time I was in elementary school (I might be wrong) he died believing that there is where he arrived.

    11. Re:Traditions change by enlavin · · Score: 1

      > Columbus, seeing the people who lived on Hispaniola, wrote in his log that they were
      > "una gente in dios", Spanish for "naked people".

      Wrong. "una gente in dios" doesn't mean anything in Spanish. Probably is a typo, where Columbus wanted to say "una gente SIN Dios", refering to the fact that they were no catholics. If you want to say "naked people" using "gente" and "Dios" you would say "la gente iba como Dios la trajo al mundo" (people was like when they were born).

      > "En dios", or "in God", referred to their lack of clothing; in Spanish, "en"
      > becomes "in" when it follows a terminal "e".)

      Wrong again. In Spanish "in" does not exists as a word.

      > India, the country, was known to England at the time as Hindustan, not India.

      In Spain at the age India was known as "Las Indias". Columbus was searching for and optimal route to "Las Indias y Cipango" (India and Japan) when he found America. Because he couldn't imagine he had found another continent, he thought people he found were Indians.

      Nowadays in Spanish you have to distinguish between "Indios" (native people from America) and "Hindúes" (people from India), tought Indios is a more intuitive name for people from India.

      Bye

      --
      -- char*p="char*p=%c%s%c;main(){printf(p,34,p,34);}"; main(){printf(p,34,p,34);}
    12. Re:Traditions change by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      if we're going to be "pee cee" about things, referring to 'indians' as 'native americans' is not only a mouthful to say, but also a racist insult to the other 'native americans', ie those who are born there every day but don't necessarily happen to have the same skin colour or background.

      If 'indians' want to be known by any other name, they should come up with one slightly less bigotted than 'native americans', which is merely a landgrabbing claim of historical righteosness over a long forgotten past in the english language which isn't even native to them.

      I would have no objection to referring to tomahawks as tomahawks, but 'native american' is an insult to myself.

    13. Re:Traditions change by Curtman · · Score: 1
      You are very wrong about the origin. Indian did come from Columbus, but only because he didn't realize where he was.

      • Inhabitants of the Asian country of India; sometimes called Asian Indians to differentiate from American Indians. See Demographics of India.
      • Those aboriginal peoples of the Americas first misidentified by Christopher Columbus who thought that he had reached the East Indies.
      • Some U.S. Natives call themselves Indians, although this may be considered offensive. It is considered more correct to refer to American aboriginal people as Native Americans. In Canada, First Nations or Aboriginal People are the preferred terms, though Indian is also used by many within First Nations communities. Others believe the idea of Indians (or Native Americans or First Nations) represents a Eurocentric point of view and consider themselves members of a tribe or nation, identifying only with the name of their tribe in their own native language; often this name is a word which translates as, "the people".


      I live in a community that is almost entirely composed of aboriginal people, and I've never met anybody who wasn't offended by being called an Indian. Thats the only reason I said anything at all. That and the opportunity for a gratuitous insensitive clod usage presented itself.
    14. Re:Traditions change by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I think you are a bit confused here... You are a 'naive american' not a 'native american', so there's no need to feel insulted.

    15. Re:Traditions change by tabrnaker · · Score: 1

      It's quite simple. Indians come from India. To continuosly call those who where here before the murderers came shows the quality of an american education.

    16. Re:Traditions change by Grishnakh · · Score: 1

      Unfortunately, as someone else pointed out, "native American" is rather incorrect as well. I'm not of aboriginal origin, but I'm a "native" American, because I was born here, and as far as I'm concerned, that makes me as native as anyone on a reservation. Sure, my ancestors came from another continent, but so did those of any aboriginies; the only difference is time. Mine came a few generations or so ago (I actually don't know, since I don't know my family history), whereas the aboriginies came thousands of years ago over the land bridge between Asia and Alaska.

      "Indian" would be a decent term to use, just because it's been in use so long, and wasn't used with ill-intent, but it's not a good term to use because it confuses aboriginies with people from the country of India. While this wasn't much of a problem 100 or more years ago, it's a real pain these days because so many people from India are living in the US now. Probably half my coworkers are from India (while none are aboriginies).

      So, I consider "Aboriginal People" the best term of all to use, as I can't imagine how it's offensive, and it's not needlessly confusing. As for identifying people by their particular tribe or nation, that's pretty silly. Sure, that can be used when known or necessary, but for non-aboriginies, it's much more common to need a term for referring to all aboriginal people collectively, rather than listing every tribe. I've never heard of any Europeans insisting on others calling them by their particular country of origin, when the person was saying something about European people collectively. Why should aboriginal people be any different?

  51. For all you Europeans reading this... by darnok · · Score: 4, Insightful

    ...note that this type of work may become illegal if the EU embraces software patents.

    As you're in the one region of the world that seems to not be bowing down to corporate interests at every opportunity, please do what you can to ensure it doesn't happen.

    I *want* to watch video on my Linux box; I don't want to have to buy MS product just so my kids can watch movies that we've paid for.

    1. Re:For all you Europeans reading this... by QuantumG · · Score: 1

      alternatively, if we all keep bragging about how cool we are at hacking things then software patent advocates will have more reasons to justify these new laws, and perhaps they'll introduce even worse laws.. just like they did with the DMCA.

      --
      How we know is more important than what we know.
    2. Re:For all you Europeans reading this... by burns210 · · Score: 1

      Watching video content is not a right, it is a privledge. The company you are using your right to watch has chosen a media that is OS-specific. It is not your RIGHT to reverse the technology that makes it OS-specific and distribute those means to others.

      If you want to watch content, fine. You don't get to reverse the media that the content provider makes on his content for your personal pleasure. You want to use someone else's product, service or content, you have to do it by THERE standards, within reason, otherwiseyou are out of luck...

      FYI: I am STRONGLY opposed to software patents.

    3. Re:For all you Europeans reading this... by This+is+outrageous! · · Score: 1
      It is not your RIGHT to reverse the technology that makes it OS-specific

      Yes it is...

      --
      This is...

      O
      U
      T
      R
      A
      G
      E
      O
      U
      S

      !

    4. Re:For all you Europeans reading this... by austad · · Score: 2, Insightful

      If I buy content, I'll watch it on whatever I damn well please, even if it includes reverse engineering. How would you like it if you bought bread, but could only use it in the KitchenAid BFT9000 toaster which cost $200?

      --
      Need Free Juniper/NetScreen Support? JuniperForum
    5. Re:For all you Europeans reading this... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Such tough talk over a little porno.

    6. Re:For all you Europeans reading this... by Jussi+K.+Kojootti · · Score: 1
      For the record: I oppose sw patents.

      Still, I can't understand how this could be illegal even with software patent laws? The guy just implemented a (soon-to-be) standard. he even used the reference implementation as base!

      Either the parent is not Insightful or I'm somehow mistaken. In the latter case, please enlighten me.

    7. Re:For all you Europeans reading this... by a24061 · · Score: 3, Insightful
      It is not your RIGHT to reverse the technology that makes it OS-specific and distribute those means to others.

      Morally it is your right to do so. Legally it may not be---because the big software and media companies have corrupted governments to extend copyright and patent law beyond what is in the public interest.

    8. Re:For all you Europeans reading this... by Thomas+Shaddack · · Score: 1
      Don't worry, you will still be able to watch whatever you want on any mainstream architecture. You will just have to use software from a coder known only by his handle and of unknown nationality, downloaded from servers in China or Bangladesh, or from an anonymized network of your preference. (Or got on a physical medium from your local dealer.) And not talking about it to people you don't know.

      If Linux codecs are outlawed, we will just have to remember DeCSS and its "unavailability".

      Don't worry. Have friends.

    9. Re:For all you Europeans reading this... by Simon+Lyngshede · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Good for us that Poland was accepted as an EU member state. Looks like they going to vote against it, making may other countries think twice. I look very much like software patents are not going to be an issue in the EU. But let us keep fighting until we're sure.

    10. Re:For all you Europeans reading this... by Ernest · · Score: 1

      In my opinion, morally it's quite wrong to try to watch something somebody produced (a movie), which he has not allowed you to watch (by using an un-authorized decoder).

      However it's a moral disgrace that that same producer _is_ willing to sell (licence) their product to anybody without giving that same person atomatically also the right to watch it.

      Does both wrongs cancel each other out ?

      my believe is that the second wrong make my first wrong acceptable (I really do pay for most of this material).

      --
      Ernest J.W. ter Kuile
    11. Re:For all you Europeans reading this... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Because it's perfectly legal to have a standard which is patented, even a legally mandated standard.

      Most countries have chosen an MPEG series (typically MPEG2) standard for their digital TV services, mandating a single standard for all the broadcasters on a particular medium in order to ensure order in the marketplace.

      But MPEG standards are patented. Implementors have to buy an expensive license from a number of interested parties and failure to do so opens implementors, sellers, buyers and users up to prohibitively expensive lawsuits.

      So to watch TV you have to license these patents, or buy a product which integrates such a license.

      I can read how to do it myself online, I have the know-how to make it work, and I wouldn't be breaking any laws by reading about it. But if I implement it, to watch the free-to-air TV channels that are still also available in PAL encoding in my country, I am subject to a potentially multi-million dollar lawsuit.

      EVEN if I figure it all out myself in my own home without reading a line of code by anyone else.

      The real problem here, at least for now, is software patents. It should be established as a matter of law that it's neither practical nor in the public interest to establish patentability of software, and therefore no software per se, nor the medium on which said software is stored can be subject to a patent.

    12. Re:For all you Europeans reading this... by a24061 · · Score: 1
      my opinion, morally it's quite wrong to try to watch something somebody produced (a movie), which he has not allowed you to watch (by using an un-authorized decoder).

      I completely disagree---as long as we are talking about something produced for publication. If you produce something purely for private viewing, that's one thing.

      But if you publish it, everyone should be able to watch/read/hear it. The only justification for copyright is to promote the public good by encouraging authors (artists, etc.) to produce more work for publication and in the long term to augment the public domain and our culture. Those who are not willing to let anyone view or study the work---with fair use rights, without DRM and on the platform of choice---do not deserve to benefit from copyright and it should be revoked when they attempt to impose such restrictions.

    13. Re:For all you Europeans reading this... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "It is not your RIGHT to reverse the technology that makes it OS-specific and distribute those means to others."

      Umm. Maybe not in the US it isn't.

      I know quite a few european countries *do* make it your right to reverse-engineer products that you buy.

    14. Re:For all you Europeans reading this... by abulafia · · Score: 1
      It is not your RIGHT to reverse the technology that makes it OS-specific and distribute those means to others.

      Four questions:

      - it is my 'RIGHT' to observe and learn the laws of mathematics?
      - is it my 'RIGHT' to purchase a watch, look at what it does, and learn from what I see?
      - is it my 'RIGHT' to busy myself with making things for others using my knowledge?
      - Assuming you said 'yes' the the above (given the readership, not actually an entirely rhetorical question), what is the difference between the three activities listed above and reverse engineering software?

      Making things complicated makes for a nice law practice, if that is what you're in to. Making things simple is what actually advances the human race.

      --
      I forget what 8 was for.
    15. Re:For all you Europeans reading this... by burns210 · · Score: 1

      That is a damn fair point.

      My post was a very devil's advocate view of why they are doing it... I somewhat understand the argument 'THEY make it, THEY decide how those who want to enjoy it get to enjoy it.' however, in reality, i lean towards the 'F you, I want my fair rights back'

    16. Re:For all you Europeans reading this... by LuSiDe · · Score: 1

      Does anyone know if this will be legal in conjunction with Microsoft being convicted a felon in the EU in the Real vs Microsoft case in the EC? They are related.

      --
      WE DON'T NEED NO BLOG CONTROL.
    17. Re:For all you Europeans reading this... by Ernest · · Score: 1

      I completely disagree---as long as we are talking about something produced for publication. If you produce something purely for private viewing, that's one thing.

      Wel, that's what the producers did: they produced something for purely private viewing, and you're not invited till you pay. So you and the producer both agree.

      What you guys don't agree on, is what the word Private means.


      --
      Ernest J.W. ter Kuile
    18. Re:For all you Europeans reading this... by jc42 · · Score: 1

      Watching video content is not a right, it is a privledge.

      Perhaps, perhaps not; it depends on your local laws.

      But there is one thing that's farily consistent in the laws everywhere: If someone sells me something that doesn't work for me, and they didn't describe it well enough that I could tell before the sale that it wouldn't work, it is fraud. Wherever you live, your legal language has a term for fraud. There are often special laws for what in English is called "consumer fraud", i.e., businesses tricking someone into buying something different from what they thought they were buying.

      Some CDs and DV DVDs have labels on the outside that say what equipment they play on; most don't. If you buy them via a web site, such warnings are almost never visible before you buy. It's fairly common for vendors to make it very difficult to get a refund in such cases. This is clearly intentional fraud. "We've got that sucker's money; we don't care whether he can use what we sold him."

      And in a lot of the world, if you sell me a recording of any sort, you can't prosecute me if I watch it. Even if I have to modify my equipment (e.g. by modifying the hardware or by writing a bit of code) to do so. But in some parts of the world, such modifications are illegal. When government outlaw such actions by customers, they are openly and knowingly supporting consumer fraud by the sellers of recordings.

      --
      Those who do study history are doomed to stand helplessly by while everyone else repeats it.
  52. Re:Bringing WMV9 to linux by Chris+L.+Mason · · Score: 1

    >If you are not in a swing state, and your candidate won't win, vote for a party you actually like.

    Dude, you need a new sig. :)

  53. HDTV content by BrookHarty · · Score: 4, Informative

    Incase you are wondering, why port WM9 to linux?

    Some HDTV quality video is only in WM9, and some HDTV-DVD's also. Also for those pay music services that only use WM9.

    http://www.wmvhd.com/

    1. Re:HDTV content by dosius · · Score: 1

      Isn't the WMA audio codec in all its incarnations fully implemented in LAVC? As of late I have had little trouble playing WMAs in MPlayer, so mplayer -ao pcm followed by lame is my usual solution when I find a WMA on KaZaA.

      Moll.

      --
      What you hear in the ear, preach from the rooftop Matthew 10.27b
    2. Re:HDTV content by Jah-Wren+Ryel · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Some HDTV quality video is only in WM9, and some HDTV-DVD's also.

      Unfortunately, almost all of those are wrapped up in Microsoft's digital restriction mandates and thus won't play on linux even with DVD Jon's work here.

      MS's DRM is particularly nasty because it enables "phone home" authorization just to play the video thus you end up with silliness like the HD-DVD release of Terminator 2 not working (without a proxy) outside of the US or Canada as well as HD movie trailers (not actual movies, just the "previews" for upcoming movies) phoning home each time you play them, allowing the movie studios to do god knows what with that information -- and you not to play them without an internet connection (and all the assorted risks that come with it).

      --
      When information is power, privacy is freedom.
  54. iTunes ogg support by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I was plesantly suprised to find that iTunes (at least with 4.7) has ogg vorbis support. I don't know when that happened. I wonder if there is support coming in the iPod?

  55. Next Obvious step ... by Stephen+Samuel · · Score: 3, Funny

    I wonder what Microsoft is gonna have Jon charged with?

    --
    Free Software: Like love, it grows best when given away.
    1. Re:Next Obvious step ... by kylemonger · · Score: 5, Funny

      With thirty billion in the bank I think they can just have him killed.

    2. Re:Next Obvious step ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Microsoft wants people to licence their codec technology, so they will charge him with nothing.

    3. Re:Next Obvious step ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yea, and the rest of Trondheim!

    4. Re:Next Obvious step ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I wonder what Microsoft is gonna have Jon charged with?
      10000 Volts maybe?

  56. Re:Dear God. by Lord+Kano · · Score: 0, Offtopic

    Actually, the government still refuses to confirm or deny the existance of Area 51.

    Secondly, the waiver in question allows the military to ignore environmental laws regarding the disposal of toxic waste.

    And yes, they are burning it. Thousands of gallons of toxic waste are being burned at a facility that officially doesn't exist.

    LK

    --
    "Hi. This is my friend, Jack Shit, and you don't know him." - Lord Kano
  57. Where Are the Karma Whores When You Need Them? by Stephen+Samuel · · Score: 1

    Could somebody who actually made it to these web pages post their content so that the rest of us can read them.

    --
    Free Software: Like love, it grows best when given away.
    1. Re:Where Are the Karma Whores When You Need Them? by mlk · · Score: 1
      --
      Wow, I should not post when knackered.
  58. Re:Bringing WMV9 to linux by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    You must be David Lawrence... http://www.online-tonight.com//

  59. um? by tomstdenis · · Score: 1

    I know this is going to be modded as flamebait or whatever... ...but...

    Who cares?

    First, don't FOSS alternatives exist?

    Second, from personal experience lavc's mpeg4 is good enough even at relatively low rates [sub 1 mbps].

    Third, I'm tired of one person getting credit for shit. I'm sure it wasn't just Jon sitting at his puter typing away to make this happen.

    Tom

    --
    Someday, I'll have a real sig.
  60. SHouldn't the title be: by /dev/trash · · Score: 1

    The group of hackers that uses DVD Jon as their scapegoat has hacked WMV?

    1. Re:SHouldn't the title be: by TravisWatkins · · Score: 1

      I've worked on some iTunes-related things with him in the past. Trust me, he knows what he is doing.

      --

      "But I'm still right here, giving blood and keeping faith. And I'm still right here."
  61. Re:Bringing WMV9 to linux by Pugflop · · Score: 2, Funny

    Sure there is!

    >gcc mycrap.c

    Compiling...

    SYNTAX ERROR!

  62. Re:Bringing WMV9 to linux by trewornan · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Q. What's a valid patent?
    A. One that hasn't been tested in court.

    Who's to say that there's any valid IP in WMV9 ? Of all organisations, MS and the US Patent Office are the last I'd trust to tell me.

  63. Really Importent! by cfoster611 · · Score: 1

    This seems incredibly important, since it appears the first time that WMV9 can be decoded without using a windows DLL.

    Perhaps now i'll be able to use WMV9 without using M$'s player on my Mac.

    --
    --- Kicking the Cheat since late 2002
  64. MOD PARENT UP! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    He's actually correct, unlike half of the people commenting on this story.

  65. Re:Bringing WMV9 to linux by ATN · · Score: 1, Insightful

    I suppose the problem is that regardless of how good a piece of software is people generaly don't like change, and in many cases it's a matter of who has gained a certain amount of power over consumer's based on their sense of safety in familiarity. It goes even further then that, as software companies purposely make it very difficult for people to switch to alternatives as they use thier political and monetary power to force the adoption of standards that require licenses when there are open standards of the same or better quality that don't have the same kind of power behind them that if adopted would give the consumer more options, increase competitivness in the products that use the standard by making it easier for new companies to enter the market, and ultimately provide consumers with better inexpensive products.

  66. my sweaty ballsack by haX0rsaw · · Score: 0, Troll

    is smelly.

  67. Licensing Windows Media for Other Platforms by westlake · · Score: 4, Interesting
    It can be useful to ask how much it would cost to license Microsoft's media.

    The answer for a video decoder is 10 cents per unit with a $40,000 cap. Windows Media Licensing Fees and Royalties (September 2004)

    You want to see Linux on every desktop? Would it kill you to admit that shelling out the bucks to license proprietary technologies that might actually get you there makes some sense?

    None of the commercial Linux distros are going to touch a decoder that has "lawsuit" written all over it.

    1. Re:Licensing Windows Media for Other Platforms by lithron · · Score: 1

      The answer for a video decoder is 10 cents per unit with a $40,000 cap.

      You misplaced that comma. Its a $400,000 cap.

      That 10 cents also ONLY covers video OR audio. If you want both you must pay 20 cents per unit, with a different cap than listed above. If you want 'high-resolution stereo' or 'multichannel' audio you'll be paying another 20 cents per decoder.

      While it is still cheap, its not quite as cheap as you make it sound.

    2. Re:Licensing Windows Media for Other Platforms by ZorinLynx · · Score: 1

      Doesn't this apply to licensing Microsoft's code? If you write your own implementation, do you still have to pay?

      -Z

    3. Re:Licensing Windows Media for Other Platforms by ocelotbob · · Score: 1

      yes you still have to pay. ASF, among other components, is patent-encumbered.

      --

      Marxism is the opiate of dumbasses

    4. Re:Licensing Windows Media for Other Platforms by westlake · · Score: 1
      While it is still cheap, its not quite as cheap as you make it sound.

      true, and I apologize for the error.

      but I stand by my argument that home users are not FOSS purists. meaning they won't abandon windows media, subscription radio, on-line music stores, etc., for a Linux distro that doesn't support these services out of the box.

    5. Re:Licensing Windows Media for Other Platforms by moranar · · Score: 1

      It's a $400,000 cap, not $40,000, but still it's not too much for a big Linux company.

      --
      "I think it would be a good idea!"
      Gandhi, about Internet Security
    6. Re:Licensing Windows Media for Other Platforms by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I for one would be happy to pay a license fee of even several dollars per computer, to get native Linux support for WMV. And pay again for QuickTime.

      The trouble is that neither Microsoft nor Apple has given us that option. Neither company really wants Linux to gain more interoperability features; anything that smooths a migration away from Windows or MacOS is not good news for them.

      But if Microsoft's attempts to standardize WMV9 means that some organization will be accepting license payments and we can get legal for a small amount, I'm happy about it.

    7. Re:Licensing Windows Media for Other Platforms by JTL21 · · Score: 2, Informative

      Read the license itself, its horrible.

      What matters isn't the price of the Windows Media Licensing its the other terms some of which are unacceptable. Unless it has changed recently it commits any signing company to handing over some areas of technology development to Microsoft, and restricts what other technologies you can develop such as media servers.

      The license is explicity anti-competitive and also vague in what it grants you. The MPEG licenses on the other hand while financially expensive (this varies between particular licenses) are simple patent license grants with no restrictive conditions.

      In my view the price for the Microsoft licenses is higher.

    8. Re:Licensing Windows Media for Other Platforms by Thomas+Shaddack · · Score: 1
      ...meaning they won't abandon windows media, subscription radio, on-line music stores, etc., for a Linux distro that doesn't support these services out of the box.

      Well... not everybody is an FOSS purist. Not even within the rank of coders and admins.

      I, for one, can easily imagine a P2P-based update system, as easy to use as "emerge", for safe and simple installing of "unofficial" components. Or an "upgrade" CD, custom-tailored for the given distro.

    9. Re:Licensing Windows Media for Other Platforms by evilviper · · Score: 4, Insightful
      Would it kill you to admit that shelling out the bucks to license proprietary technologies that might actually get you there makes some sense?

      That is most definately the WRONG way to go about it.

      The RIGHT way is to push content providers to use technologies that we don't have to license, such as Vorbis, Theora, MPEG-1, Dirac, etc.

      Imagine if all the percieved gaps in Linux were fixed the same way... People using Linux will want photoshop, so license Photoshop for Linux, rather than creating The GIMP.

      Pay the license fee to get DVD decryption in a Linux player, but it must be binary-only, and limited to the same features you find in Windows DVD players (no DVD-backups for you!).
      --
      Slashdot gets worse every day... Pipedot: News for nerds, without the corporate slant
    10. Re:Licensing Windows Media for Other Platforms by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

      Sure... license it.

      And then watch Micro$oft take the liberty of NOT licensing the DRM-related parts of it... just as Linspire's Michael Robertson unfortunately did for the Linspire distro just last week:

      http://www.linspire.com/lindows_michaelsminutes_ar chives.php?id=143

      Conclusion: Forget it! We need free formats, not such utter crap! And financially supporting such crap is even worse...

    11. Re:Licensing Windows Media for Other Platforms by westlake · · Score: 1
      The RIGHT way is to push content providers to use technologies that we don't have to license, such as Vorbis, Theora, MPEG-1, Dirac, etc

      Imagine if all the percieved gaps in Linux were fixed the same way... People using Linux will want photoshop, so license Photoshop for Linux, rather than creating The GIMP

      Imagine licensing the PANTONE system for the GIMP and delivering a product that is suitable for pre-press work today and not five years down the road.

      Free-as-in-speech and free-as-in-beer are obsessions only within the open source community.

    12. Re:Licensing Windows Media for Other Platforms by Cid+Highwind · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Imagine licensing the PANTONE system for the GIMP and delivering a product that is suitable for pre-press work today and not five years down the road.

      Free-as-in-speech and free-as-in-beer are obsessions only within the open source community.


      That's true. For the people who don't care about either of those there is Photoshop, which has already licensed Pantone, and is ready for prepress work today. Sure it's expensive, but hey, you don't care about free-as-in-beer anyway, right?

      Without the code being free (as in beer and as in speech) there is zero added value in using The GIMP over Photoshop (or any other proprietary image editor).

      --
      0 1 - just my two bits
    13. Re:Licensing Windows Media for Other Platforms by LuSiDe · · Score: 1

      "That is most definately the WRONG way to go about it.

      The RIGHT way is to push content providers to use technologies that we don't have to license, such as Vorbis, Theora, MPEG-1, Dirac, etc."

      Sure, that's all fine but customers who use Linux on the desktop want to see the content *right now* and the alternatives aren't getting ground. Some Linux distributors already got a license from Microsoft, such as TurboLinux and Lindows.

      --
      WE DON'T NEED NO BLOG CONTROL.
    14. Re:Licensing Windows Media for Other Platforms by evilviper · · Score: 1
      but customers who use Linux on the desktop want to see the content *right now*

      Yes, and I'm sure they want to be able to use Microsoft Office on Linux *right now*, and they want to be able to play all of their PC games *right now*. So what?

      Linux would not be an attractive option in the first place, if everything was licensed. If it was, it would be just another OS that you had to pay through the teeth for.

      Giving people the ability to play WMV will HURT Linux in the long run, as it would prevent the adoption of the alternatives. It's the inability of customers to play the video/audio on a site that motivates companies to switch. Giving people that option will help to entrench WMV, further locking everyone in to WMV, and forcing people to pay for a WMV license over and over and over.

      As I said, licensing is the WRONG way to go. It serves to help very few in the short-term, and hurting EVERYONE in the long-term.
      --
      Slashdot gets worse every day... Pipedot: News for nerds, without the corporate slant
    15. Re:Licensing Windows Media for Other Platforms by LuSiDe · · Score: 1

      Hmm normally i'd just stop arguing but i think i'm able to make a point to make you at least not think so fundementally in wrong versus right.

      Look, when Stallman was in the proprietary UNIX age, he could also have said: 'copyright is the wrong way, i am against copyright' hence using public domain or a very liberal license (e.g. BSD, though then he'd still copyright his software). He did not do that, he did not strictly apply his principle. Instead he thought of a practical solution to get around copyright while not being too liberal for those who don't 'want to play nice' (the GPL). I'm not sure if Stallman actually said or thought that, but i'm very sure it was either Stallman or Moglen who wrote being actually against copyright in an essay.

      Moral of the story? Sometimes the practical solution just ain't the holy grail (the theory) but it might help you to get (near) the holy grail. Its not clear wether this example actually raises Linux adoption so its in 'our' advantage (of our goal, which i assume we share). Therefore i don't say either is, but you appear to be overly confident about it.

      --
      WE DON'T NEED NO BLOG CONTROL.
  68. Insert SNL Han Solo Screen test skit here by stor · · Score: 2, Funny

    Cut-n-pasted from http://snltranscripts.jt.org/96/96jstarwars1.phtml

    Voice of Director: Christopher Walken, Han Solo screen test. Okay, Chris, whenever you're ready.

    Christopher Walken: "I'm Captain of.. the Millenium.. Falcon. Chewie here.. tells me.. you're looking for passage.. to the.. alderaan system."

    Voice of Director: "Yes, indeed, It's a fast ship."

    Christopher Walken: "Fast.. ship? You've never heard.. of the.. millenium falcon? It's the ship.. that made the kessel run.. in less than.. 12 parsecs. She's.. fast enough.. for you.. old man.." That sucked! I'm sorry.. [ turns and walks away ] You know.. I had it..

    Cheers
    Stor

    p.s. If you haven't seen this skit, try googling for it. It may only be available in .wmv though ;)

    --
    "Yeah well there's a lot of stuff that should be, but isn't"
  69. Re:Bringing WMV9 to linux by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    What the hell is that supposed to mean?

  70. Decoder only, or encoder too? by Animats · · Score: 1
    Did he do an encoder, or just a decoder?

    Most of the hard work is in the encoder, which has to recognize frame-to-frame motion and make hard decisions. The decoder just does what the data stream says to do.

    1. Re:Decoder only, or encoder too? by ZorinLynx · · Score: 4, Insightful

      You only really need a decoder, because there's plenty of other, much more open formats to encode into when you're on a Linux system.

      WMV is a closed, proprietary codec. Please don't encode your files into that format. }:)

      -Z

    2. Re:Decoder only, or encoder too? by a24061 · · Score: 1

      Why would you want an encoder? It's bad enough that proprietary algorithms and DRM exist---we shouldn't promote them by encoding to them.

    3. Re:Decoder only, or encoder too? by evilviper · · Score: 1

      WMV/VC-1 is about as closed and propritary as MPEG-4.

      Frankly, if I had a need to commercially distribute digitized video, I would seriously consider VC-1, because the license to use it is MUCH cheaper than MPEG-4, and the two are about even in quality/bitrate.

      <RANT>
      If there was a VP3 encoder for Unix/Linux, I would have been encoding every video I had to VP3. Instead, here we are over years later, Theora far from finished, not any better than what they started from, and now nearly obsolete because most other codecs have passed it up.

      I believe in technical freedom. Give people a VC-1 encoder if possible, and let them decide if they will use it or not.

      --
      Slashdot gets worse every day... Pipedot: News for nerds, without the corporate slant
    4. Re:Decoder only, or encoder too? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Hey everyone, evilviper has volouneered to write us a WMV9 encoder! Not that we'll ever want to actually use it...

  71. Hold on a second by brighton · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Maybe someone can explain this to me. It would seem to me that there's no encryption being broken here. But let's say we wanted to play a WMV9 -drm'd movie in linux using this code. We would have to decrypt the DRMd content somehow no? So now I assume that this is where the whole downloadable license thing comes into play. So let's say DVD-John 's algorithm downloads a license to play the drm'd file. What's to stop a rogue programmer from outputting the decrypted video stream to file ? I would have assumed the protection previosuly lied in Windows Media Player and its closed sourcebase preventing this option from becoming practical to a user. Now if we have the ability to play back DRM'd files as easily as I outlined it above, doesn't that completely destroy the ability of content producers to provide DRM'd content? Or is that exactly what RMS' point has been the last few years.

    All this time I've assumed there was something big that I was missing in this whole DRM scheme . It seems totally inconceivable to me that Microsoft/Apple/Real/etc honestly believes that they can coax all content players to respect the content provider's wishes.

    1. Re:Hold on a second by m50d · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Yes, it will be possible, just like there's a no-drm patch for xpdf. However, just like that patch, anyone publishing this player probably won't want to include the nodrm bit for fear of looking like a piracy tool, and I doubt studios will be worried about the few people who will put the effort into getting it. There's a cracker for wmv drm available anyway, that doesn't even use the keys.

      --
      I am trolling
    2. Re:Hold on a second by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It is all in the hardware.
      It is possible to make hardware that destroy itself if somebody is trying to listen to it.
      It is impossible to make software that does that.
      Read up on TCPA and XBOX game distribution, mobile phones (games, ring tones) to see what the future holds for the PC.

    3. Re:Hold on a second by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      ....

      There's a cracker for wmv drm available anyway, that doesn't even use the keys.


      ....

      oo where to get it? (and dont say its the old noe because thats not working..

  72. Re:Dear God. by ravenspear · · Score: 1

    Actually, the government still refuses to confirm or deny the existance of Area 51.

    Actually no. The Air Force admitted to its existence several years ago.

  73. Norway next to be annihilated? by RealBorg · · Score: 1

    I guess this gives Norway, whose court's have decided this to be legal, another push on George WW3 Bush's list of terrorist countries. Our brave norwegians have even resisted the pressure to join the european union. Remember that small village in Gaul? ;-)

    1. Re:Norway next to be annihilated? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No, no, no, you got it all wrong. The proper term is 'liberated'. Remember, 'liberated from their oppressive, and despotic government'

    2. Re:Norway next to be annihilated? by jimicus · · Score: 1

      'liberated from their oppressive, and despotic government'

      Who said anything about Norway liberating America? I thought it was the other way around.

      Oh, wait...

    3. Re:Norway next to be annihilated? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      We may be on that list!
      But, we are very americanized. No beards and turbans. Fighting us would be like fighting your nearest neighbor. - But we have OIL! I feel terror.

      Seriously, if I lived in U(banana)SA , I would be out in the streets waving banners.

      Regards,
      nasty and oily,
      CptGyro

    4. Re:Norway next to be annihilated? by aminorex · · Score: 1

      What's really a hoot is the rhetorical attacks agaist the "Mullahs" of Iran, which is the only truly democratic republic in the whole of the middle east. Israel can't claim to be a democracy when they deny the vote to half of the population on the basis of race. Iran is easily as democratic as the U.S. where the final arbiters of disputes at law are a supreme revolutionary council of black-robed priests and prietesses appointed by dead presidents. At least the elected leader of Iran has a moral I.Q. better than Koko the gorilla's.

      --
      -I like my women like I like my tea: green-
  74. Slashdotted Already...? by Non-Newtonian+Fluid · · Score: 1

    Ah, to be swashbuckling out there, as opposed to sitting behind a desk here, wrestling with old VB6 code.

    If only the links weren't Slashdotted and I could waste more time revelling in someone else's success.

    *sigh*

  75. "ms can change the format any time they like" by jbellis · · Score: 2, Informative

    Not once millions of files are encoded, they can't. Joe User wouldn't be happy if suddenly windows auto-update meant his kids' birthday videos don't work anymore.

    1. Re:"ms can change the format any time they like" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Off topic, Carange Blender, nice and all, but I'm done with it for now. Have to parse that cursive more often than is comfortable, like every 5 fights or so.

    2. Re:"ms can change the format any time they like" by Sycraft-fu · · Score: 1

      No what I mean is that in the future, they can roll out a new WM standard as they have in the past, but not open it up. WMV 10 or 9.5 or whatever. Thus something implemented with VC-1 couldn't play it.

    3. Re:"ms can change the format any time they like" by Hal_Porter · · Score: 1

      Actually Microsoft can role out new and incompatible codecs without any user problems.

      Windows Media Player knows how to decode and install new codecs. The codecs are small too, so you can realistically download them over a dial up line.

      The old files will still use the original codec, obviously. They just make the authoring tools only use the new codecs.

      --
      echo -e 'global _start\n _start:\n mov eax, 2\n int 80h\n jmp _start' > a.asm; nasm a.asm -f elf; ld a.o -o a;
    4. Re:"ms can change the format any time they like" by Quixote · · Score: 1

      Easy: Microsoft will just come up with a "WMP10" that will play the VC-1 files, as well as the new (read: DRM enabled) files. Once you sucker the people into using an interface (WMP), it is only a small step to lead them to the abattoir.

  76. A step closer to breaking WMV DRM? by sdo1 · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Oh, I hope we're a step closer to freeing up DRM restricted WMV files and here's why...

    I bought (as in I paid for) WMV files from MLB.com of this year's baseball playoffs because I didn't save my TiVo'd copies and wanted to have the games in my personal archive. At MLB.com, they used advertising verbiage like "watch them whenever you want!" and "burn them to CD!". Apparantly I didn't read the fine print close enough (or maybe it wasn't in the fine print), but those files are heavily DRM restricted. I have to be connected to the internet and log onto MLB.com to watch them. And even then, I can't even fast forward. Pathetic.

    All I wanted to do was to convert them DVD-compatible MPEG2 for MY USE. I want to watch them on my TV instead of my computer. I paid for them and I should be able to view them somewhere other than my PC. I searched high and low and couldn't find a way to break the DRM. Sheesh, it's not like I'm trying to do anything that could be construed as illegal, at least by any rational person. Really frustrating.

    If Jon's thing helps free these files in a way that will allow me to media-shift them, then I'm all for it! Even if it's not so I can watch them on Linux. Heck, I've had to use DeCSS to extract MPEG files from DVDs of MY OWN HOME VIDEOS because the original tapes were damaged. How pathetic is it that I needed a tool like that in order to view files that I and I alone own copyright on?

    -S

    --
    --- What parts of "shall make no law", "shall not be infringed", and "shall not be violated" don't you understand?
    1. Re:A step closer to breaking WMV DRM? by peterhoeg · · Score: 1, Informative

      Hate to be the one breaking the bad news, but you do not own the copyright to those titles. You own the media, not the content and definately not the copyright.

    2. Re:A step closer to breaking WMV DRM? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "--- What parts of "shall make no law", "shall not be infringed", and "shall not be violated" don't you understand?"

      The part where it says "x co-workers/students/pedestrians killed with semi-automatic gun bought via post-order, munitions available at every shop"

      Long live the only western development country in the world...

    3. Re:A step closer to breaking WMV DRM? by mikrorechner · · Score: 2, Funny
      Heck, I've had to use DeCSS to extract MPEG files from DVDs of MY OWN HOME VIDEOS because the original tapes were damaged.
      Maybe I don't get you right here, but how the hell did you get CSS encryption on your "OWN HOME VIDEOS"?

      Is there a tool like EnCSS somewhere out there, for making watching your own videos a pain in the ass or what?
      --
      "Oh, a lesson in not changing history from Mr I'm-my-own-Grandpa." - Dr Hubert Farnsworth
    4. Re:A step closer to breaking WMV DRM? by IO+ERROR · · Score: 1

      How'd you manage to wind up with CSS on a DVD of your own stuff? You can make a DVD without it. As for MLB.com, you should file a chargeback with the credit card company, as they clearly created an expectation that you would be able to watch the files you bought in particular ways and then failed to deliver, and failed to remedy their breach.

      --
      How am I supposed to fit a pithy, relevant quote into 120 characters?
    5. Re:A step closer to breaking WMV DRM? by ZorbaTHut · · Score: 1

      What part of "MY OWN HOME VIDEOS" do you not understand?

      Home videos, also known as "videos taken in the home".

      --
      Breaking Into the Industry - A development log about starting a game studio.
    6. Re:A step closer to breaking WMV DRM? by evilviper · · Score: 1
      Your rant is completely off-topic. This has NOTHING to do with DRM of any kind. It is only a native WMV9/VC-1 video decoder.

      I paid for them and I should be able to view them somewhere other than my PC. I searched high and low and couldn't find a way to break the DRM.

      Use the S-Video output found on most video cards. Hook it up to a VCR, or digital caputure card, and record the playback of your DRM'd files. You'll loose some quality in the conversion (let's say 10%) but it'll work with any kind of DRM.

      The important part is not to let yourself get screwed-over again. Read the fine print, and be sceptical, especially if the video is for sale in Windows Media format.
      --
      Slashdot gets worse every day... Pipedot: News for nerds, without the corporate slant
    7. Re:A step closer to breaking WMV DRM? by TiggsPanther · · Score: 1
      How'd you manage to wind up with CSS on a DVD of your own stuff? You can make a DVD without it.

      My guess would be that the poster got them converted by a company that automatically uses CSS when moving VHS to DVD format. I'm not sure why companies would do this, but there's always the chance that one does.

      --
      Tiggs
      "120 chars should be enough for everyone..."
    8. Re:A step closer to breaking WMV DRM? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      use a screen recording program and turn them wmv into something usable.

    9. Re:A step closer to breaking WMV DRM? by aminorex · · Score: 1

      Another option is to use audio and video mirror drivers to capture the consumable data stream.

      Windows doesn't have actual DRM yet. They're just pretending so that content-providers get suckered into WMV.

      --
      -I like my women like I like my tea: green-
    10. Re:A step closer to breaking WMV DRM? by ChrisPee · · Score: 1
      To convert any Windows video format to any other, use a video capture program like Snag-It. Capture the video window to an (uncompressed) AVI file, with your audio out patched to mic in. The AVI file can then be converted to MPEG-1 or MPEG-2 with the free TMPGENC utility.

      * This requires lots of free disk space and a reasonably fast (1GHz+) PC.

    11. Re:A step closer to breaking WMV DRM? by peterhoeg · · Score: 1

      Well, aren't you antsy? Ok, I misread it.

  77. Re:First Post! by 320mb · · Score: 0

    I can view anything with Linux using mplayer.........and M$ can't stop me.

    --
    === 'Kernel Panic' no sig found:
  78. Can't people use Google? by msormune · · Score: 2, Informative

    Google reveals that this has been done already before. Check out http://www.amigaforever.com/kb/5-105.html, for example.

  79. You can already watch VC-1 with Xine or Turbolinux by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Some creative googling turns this page up: http://www.amigaforever.com/kb/5-105.html

    Q: How can I play back videos encoded with the VC-1 codec? Can I also play them back on a Mac or other system?

    A: In order to save disk space while trying to preserve as much quality as possible, Amiga Forever contains videos which are "encoded" (compressed) using the VC-1 codec, originally developed by Microsoft as part of its Windows Media 9 (WM9) technology (where it was known as "VC-9" before being released as the "VC-1" standard by the Society of Motion Picture and Television Engineers). The videos on the Amiga Forever 6.0 CD-ROM are stored in the "VIDEO" directory, and have names ending in ".WMV".

    The video files can be played back with Windows Media Player 7.1 or higher on Windows, or with Windows Media Player 9 or higher on Mac OS X. VC-1-compatible players for Linux include Turbo Media Player by Turbolinux and Xine (which requires some original Microsoft DLLs).


    So there you have it. If anything, JJ only got some native linux code to work, since he could have used a DLL to play it in Xine and probably MPlayer too.

  80. Slashdotted? -- use Coral Cache by otisg · · Score: 2, Informative

    Use it like this: like this

    More about Coral: http://www.scs.cs.nyu.edu/coral/.

    --
    Simpy
    1. Re:Slashdotted? -- use Coral Cache by passthecrackpipe · · Score: 1

      looks like the coral cache is slashdotted.... just a blank page.

      --
      People who think they know everything are a great annoyance to those of us who do.
  81. Cannot connect to host. by rice_burners_suck · · Score: 4, Interesting
    Dude, this site is all Slashcracked. How come /. doesn't have a Google-style cache (you could easily set it up using the Squid, with all links on the front page leading to the cache, rather than the original? Nobody would ever get /.ed that way.

    If you're worried that owners of the linked sites won't get usage statistics, the cache could be set up to count how many times it was accessed, and the statistics could be emailed to the site owner. The email would look something like this:

    To: webmaster@slashdotted.site.com
    From: CmdrTaco@slashdot.org
    Subject: You were /.ed!
    Date: Today

    From the because-your-site-rocks-and-we-cached-the-damn-thi ng department:

    Guess what? Your site was /.ed! But don't worry, our cache prevented millions of users from bringing your servers to their knees. Here are your usage statistics:

    .
    .
    .
    .

    You get the idea.
    1. Re:Cannot connect to host. by a24061 · · Score: 1

      This is covered in the Slashdot FAQ under Slashdot should cache pages to prevent the Slashdot Effect!.

    2. Re:Cannot connect to host. by BenjyD · · Score: 1

      From that FAQ:

      I could try asking permission, but do you want to wait 6 hours for a cool breaking story while we wait for permission to link someone?

      That is a pretty silly point. Would you rather:

      1. Wait a few hours while we get permission
      2. Wait a day to read the article because it's slashdotted

      But maybe I'm just bitter, having served 20,000 Slashdotters on my 512K ADSL last night. According to MRTG, my router was using about 150% of my upstream bandwidth for most of the time.

    3. Re:Cannot connect to host. by a24061 · · Score: 1

      I'm only pointing out that the /. powers that be have already thought about it and made a decision. I'm not saying it's right or wrong.

    4. Re:Cannot connect to host. by Quixote · · Score: 1
      It is not just a matter of statistics. What if you have ads on the page? What if you have some system to deliver source-specific (IP-based) ads?

      A better solution would be to have a META tag which allows mirroring; then you could automatically mirror the sites that didn't want to get creamed (or even just a subset of the content, by putting such a tag in the content headers).

    5. Re:Cannot connect to host. by fok · · Score: 1

      /. could use some persuasion techniques such as... "let us chache or your server DIES!"

      --
      \m/
    6. Re:Cannot connect to host. by DrWhizBang · · Score: 1

      mirrordot.org.

      is that what you had in mind?

      --
      Schrodinger's cat is either dead or really pissed off...
    7. Re:Cannot connect to host. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I could try asking permission, but do you want to wait 6 hours for a cool breaking story while we wait for permission to link someone?

      Most /. news articles are at least two weeks old, a few hours don't hurt, even though you can probably go without asking for permission anyway. You could do it the Google way, and cache without asking for permission. Google seems to get by just fine legally taking on the entire internet in this fashion.

      But what happens if I cache the site, and they update themselves? Once again, I'm transmitting data that I shouldn't be, only this time my cache is out of date!

      Synchronize the cache with the original once every ten minutes. Geez, stop being so stingy, CmdrTaco! Otherwise we'll have to start boycotting Slashdot and pay our fees to sites that mirror for Slashdot instead! Slashdot is a hazard to the rest of the world, just because CmdrTaco is stingy, and the FAQ doesn't address this fact that he's stingy in this respect.

      I don't want to sound like an anti-CmdrTaco troll, it just seems like the rest of the world is unfairly subject to server crashes, and that doesn't help Slashdot readers, the main constituents that are paying his salary. It's only the right thing for CmdrTaco to simply spend the money he's getting paid to work for to better service his customers and protect the world from /. attacks, which he is primarily responsible for.

  82. Re:Bringing WMV9 to linux by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The mp3 codec debacle is just forcing US imperialism on the rest of the world, nothing prevents redhat or any other US based linux distro hosting a server outside the US that can be used to obtain patent encumbered software, just like when 128 bit encryption was illegal to export.

  83. It's very much NOT open source by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    IIRC VC-1 is open source now after it was submit to SMPTE for the review

    VC1 is an open standard, meaning that anyone can re-implement it from the hardcopy speficification (subject to royalties of course). However Microsoft's particular implementation of the standard (the WMV9 code) is anything but open source. It will cost you $5000 (could be $10000, I forget) plus a hefty confidentiality agreement from Microsoft - so I doubt we'll be seeing it in the mplayer/VLC CVS anytime soon. It looks like it was thrown together by chimps, by the way.

    As mentioned in the article, the VC1 standard is technically inferior to H.264 anyway (which does have open source reference software).

  84. Screenies... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Hmm, according to those screen shots he doesn't want to play wmv9 media, he just wants to look at hot chicks! Also, his up2date isn't!! Yum update! Quick! Waagh!

  85. Yes, an informative myth. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    way to go, mods

  86. AWESOME - Though that would be WMV3, not WMV9... by DeeKay · · Score: 3, Informative

    The Video Codec is WMV3, the whole shebang together with the new audio Codec and lots of DRM is just called Windows Media 9!

    Thank you, Jon! ;-) I've been waiting for that for a long time, and the WMV3-videos that wouldn't run with Mplayer and VLC REALLY started to piss me off...

  87. GG by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Another website downed by slashdot.

  88. The fuzz is about.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    someone who did it and now we have the source for the codec. Sure. You say it way easy. But I didn't see YOU doing this. Everybody just said "oh, well, we'll use the dll".

    1. Re:The fuzz is about.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No seriously now, Jon didn't write the source code for the VC1 implementation. He took an existing VC1 codec and made it work with VCL. That's it. We had the source code before he did this, and we still have the source code.

  89. the answer is obvious by talaphid · · Score: 1

    Native-ian.

  90. Re:Bringing WMV9 to linux by zaxios · · Score: 1

    Whatever it is, it's profound.

  91. How is this possible? by CountBrass · · Score: 1

    That Apple could be mentioned in an article and there not be a reference to "iPod" or "iPod killers"?!?

    My world has turned upside down.

    --
    Bad analogies are like waxing a monkey with a rainbow.
  92. Breaks license terms for sure by gilesjuk · · Score: 1

    While using WMV on Linux will probably break the end user license, lets not forget that Microsoft have been found to be breaking laws with their anti-competitive practises.

    So such licenses are questionable. You have a computer hardware to run it, you have the software required to decode the files. Why should you be forced to buy and use a specific operating system to do the job? especially if there's a free alternative that is better.

    It's politics like this that make me think about taking up another interest.

    1. Re:Breaks license terms for sure by TiggsPanther · · Score: 2, Insightful
      While using WMV on Linux will probably break the end user license...

      And this is the problem and why MS are going to have a hard time trying to crack down on any attempts to stop Linux being able to run WMV.

      Thanks to the "marvel" of Windows Movie Maker people with Windows XP can create these files from their Home PC without needing to either shell out on over-expensive software (except maybe Windows XP) or use pirate software (again, except maybe Windows XP). Unless there's a way of getting Windows Movie Maker to use other codecs then there is going to be more and more home content that will be open by nature but closed by implementation.
      And unless there's a decent free alternative (which I'd like to know about, too) for editing video on Windows I can't think of any way of persuading these people to use formats that can be easily read elsewhere - hence needing to use what's unfortunately not a legal implementation just to play the stuff back.

      --
      Tiggs
      "120 chars should be enough for everyone..."
  93. Re:Bringing WMV9 to linux by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    It means his dealer has riped him off again.

  94. Props to Jon! by _iCeb0x_+(1337+and+k · · Score: 1

    Finally, I think, he has done something with a good purpose (I am really addicted to this word today).

    Cracking CSS was good, because it allows for us to back-up our movies, which sure is fair-use... It also allows us to share these copies, but that's another story.

    Cracking Apple's FairPlay "technology" was not that important. Was it meant for "playing our AAC's on any device"? I doubt it! I haven't seen that many non-Apple players that support the format, even if unprotected. Apple tries to tie the consumer into their products, but I don't see people buying music from the iTMS for playinh iy in other players, and the restrictions are pretty loose. You can have your files authorized for 3 different computers and 2 iPods (I am not sure here)... I think it's prety good for me and for most people and that creates a good relationship between Apple and the record labels, be it good or not. I, personally, think that $0.99 for song is a good price point for what you can do with the music.

    But, for his last feat, that's really good! Linux needs the more compatibility with "3rd-party standards" it can get if it is to be on the desktop any time in the future.

    Now, if someone could reverse engineer all those QuickTime codecs and get QuickTime on Linux decently!

    1. Re:Props to Jon! by Skinkie · · Score: 1

      http://www.openquicktime.org/ I think before the last century men should evolve their brain search methods to a google-query-first algorithm.

      --
      Support Eachother, Copy Dutch Property!
    2. Re:Props to Jon! by 68kmac · · Score: 1
      You can have your files authorized for 3 different computers and 2 iPods
      5 computers and an unlimited number of iPods, actually.
    3. Re:Props to Jon! by ledow · · Score: 1

      "Was it meant for "playing our AAC's on any device"? I doubt it! I haven't seen that many non-Apple players that support the format, even if unprotected."

      I don't know about that... my Nokia phone can play AAC's and MP3's so someone is using the format. I'm sure if you dug deeper, you'd find all sorts of dvd players and portable MP3 players that support AAC.

    4. Re:Props to Jon! by _iCeb0x_+(1337+and+k · · Score: 1

      That's why I said "I haven't seen that many. I know there were devices that support the format, but it's not as widespread as MP3.

    5. Re:Props to Jon! by _iCeb0x_+(1337+and+k · · Score: 1

      Before complaining about one's supposed limitation, you should look at those of yours. I was talking about "all of those codecs".

      I have been involved in projects dealing with video on the web and there's been quite some time since I came to know about OpenQuicktime and also QuickTime4Linux. We were considering both for a new project, but it was aborted, unfortunately, for technical reasons.

      OpenQuicktime wasn't ready for our needs at the time. I see they have Sorenson support now, which was something we needed at that time, but there are some fairly common codecs that are still unsupported like QDesign Music and Qualcomm PureVoice.

      If you want to poke fun at my limitations, you can just say I could have hacked those myself, since the project is open source. Just go ahead, I don't really care.

    6. Re:Props to Jon! by _iCeb0x_+(1337+and+k · · Score: 1

      Even better than I could have thought...

    7. Re:Props to Jon! by Skinkie · · Score: 1

      Sorry, I wasn't really pointing at you more in information in general. People seem to forget what is allready made and start over all again, which was the unwritten thought behind it. If you feel offended by my post my honest apologies.

      I was first introduced with Q4L by installing Cinelerra, probably pasting the link was a better way, without the quote.

      Btw. The Darwin Streaming Server must have an open source implementation too, hasn't it?

      --
      Support Eachother, Copy Dutch Property!
    8. Re:Props to Jon! by _iCeb0x_+(1337+and+k · · Score: 1

      No problem... Pardon me for the violent reply!

  95. google cache by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    it's in the google cache

  96. Good things about EEA by ringe82 · · Score: 1

    1. We get to pay our huge (non-)member fee
    2. We get to have our fresh meat look like stone (gray) since we can't continue using harmless methods for keeping it red looking. (New EU rule - USA just accepted this method, we've used it since the sixties, but no more)
    3. We get to obey a lot of other freaky EU rules, packing our lives with bureaucracy.
    4. We don't have to bother what the EU decides, we don't have a voice anyway.
    5. Even if we had a voice, we wouldn't have to care at all as we're just 4 million people against Germany's 82 million, so we don't even have to sit in the EU parlament.
    6. We get to PAY, and PAY, and PAY and don't have to do nothing but OBEY THE RULES, that noone in southern Europe cares about! No stress!

    Man! I'm sick of EU. Gimme my country back.

    1. Re:Good things about EEA by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It is no better from the inside... Denmark has been screwed equally as bad as Norway... If it were up to me all the scandinavian contries should quit the EU and continue together.

  97. Colour of grass ... by witcomb · · Score: 1

    here is white, what about you?

  98. I want to ask "why?" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I know people have paid for WMV9 files but why in gods name does everyone use them? Is DivX and quicktime just that bad?

    Everytime I look at a WMV file it doesn't seem to be as good of quality as Divx or an MPEG4 file.

    Could just be me though.

  99. Does he need it ? by earthstar · · Score: 1
    With all the talk of DRM ,copyright,free use etc, Why would Jon want to put this on his blog :
    This work is licensed under a Creative Commons License

    That license is indeed liberal ,but if users exceeded it like he does with companies, would he care?

  100. The trick is.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    "...Xine (which requires some original Microsoft DLLs)."

    This apparently does not.

  101. No he doesn't do any of those things. by Ayanami+Rei · · Score: 1

    He is I guess what you would call a "PR guy" for a group of talented individuals (hackers) who do the work. It didn't even have to be anyone at nanocrew, it could have been someone else who was too shy or afraid to release this stuff herself. (Big bad microsoft and all)

    --
    THIS THING CAN TURN ON A DIME, MACROSSZERO STYLE ALSO FUCK BETA, ~NYORON
    1. Re:No he doesn't do any of those things. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yes, and Linus Torvalds didn't write the first version of Linux. He's just the PR guy.

      I have as much evidence to support the above claims as you have to support your claims about DVD Jon.

      In other words, absolutely no evidence.

    2. Re:No he doesn't do any of those things. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      It didn't even have to be anyone at nanocrew
      AFAIK, nanocrew isn't a group. It's just his personal website. There aren't even any NFO files on the site, let alone any ASCII art.
      it could have been someone else who was too shy or afraid to release this stuff herself. (Big bad microsoft and all)
      Yes, because releasing something anonymously on USENET is just sooo hard!

      Puhleaze. Your theory reeks of bullshit.
  102. Well how did he get around the DRM? by Ayanami+Rei · · Score: 1

    I mean, is the whole stream encrypted or is there a content-control header that DirectShow marshals that you can ignore?

    --
    THIS THING CAN TURN ON A DIME, MACROSSZERO STYLE ALSO FUCK BETA, ~NYORON
  103. Re:Bringing WMV9 to linux by Locutus · · Score: 1

    I wonder how much Microsoft REALLY wants to start taking companies/people to court for IP claims. Think about it, they have WAY more to hide than any other company I can think of( governments not included ).

    A court case would legally allow the defendant to request internal Microsoft documents in the discovery phase. IIRC, Microsoft has, in the past, settled most if it's cases before discovery occured and has even required that "discovery" documents be destroyed in cases it settled after discovery.

    I wonder if their new policy of deleting / destroying documentation over 30 days old will bite them in their desire to try to use IP claims in fighting the spread of GNU/Linux?

    IMO.

    LoB

    --
    "Anyone who stands out in the middle of a road looks like roadkill to me." --Linus
  104. Re:Isn't WMV supposed to be a "standard" for HD-DV by badriram · · Score: 1

    Sorry to burst your bubble but WMV has been approved.
    Seems like MS we will be seeing a lot of VC1 in the future....

  105. Tell you why .. by The+MESMERIC · · Score: 0

    First it must be fun for them.
    Even if they hack something that many would deem useless - I can see it's their hobby. You can only excel more and more.

    Now concerning WMV9 - many Linux fans would want people to give up their Windows. Then they are sent some proprietory file (unreadable) - and the nagging start again.

    Now about DRM. Yeah it should be avoided at all costs. But I had a deadline and knew f** all about Actionscript. Having learnt (ages ago) C# from the LearnVisualStudio.NET series - I've visited a brother site that did Flash script and paid some $15? and download some vids to quickly learn my way into Flash MX/ActionScript (before the client found someone else more proficient in poop technologies).

    And guess what - those bastard had the video DRMed! Now I don't know if Jon cracked DRM also (site's been /.) - but at the time it would have saved me much grief. Wine Windows Player will not play DRM video. Eventually I remember I had a Win4Lin demo in a disc.

    When people go: "What is the point?" - As long as they are having fun - if they are hacking some code with good intent - it is bound to help someone somewhere someday :)

  106. No evidence? by Ayanami+Rei · · Score: 2, Interesting
    --
    THIS THING CAN TURN ON A DIME, MACROSSZERO STYLE ALSO FUCK BETA, ~NYORON
    1. Re:No evidence? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      A biased opinion piece written by an anonymous person is your evidence?

      Not to mention that it's not even relevant. We are talking about DVD-Jon's recent work. The FairPlay reversing and the WMV9 stuff.

      Jon himself stated 5 years ago that he didn't write the decryption part of DeCSS.

      In other words, your "argument" is a logical fallacy.

      That he didn't write DeCSS all by himself doesn't prove that the software he has released after DeCSS was partly written by someone else.

      Well, perhaps in the eyes of envious kiddies such as yourself.

      PS: So do you have any biased and anonymous opinion pieces on his FairPlay and WMV9 work? No? That's what I thought.

    2. Re:No evidence? by Ayanami+Rei · · Score: 1

      playfair was first. Jon didn't write playfair. in fact, the usage notes for deDRMS mention you need to use VLC to get your "user key"; a feature that was part of the original playfair which was later integrated into VLC.

      http://yro.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=105348&c id =8967845

      Similarly, we've got no evidence he's done anything except compile the freely available VC-1 code in this latest iteration. No idea if it supports encrypted streams or what.

      --
      THIS THING CAN TURN ON A DIME, MACROSSZERO STYLE ALSO FUCK BETA, ~NYORON
    3. Re:No evidence? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      playfair was first. Jon didn't write playfair. in fact, the usage notes for deDRMS mention you need to use VLC to get your "user key"; a feature that was part of the original playfair which was later integrated into VLC.
      Are you lying or just making assumptions?

      Jon committed his code to VLC CVS on January 5th, 2004 (the user key code is part of the first commit, just in case you were thinking about making an assumption about that code being added later).
      playfair was released in early April, 2004. The slashdot article was on April 5th, 2004.

      From playfair-0.2.tar.gz/src/mp4ff/drms.c:
      * drms.c : DRMS
      * Copyright (C) 2004 VideoLAN
      * $Id: drms.c,v 1.2 2004/04/01 19:48:01 play_fair Exp $
      *
      * Author: Jon Lech Johansen
      After Apple cracked down on playfair, it returned as hymn. From the hymn manual:
      Jon is the person who first reverse-engineered the FairPlay DRM scheme.
      The playfair README states: "The original version of this program was derived from a Windows-only program called m4p2mp4".
      What do we find when we inspect the m4p2mp4 source code? drms.c by Jon:
      * drms.c : DRMS
      * Copyright (C) 2004 VideoLAN
      * $Id: drms.c,v 1.1 2004/01/05 12:37:52 jlj Exp $
      * Author: Jon Lech Johansen
      I suggest you do fact checking yourself in the future.

      Similarly, we've got no evidence he's done anything except compile the freely available VC-1 code in this latest iteration.
      As far as I can tell, it's only clueless slashdotters who are suggesting he's done something besides that. Is "freely available" another one of your assumptions? Where do I get this freely available VC1 code? It's not freely available from Microsoft or SMPTE. I called SMPTE and it's currently only available to members and for a fee + shipping.
  107. Re:Dear God. by Lord+Kano · · Score: 1

    Got a link?

    --
    "Hi. This is my friend, Jack Shit, and you don't know him." - Lord Kano
  108. Re:Dear God. by ravenspear · · Score: 1

    Try here.

    "The Air Force finally admitted the existence of Area 51 on April 17, 2000, when Air Force spokeswoman Gloria Cales told Associated Press reporters, "We acknowledge having an operating site there [Area 51], and the work is classified." Cales added that the work done at Area 51 involved "operations critical to the U.S. military and the country's security."

  109. Good call. by leonbrooks · · Score: 0, Offtopic

    No text was inserted during the manufacture of this posting.

    --
    Got time? Spend some of it coding or testing
  110. Yup. OK, gentlemen... by leonbrooks · · Score: 1

    ....mod that man through the floor. (-:

    --
    Got time? Spend some of it coding or testing
  111. What colour is the sky on your planet? by leonbrooks · · Score: 1

    Your statement assumes that all lawmakers are sane, reasonable and unbiassed. The odds against that are incredible.

    --
    Got time? Spend some of it coding or testing
  112. "Cash cow of genus Elephas" or maybe Balaenoptera by leonbrooks · · Score: 1

    Elephants and whales have cows and calves too, y'now.

    --
    Got time? Spend some of it coding or testing
  113. It's not a theory... by Ayanami+Rei · · Score: 1

    Jon repackages existing, available stuff, and likes to take a bit of credit for that.

    --
    THIS THING CAN TURN ON A DIME, MACROSSZERO STYLE ALSO FUCK BETA, ~NYORON
  114. Indeed, it's actually lies or assumptions. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    and people who claim that are either lying or making assumptions.

  115. Re:Loser #1 by mrcrontab · · Score: 1

    test