First off, modern CPU's are much more complex than 10 years ago, and they can be more sensitive to overclocking.
And if a person want to potentialy screw up a $600 or $700 or more chip, isn't their money that they are playing with in the long run? Who gave Intel the right to say that you can overclock their chips. It should also be remembered what one of the main reasons behind Intel locking the clock mults on their chip was in the first place. Shady people/companies were buying 200 MHz chips(or what ever they could get cheep), overclocking them to what ever they could get, and selling them as a higher speed origional chip. Effectivly screwing the customer(a uninformed one at that, but a screwed one at anyrate).
But if i remember correctly, to be a monopoly implies that you have total unrestrained control of the price of your porduct/market niche. In this case that is totaly untrue. If MS had monopolistic power then they wouldn't be almost giving the software to Non-Profit orginizations, and students/teachers/schools. Because the ppl at these orginizations would just find a cheaper product. Then the only response MS would have to would be to prevent there use on a Windows computer, and I know for a fact that they dont, because I use both MS Office 2K and Corel Office 2K on windows computers.
What is this whole thing about the Slashdot readers being powerless. Every time there is a DVD CCA article posted, I hear this we need to take a stand BS.
PEOPLE STOP TALKING AND START STANDING.
It may take a bulldozer to push a bolder off a hill, but one it gets rolling that bulldozer won't be able to stop it. Its time for action, we, the public need to start standing up and shouting.
In April of 1775, the first shot of the American Revolutionary war was fired. Let this be hailed as the first shot of a new revolution, a revolution of right against wrong, freedom against oppression. History shows that we can be sucssful.
The way I see it, we are not the body that is going to make them change, we are the body that needs to tell the masses that there is a change, that there is a wrong, and that this wrong needs to be righted, the change needs to be made.
One voice, united in nonviolent protest, for a cause is a strong force. Martin Luther King showed this. He was but a man, his actions simple and streight forward, the results changed a society. WE are many, our actions are not complicated, we must each stand up and say "NO MORE".
If every slashdot reader didnt buy a new DVD player, or that new movie on DVD, what would happen? NOTHING. We, alone, do not have the power to change the practices of a corporation, or a group of corporations. But we have to power to inform.
I propose this, start writing your local news papers, tell them the truth, get them to publish your side, more people will learn about this injustice. Write any technical or science magazines you scribe to and explain to them what the facts are, when they publish it still more will learn about this injustice. Have a firend, tell them, and tell them to tell their firends.
WE, the slashdot readers are the ones that need to make a change. WE are the ones that need to start informing people that action is needed, not the ones that need to make the problem seem insrumountable.
P.S. Someone, with better internet skills than I have should start a site deticated to this cause (sort of like Microsoft's Freedom To Innovate Network) so that our ideas, are achievments, and our plans, can be exchanged.
What are they planning on doiong, sell you a dvd that is going to die in 3 days?
That to me sounds like the easiest way to get rid of your customer base. Who in their right mind is going to lay out that kind of money, even if they are cheep, at that rate.
Divix was a good idea, it seems to me like the execution of that idea was what failed. You coud buy a DVD movie, that you may or may not have wanted to see, try it, and if you didnt like it, you were only out 5 or 6 bucks.
On the other hand, a dvd that degrades, would be pointless. You would by it, and after you play it, its gone? How much do they expect to charge you for it? A dollar? 50 cents? I know that I wouldnt pay a penny for a movie that i could watch once, and then poof gone. On the other hand, I do see one market/use for this kind of media. The transfer of documentation that you want to destroy after it has been viewed it. Remeber the exploding tapes form Mission Impossible. Here is the new interactive version, pop in computer, load, get the info, by the time your done the disk is trash...Maybe Bond could use one of these in his next movie!
Theoretically, isn't anything that is published on the net "pressed" as it has been published, and is publicly accessible. Along the same lines as a newspaper, book or magazine is publicly accessible. If paper is covered by the first amendment, then why shouldn't e-paper be?
It seems to me like its just another attempt to crush innovation.
The way it looks is someone in Real Media decided that they should keep their format theirs, and anybody that might want to do something useful or helpful to the public with it is obviously wrong in their thinking. After all its not about the people and the product, but rather the product and the profits.
This seems very reminiscent of the Netscape/AOL/DOJ vs. Microsoft case. And if history can be used as a guide, then the company that is trying to innovate, and provide people with a better way of doing something is going to loose. Of course were not dealing with a monopoly here, but the underlaying principle is the same. Good ideas getting stomped on by someone else.
Its funny how companies can use the law/government to do their dirty work instead of coming up with the idea in the first place....
but I would put on thin, cut-out gloves (or rubber fingertips) before sticking the chips to my "fingernails"
Why not just have them implanted in your fingertips....Im sure you could arange for some kind in induction recharging for their internal power source, or better yet tap a blood vessal and use the flow of blood to power a microturbine which intrun would power the devices...
Slashdot Mirror
First off, modern CPU's are much more complex than 10 years ago, and they can be more sensitive to overclocking.
And if a person want to potentialy screw up a $600 or $700 or more chip, isn't their money that they are playing with in the long run? Who gave Intel the right to say that you can overclock their chips.
It should also be remembered what one of the main reasons behind Intel locking the clock mults on their chip was in the first place. Shady people/companies were buying 200 MHz chips(or what ever they could get cheep), overclocking them to what ever they could get, and selling them as a higher speed origional chip. Effectivly screwing the customer(a uninformed one at that, but a screwed one at anyrate).
But if i remember correctly, to be a monopoly implies that you have total unrestrained control of the price of your porduct/market niche. In this case that is totaly untrue. If MS had monopolistic power then they wouldn't be almost giving the software to Non-Profit orginizations, and students/teachers/schools. Because the ppl at these orginizations would just find a cheaper product. Then the only response MS would have to would be to prevent there use on a Windows computer, and I know for a fact that they dont, because I use both MS Office 2K and Corel Office 2K on windows computers.
Just courious? How do you force someone to give up a key if that key is safely tucked away in their mind?
Obviously you could argue that the government could torture the key out of him, but last time I checked, that was forbidden in the Constutition.
So how do you get some one to reveal a thought or memory if they dont want to?
Could it be possible that the DVDCCS lawyers are reading these news groups? Could we have tipped them off? Does this bother anyone???
Is this really just a coincidence that they just realized their oversite. Or are they reading what is being said, and acting accordingly?
What is this whole thing about the Slashdot readers being powerless. Every time there is a DVD CCA article posted, I hear this we need to take a stand BS.
PEOPLE STOP TALKING AND START STANDING.
It may take a bulldozer to push a bolder off a hill, but one it gets rolling that bulldozer won't be able to stop it. Its time for action, we, the public need to start standing up and shouting.
In April of 1775, the first shot of the American Revolutionary war was fired. Let this be hailed as the first shot of a new revolution, a revolution of right against wrong, freedom against oppression. History shows that we can be sucssful.
The way I see it, we are not the body that is going to make them change, we are the body that needs to tell the masses that there is a change, that there is a wrong, and that this wrong needs to be righted, the change needs to be made.
One voice, united in nonviolent protest, for a cause is a strong force. Martin Luther King showed this. He was but a man, his actions simple and streight forward, the results changed a society. WE are many, our actions are not complicated, we must each stand up and say "NO MORE".
If every slashdot reader didnt buy a new DVD player, or that new movie on DVD, what would happen? NOTHING. We, alone, do not have the power to change the practices of a corporation, or a group of corporations. But we have to power to inform.
I propose this, start writing your local news papers, tell them the truth, get them to publish your side, more people will learn about this injustice. Write any technical or science magazines you scribe to and explain to them what the facts are, when they publish it still more will learn about this injustice. Have a firend, tell them, and tell them to tell their firends.
WE, the slashdot readers are the ones that need to make a change. WE are the ones that need to start informing people that action is needed, not the ones that need to make the problem seem insrumountable.
P.S. Someone, with better internet skills than I have should start a site deticated to this cause (sort of like Microsoft's Freedom To Innovate Network) so that our ideas, are achievments, and our plans, can be exchanged.
What are they planning on doiong, sell you a dvd that is going to die in 3 days?
That to me sounds like the easiest way to get rid of your customer base. Who in their right mind is going to lay out that kind of money, even if they are cheep, at that rate.
Divix was a good idea, it seems to me like the execution of that idea was what failed. You coud buy a DVD movie, that you may or may not have wanted to see, try it, and if you didnt like it, you were only out 5 or 6 bucks.
On the other hand, a dvd that degrades, would be pointless. You would by it, and after you play it, its gone? How much do they expect to charge you for it? A dollar? 50 cents? I know that I wouldnt pay a penny for a movie that i could watch once, and then poof gone.
On the other hand, I do see one market/use for this kind of media. The transfer of documentation that you want to destroy after it has been viewed it. Remeber the exploding tapes form Mission Impossible. Here is the new interactive version, pop in computer, load, get the info, by the time your done the disk is trash...Maybe Bond could use one of these in his next movie!
Theoretically, isn't anything that is published on the net "pressed" as it has been published, and is publicly accessible. Along the same lines as a newspaper, book or magazine is publicly accessible. If paper is covered by the first amendment, then why shouldn't e-paper be?
It seems to me like its just another attempt to crush innovation.
The way it looks is someone in Real Media decided that they should keep their format theirs, and anybody that might want to do something useful or helpful to the public with it is obviously wrong in their thinking. After all its not about the people and the product, but rather the product and the profits.
This seems very reminiscent of the Netscape/AOL/DOJ vs. Microsoft case. And if history can be used as a guide, then the company that is trying to innovate, and provide people with a better way of doing something is going to loose. Of course were not dealing with a monopoly here, but the underlaying principle is the same. Good ideas getting stomped on by someone else.
Its funny how companies can use the law/government to do their dirty work instead of coming up with the idea in the first place....
but I would put on thin, cut-out gloves (or rubber fingertips) before sticking the chips to my "fingernails"
Why not just have them implanted in your fingertips....Im sure you could arange for some kind in induction recharging for their internal power source, or better yet tap a blood vessal and use the flow of blood to power a microturbine which intrun would power the devices...
- Resistance is futile...