MPEG-LA never said they would go after END USERS. They CAN'T go after end users - there is no practical possibility in this. Really, wake up to reality.
License fees connected to MPEG-4 technology, all of its levels, are always entirely free for END USERS who are just consuming video or audio built on said tech. Nothing else has ever been said, nothing else will ever be possible. Don't confuse end user's consuming commercial material of MPEG-4 format as being subject to licenses - the ones SELLING said material are the ones subject to the license.
There. I said it. Why? Because he counters Gruber's arguments with identical retorts, completely failing to see beyond his own nose, failing to realize and admit that all he is doing is just pulling his end of the rope in this tug of war, instead of coming up with anything worthwhile to consider in the choice of h.264 v theora.
They could go down a point (or pixel) in font size, too. Something else noteworthy is that most characters in Century Gothic, of same height as same character in Arial, is wider, thus requiring more paper per letter, per word, per sentence - their cost cutting might end up a null result.
The exploits were of course not found in the 5, 10 or 15 minutes advertised. They were all worked on for weeks, and even months, and were well-tested and prepared before being executed at the contest like a rehearsed stage play. Also worth to note is that the reason behind "Chrome only browser that withstood security breach" was that NO ONE TESTED CHROME AT ALL. I give this particular "Pwn2Own" show no credibility what so ever because of these details.
Morals differ. It's a bit like the discussion regarding free speech, where lots of people say "oh I'm all for free speech, alright, AS LONG AS IT'S ABOUT SOMETHING NICE". That's what free speech is for; to allow even the uncomfortable topics to get their breath of air in the public debate in order to illuminate, understand and handle them. Either you accept this, and thus being for free speech, or you don't, and then you're simply not for free speech AT ALL. I have the same perspective of free, and freedom; either you're for freedom, or you're not for freedom at all as is the case with the GPL license ("oh I'm for freedom, alright, AS LONG AS ONLY THOSE I WANT WILL BENEFIT FROM IT"). GPL doesn't extend full freedom to the developers of the software, only to the end-users, and by that definition GPL is not freedom at all. PERIOD.
In developing (I work with a company doing _mostly_ web-based applications; perl, php, asp, all that gibberish) I steer clear of projects and software with a troublesome license. I am very pro-open source, I am very pro-freedom, and I am very pro-FREE FOR NON-COMMERCIAL USE, so don't get the wrong idea, but I mainly steer clear of anything GPL when it comes to the point of including GPLd software in the projects I work with. Simply: it spells nothing but trouble to me. Please do discuss, debate, don't just f***ing go all nazi gpl/linux/grandma on this by modding it "troll".
In f.e. Sweden, the cost for this case, over 7 years, would've been a staggering whole lot less in the shape of the extra taxes we pay here for our free healthcare (yes, I do consider it free after all). Over here, everyone helps to pay for everyone, and people get the care they need without being subjected to "pay lots, or get out". Over there, people die, or go broke in the process of staying alive.
Wouldn't it just be easier to collect the staggering amounts of methane byproduct from all our cattle and other livestock? Surely the methane resources in these "establishments" are far more manageable than those of an arctic plain.
...past civilizations, possibly arctic such (today we have evidence of the poles once having a warm, tropic climate) emerging for us, as a form of price to pay for our ancestors' cimres; these past civilizations' crimes against Gaia. And we, in turn, are of course doing a great job of leaving nice presents behind for future civilizations to suffer from.
That's very odd. Also odd is that from the article it seems that the overheating has to do with how realistic the game looks; as if the card just KNOWS the content looks realistic, and suffers a spell of worry, feeling stressed about performing, and thus not managing to cope. Oh, the poor GPUs, they deserve better. Spread the love.
An interesting detail is that 99% of the "bloggers" on the web only post volatile, vain bollox, and that cannot count as journalism, which I believe is a requirement for a press pass.
Very naive answer. In fact, it's the same answer that everyone has had for everything that we in the past century have eventually found to be hazardous to human health; "c'mon, do you think they'd be allowed to sell it if it was dangerous?"
We could reminisce back in time, to f.e. the 50s and the post-war times, which saw a surge in production and consumption of new goods, of which a substantial amount since has been banned for both resale and production, and all of it was sold and promoted with the same reason you bring. If you had read your history books, you would've known this. I guess this makes you the jackass.
This is obviously a plot by Steve Jobs. It can't be for real. Fanboy's have duped the data, and possibly the entire SAR research. Linux Grannies outraged; news at eleven.
and *i* bet your prediction of the ipad failling won't come true. i also bet that you've "predicted" lots of other bad outcomes that never came true. scurry back to under your bridge, linux granny.
I bet you said the same when os x was introduced, when the ipod was introduced, when the ibooks were introduced, when the macbooks were introduced, and when the iphone was introduced, and now, 10 years later, neither you nor any of the others in your "pack" have nailed a single right with your gleaming, sharp market insight, seeing as how all these products are bought by the millions by people all over the world - but I guess you're just the clever one here, and all the millions of customers out there are the dumb ones.
It's not about being a mactard; hell, apart from me owning one of the smaller iPods, I don't use any of their products other than when required to. It's about having the sanity to not trying to guess things' outcome prematurely, regardless of the brands' previous track record.
Really, why tag this "insightful"? Doesn't the "grannies of/." have anything better to lunge at from under their stones?
It's been just days since the iPad was unveiled, it has not even hit the friggin' market, yet some caveman of a "market expert" pulls a joke and, behold! other cavemen chimes in by second-guessing the product's outcome before its release. Much can be guessed when it comes to products, but what can be said for certain is that there just is no end to the naiveness and stupidity among the haters obsessed with this and that brand of product.
Why can't the american news world stop using the world technology for everything that isn't actual, real, new technology? Probably the most hyped and buzzed non-buzzword in the world. F*'k. Stop using it already.
Slashdot Mirror
Despite being off-topic, I just have to second it.
You're one very misinformed person.
MPEG-LA never said they would go after END USERS. They CAN'T go after end users - there is no practical possibility in this. Really, wake up to reality. License fees connected to MPEG-4 technology, all of its levels, are always entirely free for END USERS who are just consuming video or audio built on said tech. Nothing else has ever been said, nothing else will ever be possible. Don't confuse end user's consuming commercial material of MPEG-4 format as being subject to licenses - the ones SELLING said material are the ones subject to the license.
There. I said it. Why? Because he counters Gruber's arguments with identical retorts, completely failing to see beyond his own nose, failing to realize and admit that all he is doing is just pulling his end of the rope in this tug of war, instead of coming up with anything worthwhile to consider in the choice of h.264 v theora.
They could go down a point (or pixel) in font size, too. Something else noteworthy is that most characters in Century Gothic, of same height as same character in Arial, is wider, thus requiring more paper per letter, per word, per sentence - their cost cutting might end up a null result.
The exploits were of course not found in the 5, 10 or 15 minutes advertised. They were all worked on for weeks, and even months, and were well-tested and prepared before being executed at the contest like a rehearsed stage play. Also worth to note is that the reason behind "Chrome only browser that withstood security breach" was that NO ONE TESTED CHROME AT ALL. I give this particular "Pwn2Own" show no credibility what so ever because of these details.
There's a disturbing amount of "Microsoft" in this.
...in people causing them to be positive about the build-up; the hoarding of score (read: resources). No, really, it is so.
Morals differ. It's a bit like the discussion regarding free speech, where lots of people say "oh I'm all for free speech, alright, AS LONG AS IT'S ABOUT SOMETHING NICE". That's what free speech is for; to allow even the uncomfortable topics to get their breath of air in the public debate in order to illuminate, understand and handle them. Either you accept this, and thus being for free speech, or you don't, and then you're simply not for free speech AT ALL. I have the same perspective of free, and freedom; either you're for freedom, or you're not for freedom at all as is the case with the GPL license ("oh I'm for freedom, alright, AS LONG AS ONLY THOSE I WANT WILL BENEFIT FROM IT"). GPL doesn't extend full freedom to the developers of the software, only to the end-users, and by that definition GPL is not freedom at all. PERIOD.
Seems my own post was a bit late. I, too, steer well clear of GPL, in favor of f.e. BSD and zlib.
In developing (I work with a company doing _mostly_ web-based applications; perl, php, asp, all that gibberish) I steer clear of projects and software with a troublesome license. I am very pro-open source, I am very pro-freedom, and I am very pro-FREE FOR NON-COMMERCIAL USE, so don't get the wrong idea, but I mainly steer clear of anything GPL when it comes to the point of including GPLd software in the projects I work with. Simply: it spells nothing but trouble to me. Please do discuss, debate, don't just f***ing go all nazi gpl/linux/grandma on this by modding it "troll".
Its language code is Chinese.
Even $150k for this treatment is far more than we "socialist" Europeans pay for equivalent healthcare via our higher taxes. Your system is broken.
In f.e. Sweden, the cost for this case, over 7 years, would've been a staggering whole lot less in the shape of the extra taxes we pay here for our free healthcare (yes, I do consider it free after all). Over here, everyone helps to pay for everyone, and people get the care they need without being subjected to "pay lots, or get out". Over there, people die, or go broke in the process of staying alive.
Wouldn't it just be easier to collect the staggering amounts of methane byproduct from all our cattle and other livestock? Surely the methane resources in these "establishments" are far more manageable than those of an arctic plain.
...past civilizations, possibly arctic such (today we have evidence of the poles once having a warm, tropic climate) emerging for us, as a form of price to pay for our ancestors' cimres; these past civilizations' crimes against Gaia. And we, in turn, are of course doing a great job of leaving nice presents behind for future civilizations to suffer from.
That's very odd. Also odd is that from the article it seems that the overheating has to do with how realistic the game looks; as if the card just KNOWS the content looks realistic, and suffers a spell of worry, feeling stressed about performing, and thus not managing to cope. Oh, the poor GPUs, they deserve better. Spread the love.
An interesting detail is that 99% of the "bloggers" on the web only post volatile, vain bollox, and that cannot count as journalism, which I believe is a requirement for a press pass.
Very naive answer. In fact, it's the same answer that everyone has had for everything that we in the past century have eventually found to be hazardous to human health; "c'mon, do you think they'd be allowed to sell it if it was dangerous?" We could reminisce back in time, to f.e. the 50s and the post-war times, which saw a surge in production and consumption of new goods, of which a substantial amount since has been banned for both resale and production, and all of it was sold and promoted with the same reason you bring. If you had read your history books, you would've known this. I guess this makes you the jackass.
Worst. Train of thought. Ever.
This is obviously a plot by Steve Jobs. It can't be for real. Fanboy's have duped the data, and possibly the entire SAR research. Linux Grannies outraged; news at eleven.
and *i* bet your prediction of the ipad failling won't come true. i also bet that you've "predicted" lots of other bad outcomes that never came true. scurry back to under your bridge, linux granny.
I bet you said the same when os x was introduced, when the ipod was introduced, when the ibooks were introduced, when the macbooks were introduced, and when the iphone was introduced, and now, 10 years later, neither you nor any of the others in your "pack" have nailed a single right with your gleaming, sharp market insight, seeing as how all these products are bought by the millions by people all over the world - but I guess you're just the clever one here, and all the millions of customers out there are the dumb ones. It's not about being a mactard; hell, apart from me owning one of the smaller iPods, I don't use any of their products other than when required to. It's about having the sanity to not trying to guess things' outcome prematurely, regardless of the brands' previous track record.
Really, why tag this "insightful"? Doesn't the "grannies of /." have anything better to lunge at from under their stones?
It's been just days since the iPad was unveiled, it has not even hit the friggin' market, yet some caveman of a "market expert" pulls a joke and, behold! other cavemen chimes in by second-guessing the product's outcome before its release. Much can be guessed when it comes to products, but what can be said for certain is that there just is no end to the naiveness and stupidity among the haters obsessed with this and that brand of product.
Why can't the american news world stop using the world technology for everything that isn't actual, real, new technology? Probably the most hyped and buzzed non-buzzword in the world. F*'k. Stop using it already.