It's not that hard: replace your electric stove with a gas one.
Now, you have electrical capacity free to power your car. The length of the cable-run may be a problem. Heavier-gauge wire?
In my view, the so-called "realists" are being short-sighted.
A memory dump is not a good, inter-operable file format. I have heard stories about how Microsoft word for the Mac really couldn't inter-operate with word for the PC. There is a reason MS jumped on the XML bandwagon (developing a standard that basically included every word quirk from that last 20 years).
Fossil fuels have practical uses that don't involve burning them. I wear nylon while riding my oil-lubricated bike in adverse conditions (for example).
You have succeeded only in showing why you feel you can't make any money off of GPL'd software. Most of us live in a capitalistic society. The only way for FOSS to thrive in such an environment is for a large portion of the developers to get paid for their time. Everyone knows that "important, but boring" things can get neglected in hobby projects. I think the onerous conditions of the App Store justify the amount the story submitter is charging.
The GPL (v2) specifically allows distributers to charge a fee for their service. With the source code available, you are free to take the enhancements the submitter made for the iPhone and apply them to a more open mobile platform.
You seem to be concerned that somebody is making money off your hobby project. There is not much you can do about it. The GPL seems only to be concerned that the community gets improvements back; not that the original contributers get compensated.
In the back of my mind I am working on my own business model where the (yet to be developed) software has two (or more) distinct "releases" (for lack of a better term). One "Bleeding Edge" public version and one or more "Certified" versions for corporate use. This hinges on the observation that in the corporate world software is sometimes only considered if it priced similar to what they expect to pay. Corporations (or governments) may also require the software to be certified by various third-parties (costing money). I envision the price negotiation to go something like this:
Me: The Certified version will be $30,000 a seat.
Buyer: Hmm, that's a little pricey...
Me: Tell you what, I like you. I can make it $20,000.
Buyer: I can budget $300,000 for a site license.
Me: Done.
The point is that with a free software economy, the charge will be for providing a value-added service, rather than for the software itself. Proceeds from the "Certified Version" would got towards hiring programmers more competent than myself, lawyers, standards bodies for certification, and support.
I have started derating gray-to-gray response times by a factor of 10.
That is, an advertised 5ms response time is actually 50ms. One other thing to consider: was the shutter speed on the camera used less than 5ms? Obviously, you will capture two frames if the camera's shutter speed is only 1/30th of a second.
Rationale:
Response time used to be listed as the time it takes a pixel to go from Black-to-White-to-Black.
Therefore, (in theory) a relatively "slow" 40ms response time should be enough for 50fps (with minor blurring between adjacent frames).
Knowing that the (LCD) pixels have capacitance, I decided to approximate the the color change as proportional to the (charge or) discharge of a capacitor through a resistor.
The common rule of thumb is that it takes 5 time constants to reach "steady state" (within 5% of final value). I could only assume that the "grey-to-grey" response time refers to that time constant. Therefore, to go from black to white and back takes 5 time constants each way. (for a total of 10)
Now, I do have a post-secondary diploma in electronics, but not a lot of experience in the field. My reasoning may be completely invalid. YMMV.
I actually rethought my position after seeing google maps. I still don't like it.
I think most things can be handled using "helper applications" like telnet, Java runtime, Video player, File transfer application, etc.
The point is the whole concept of "not having to install" software is ludicrous. Why should I let any random website "push" software out to my machine?
When my local phone company was having a labour dispute, they blocked the union website. Granted, this incident appears to be on a much larger scale.
My ISP at the time (Interbaun, recently bought by Uniserve) was also affected: They resell the Telus ADSL sevice (because the phone company owns the lines).
http://thetyee.ca/News/2005/08/04/TelusCensor/
According to the link I Dug up, it was back in 2005.
Cell phones are radio tansmitting equipment, regulated by organizations such as the FCC and CRTC.
It is common for people to run CB radios out of spec. This can include extra transmit power, overmodulation, and using the "missing" frequnecies. The result is everybody has to cut though more noise.
The reponse from regulatory authorites has been to require radio manufacturers to make the radios increasingly difficult to tamper with. I also noticed that maximum transmit power is now specified as "Effective Radiated Power", which takes the antenna system into account.
The conflict becomes obvious if you consider a software-implemented radio. If you have access to the source code, you can tweak all of the setting the radio manufacturer is required to keep tamper-resistant.
Here Is a redefinition of section 41.1 I am working on. It is loosly based on RCMP data destruction guidelines.
41. The following definitions apply in this section and in sections 41.1 to 41.2.
"circumvent" means to descramble a scrambled work, unless done with the authority of the copyright owner.
"technological measure" means any effective technology, device or component enumerated in section 41.1(1)b
"physical destruction" means to break up the medium into little pieces by either mechanical or chemical means. Any residue should be scrambled. This definition does not include reversable scrambling, such as that done by encryption systems.
41.1 (1) No person shall
(a) circumvent a technological measure.
(b) Known effective technical measures are enumerated as follows:
(i) In the case of printed work, physical destruction with each piece showing no more than 2 adjacent characters or lines. Incedental illustrations are exempt from the more rigorous destruction required by subsection (iv).
(ii) In the case of an audio fixation, physical destruction at the nyquist rate. By example, if the highest frequency in the fixation is 22kHz, the work must be scrambled into at least 44 thousand pieces per second.
(iii) In the case of video, physical destruction such than no more than 1/100th (one one hundredth) of each frame remains intact.
(iv) In the case of photographic works, no piece shall represent more than 1/1 000 000th (one millionth) of the work. Such a restriction is required since comercially available photographs are sometimes sold broken into 1000 pieces or more.
Subsection 41.1(1)c remains the same.
Subsections 41.1(2) through 41.1(4) remain the same.
Section 41 cannot be removed completely because of obligations under section 11 of the 1997 WIPO treaty.
After about an hour, I realised that the "technological measure" definition probably refers to the "effective technological measures" described in the 1997 WIPO treaty.
The existence of legal protection for "effective Technological Measures" does not necessarily imply any actually exist. Technological Measures MUST be effective for legal protection, otherwise, it would be impossible to know if you are circumventing them.
No, I don't believe that is the case. section 41 contains the following definition:
"technological measure" means any effective technology, device or component that, in the ordinary course of its operation,
(a) controls access to a work, to a perform- ers performance fixed in a sound recording or to a sound recording and whose use is authorized by the copyright owner; or
(b) restricts the doing with respect to a work, to a perform- ers performance fixed in a sound recording or to a sound recording of any act referred to in section 3, 15 or 18 and any act for which remuneration is payable under section 19.
Note the phrase: "...any effective technology, device or component that..."
INAL, but I am a linux user. If the technology relies on a specific OS to be effective, it is not effective. Last time I checked, the "normal mode of operation" for an audio CD was a dumb CD player equiped with little more than a Digital to Analog Converter.
I am looking for flaws in the bill from the point of view that section 41 is irrelevant. (I am more worried about the legal protection offered to click-wraped user agreements)
In Canada, "causing economic damage" is one of the definitions of terrorist activity. If the powers that be so wanted to construe it that way, organising a successful boycott can be considered terrorism. This all happened after 9/11. Various governments decided that their existing legislation against mass murder and organized crime were not good enough. 5 years later we end up with sillyness like this. The terrorists won the moment they banned liquids on planes IMHO. Regards.
Adobe ruined the benefits of the somewhat combersome pdf format the moment they added Scripting support in about version 6. Pdf files were popular because they acted like paper. The pages did not try to change or send you pop-up windows while you were viewing the document. Full disclosure: I still use lynx (http://lynx.isc.org) because I am still bitter over the transition to DHTML. PS: sorry for the late reply; the server decided I wasn't human becuase I couldn't see the challange image:P
Slashdot Mirror
Oops. that should read: "Kilowatt-hours per 100km" in Canada.
-lazy coward.
Logged in because the captcha stopped working.
Um.. the law prohibits circumventing effective copyright protection measures.
I it was me, I would ask my lawyer to argue I wasn't breaking any laws. (Because they are subject to interpretation.)
See the Chevy Volt.
It's not that hard: replace your electric stove with a gas one. Now, you have electrical capacity free to power your car. The length of the cable-run may be a problem. Heavier-gauge wire?
How many of those word documents are little more than plain-text?
In my view, the so-called "realists" are being short-sighted.
A memory dump is not a good, inter-operable file format. I have heard stories about how Microsoft word for the Mac really couldn't inter-operate with word for the PC. There is a reason MS jumped on the XML bandwagon (developing a standard that basically included every word quirk from that last 20 years).
Fossil fuels have practical uses that don't involve burning them. I wear nylon while riding my oil-lubricated bike in adverse conditions (for example).
You have succeeded only in showing why you feel you can't make any money off of GPL'd software. Most of us live in a capitalistic society. The only way for FOSS to thrive in such an environment is for a large portion of the developers to get paid for their time. Everyone knows that "important, but boring" things can get neglected in hobby projects. I think the onerous conditions of the App Store justify the amount the story submitter is charging.
The GPL (v2) specifically allows distributers to charge a fee for their service. With the source code available, you are free to take the enhancements the submitter made for the iPhone and apply them to a more open mobile platform.
You seem to be concerned that somebody is making money off your hobby project. There is not much you can do about it. The GPL seems only to be concerned that the community gets improvements back; not that the original contributers get compensated.
In the back of my mind I am working on my own business model where the (yet to be developed) software has two (or more) distinct "releases" (for lack of a better term). One "Bleeding Edge" public version and one or more "Certified" versions for corporate use. This hinges on the observation that in the corporate world software is sometimes only considered if it priced similar to what they expect to pay. Corporations (or governments) may also require the software to be certified by various third-parties (costing money). I envision the price negotiation to go something like this:
The point is that with a free software economy, the charge will be for providing a value-added service, rather than for the software itself. Proceeds from the "Certified Version" would got towards hiring programmers more competent than myself, lawyers, standards bodies for certification, and support.
I have started derating gray-to-gray response times by a factor of 10.
That is, an advertised 5ms response time is actually 50ms. One other thing to consider: was the shutter speed on the camera used less than 5ms? Obviously, you will capture two frames if the camera's shutter speed is only 1/30th of a second.
Rationale:
Response time used to be listed as the time it takes a pixel to go from Black-to-White-to-Black.
Therefore, (in theory) a relatively "slow" 40ms response time should be enough for 50fps (with minor blurring between adjacent frames).
Knowing that the (LCD) pixels have capacitance, I decided to approximate the the color change as proportional to the (charge or) discharge of a capacitor through a resistor.
The common rule of thumb is that it takes 5 time constants to reach "steady state" (within 5% of final value). I could only assume that the "grey-to-grey" response time refers to that time constant. Therefore, to go from black to white and back takes 5 time constants each way. (for a total of 10)
Now, I do have a post-secondary diploma in electronics, but not a lot of experience in the field. My reasoning may be completely invalid. YMMV.
I actually rethought my position after seeing google maps. I still don't like it.
I think most things can be handled using "helper applications" like telnet, Java runtime, Video player, File transfer application, etc.
The point is the whole concept of "not having to install" software is ludicrous. Why should I let any random website "push" software out to my machine?
True, but the linked story explains that. I also neglected to mention that ~700 other websites were also affected.
When my local phone company was having a labour dispute, they blocked the union website. Granted, this incident appears to be on a much larger scale.
My ISP at the time (Interbaun, recently bought by Uniserve) was also affected: They resell the Telus ADSL sevice (because the phone company owns the lines).
http://thetyee.ca/News/2005/08/04/TelusCensor/
According to the link I Dug up, it was back in 2005.
If the major version numbers are now obsolete, why not go with something like this:
ie: replace only ONE of the numbers with a date reference.
... by empoying high quality insulation, tin-bearing alloy shielding and woven jacketingI read that as STP cabling.
Cell phones are radio tansmitting equipment, regulated by organizations such as the FCC and CRTC.
It is common for people to run CB radios out of spec. This can include extra transmit power, overmodulation, and using the "missing" frequnecies. The result is everybody has to cut though more noise.
The reponse from regulatory authorites has been to require radio manufacturers to make the radios increasingly difficult to tamper with. I also noticed that maximum transmit power is now specified as "Effective Radiated Power", which takes the antenna system into account.
The conflict becomes obvious if you consider a software-implemented radio. If you have access to the source code, you can tweak all of the setting the radio manufacturer is required to keep tamper-resistant.
Regards,
James Phillips
Here Is a redefinition of section 41.1 I am working on. It is loosly based on RCMP data destruction guidelines.
41. The following definitions apply in this section and in sections 41.1 to 41.2.
"circumvent" means to descramble a scrambled work, unless done with the authority of the copyright owner.
"technological measure" means any effective technology, device or component enumerated in section 41.1(1)b
"physical destruction" means to break up the medium into little pieces by either mechanical or chemical means. Any residue should be scrambled. This definition does not include reversable scrambling, such as that done by encryption systems.
41.1 (1) No person shall
(a) circumvent a technological measure.
(b) Known effective technical measures are enumerated as follows:
(i) In the case of printed work, physical destruction with each piece showing no more than 2 adjacent characters or lines. Incedental illustrations are exempt from the more rigorous destruction required by subsection (iv).
(ii) In the case of an audio fixation, physical destruction at the nyquist rate. By example, if the highest frequency in the fixation is 22kHz, the work must be scrambled into at least 44 thousand pieces per second.
(iii) In the case of video, physical destruction such than no more than 1/100th (one one hundredth) of each frame remains intact.
(iv) In the case of photographic works, no piece shall represent more than 1/1 000 000th (one millionth) of the work. Such a restriction is required since comercially available photographs are sometimes sold broken into 1000 pieces or more.
Subsection 41.1(1)c remains the same.
Subsections 41.1(2) through 41.1(4) remain the same.
Section 41 cannot be removed completely because of obligations under section 11 of the 1997 WIPO treaty.
Regards,
James Phillips
After about an hour, I realised that the "technological measure" definition probably refers to the "effective technological measures" described in the 1997 WIPO treaty.
Article 11: Obligations concerning Technological Measures
The existence of legal protection for "effective Technological Measures" does not necessarily imply any actually exist. Technological Measures MUST be effective for legal protection, otherwise, it would be impossible to know if you are circumventing them.
Regards,
James Phillips
No, I don't believe that is the case. section 41 contains the following definition:
"technological measure" means any effective technology, device or component that, in the ordinary course of its operation,
(a) controls access to a work, to a perform- ers performance fixed in a sound recording or to a sound recording and whose use is authorized by the copyright owner; or
(b) restricts the doing with respect to a work, to a perform- ers performance fixed in a sound recording or to a sound recording of any act referred to in section 3, 15 or 18 and any act for which remuneration is payable under section 19.
Note the phrase: "...any effective technology, device or component that..."
INAL, but I am a linux user. If the technology relies on a specific OS to be effective, it is not effective. Last time I checked, the "normal mode of operation" for an audio CD was a dumb CD player equiped with little more than a Digital to Analog Converter.
I am looking for flaws in the bill from the point of view that section 41 is irrelevant. (I am more worried about the legal protection offered to click-wraped user agreements)
Regards,
James Phillips
In Canada, "causing economic damage" is one of
the definitions of terrorist activity. If the
powers that be so wanted to construe it that way,
organising a successful boycott can be considered
terrorism.
This all happened after 9/11. Various governments
decided that their existing legislation against
mass murder and organized crime were not good
enough. 5 years later we end up with sillyness
like this. The terrorists won the moment they
banned liquids on planes IMHO.
Regards.
James Phillips
Adobe ruined the benefits of the somewhat :P
combersome pdf format the moment they added
Scripting support in about version 6.
Pdf files were popular because they acted like
paper. The pages did not try to change or send
you pop-up windows while you were viewing the
document.
Full disclosure: I still use lynx
(http://lynx.isc.org) because I am still bitter
over the transition to DHTML.
PS: sorry for the late reply; the server decided
I wasn't human becuase I couldn't see the
challange image