This is a real benfit with CD you can only output a triangle wave at 22khz. Contrast this to a good moving coil cartridge which can get a signal out at 35khz. You can't hear it but it means that lower down the spectrum you have better resolution.
A lot of real high end gear does not have a treble and bass control.
In theory you do as your analogue electronics is influenced by the source, in practice I doubt it.
Sorry but I have to disagree, do you get paid for working on your own projects at home? I doubt it highly, so why should the company that employs you get the copyright to anything you do outside of thier employ.
As for your argument about doing private research on company time, I would say that an equal amount of time would go to doing company research on private time, you know when you got that itch.:)
FYI I will not sign a contract with this clause in.
Don't need to wonder why, have you ever seen comparisons of a voodoo II SLI vs G200, or even used both? The G200 is dog slow compared to a V2 SLI config at the same CPU speed, so this was an illistration of the raw CPU power of the Athlon.
Don't use cheezola motherboards and you will be fine. Celerons at one point were faster than the PII at the same clock, so don't knock em down.
So you are in favour of race-hate campaigns, terrorist propagranda and bigotry in all its forms?
No I think he was in favour of using the material to educate, to install understanding and hence the material loses it's power and is exposed as the garbage that it is.
Remember what being a Chritian was like in the first 200 years, you are merly spouting the same propaganda as the Roman empire at the time.
Rather than censor it, why not expose it as the garbage it is.
Any media on this planet can contain illegal copies of copyrighted material, does that mean all media should be banned.
Don't think so, your argument that nutella (the software) should be banned because it may be abused or contain material that you or people like yourself feel is objectionable really does fall apart.
Remember that at one time Christianity was objectionable material to the authoritories.
And as soon as your kid starts the program up, what's the first thing he sees? A huge list of pornography, bomb-making instruction manuals and virulent anti-Christian diatribes.
Have you used this program, do you know that this is the first thing a person sees? Trust me if a kid wants to find this info out, unless you monitor them 100% they will. I do not know of anyone who as a child did not manage to find information out that thier parents would have gone ballistic over.
Children need to be protected so that they can grow up to be good, decent, Christian people.
Children might need to be educated so that they know why things are morally wrong or not, protecting them from the world only makes them more vulnerable to these ideas that you want to protect them from.
A good decent person does not equal only a Christian person. Now for example how do you know that this technology could not be used to propegate Christian viewpoints in regimes where they are banned or stamped on by the state.
As I understand it the DMCA was to bring it in line with the IP treaties set up by the WTO. Now I noticed on the WTO members lists that there were no consumers groups at all. It would seem that one needs a consumer as well as a producer to trade and so the WTO is in my view unballanced and so you end up with still births like the DMCA.
Looking at slashdot for example I can see a huge number of consumers that are dissatisfied with the way things are turning out. Any suggestions how we get heard on the WTO?
If you think about it, there is no requirement to enforce that people have to send changes to the maintainer of the project (i.e. You). If you think about it the reason changes propegate back is thus.
A. Coder downloads the source from OS.com A. Coder gets an itch and codes up a little scratch. P.H. Boss does not want that code to go back up
Now what happens is this the source gets updated as many eyes are fixing bugs and a new version goes onto OS.com
A. Coder has to download the source again from OS.com as the product is more stable, more features rich A. Coder has to now reapply the scratch as the this was not in the original codebase, if the codebase has changed sometimes this might take a lot of time to reimpliment. P.H. Boss see's that he is spending money again on getting that code put in.
The cycle repeats until someone visits the clue tree and sees that the cost of reapplying patches to the code base they have to download is costing more than the value of keeping that code to themselves.
Therefore when you make a change it is in your self interest to make sure that change goes into the base codebase as it benfits you to do this rather than not bothering to get the change back upstream.
Unfortunfortunatly the copyright holder needs to sue. Of course you could always hand over the copyright to say the FSF and they can go after the company.
I just want to write some GPL code thats gets copied into the source of some closed source companies and go after them for the damages, that would be nice.
I am not condoning this product in any way, but the company I work for uses Websense to do it's filtering of the company Internet feed. Now they at least let you see what category a site is blocked under and you can tell them they got it wrong and they will review the URL. You can even suggest new sites they don't have yet.
Now I guess they figure (correctly IMHO) that you pay for the service or correlating all these URLS and the actual list should be open and as much controlled by users (suggest updates, suggest corrections) as the company.
Censorship is wrong and not letting customers participate in the list management is even more blatent giving up your rights.
The EFF was set up to fight encroachments into our freedon on the net. This can be one of thier tools that they cn use. This has an advantage in that the EFF is established and trusted and works towards these goals anyway so action can be coordinated.
Trinoo daemons were originally found in binary form on a number of Solaris 2.x systems, which were identified as having been compromised by exploitation of buffer overrun bugs in the RPC services "statd", "cmsd" and "ttdbserverd". These attacks are described in CERT Incident Note 99-04:
So basically this guy is making it all up as the method he is spouting was not used, it took me ten mins to find this out. Windows is vulnerable to buffer overruns as much as anything else.
IANAL but the guy who wrote this is, and it bascially details the federal law has precidence over state law, hence this law will probably be made null.
Anyway read the following EULA problems, so I guess it goes to court and expires.
So if you swirl the stuff at the speed of C in the substance, it should glow nice and blue due to Cherekenov (spelling probably out) radiation, which happens when you accelerate matter through a medium faster than C in that medium. It just dumps the energy as photons.
Stephen Baxter David Brin David Mace (who can name them books) Iain M Banks (Ok not a tech.) David Drake Joe Haldeman
So the old masters go and new ones come along.
Remember the DMCA affects the US only
on
China and the MPA
·
· Score: 2
So if the MPAA makes it illegal (via winning this battle) to reverse engineer software and protocols, well what is this going to do for the US as far as competetivness?
Non US companies can reverse engineer, US ones can't, hmm guess this will have some implications.
Ok everyone is griping about how this interface is wasting thier CPU usage. Well fire up your monitor and see how much CPU you are actually using.
Now unless you have something in the background that is chewing up your CPU, then I reckon it is hovering near 1 or 2 percent right now.
We interact with our machines in a way that makes them site idle for most of the time, so why not use that idle CPU power to make the GUI nice and sexy.
Now of course you want to be able to turn some fluff off if you want to use those cycles for something else, and you don't want it to chew the application CPU time too much when your app is running especially a game for example.
I think it is a great idea and looks really nice, and having a nice area to work and play in is a good thing.
So you can have solar panals generate the electricity for these reactions. Who cares if you need lots of power, the sun supplies more than enough.
This produces methanol which you can then use to power those methanol, air breathing fuel cells that are in developement.
The fuel cells actually burn cleaner than Internal Compustion Engines so you get less nasties in the emmisions, and of course you take the CO2 and start it all over again.
Of course you can also burn it in Gas turbines, which have a nice clean exhaust as well.
Actually, the source code for the IBM PC BIOS was published openly. The commented Assembly language is included in it's entirety in the Technical Reference Manual, which was available at a reasonable cost from IBM. Publishing this source openly had a 'viral' effect not unlike what happens with GPL code, in that anybody who spent any amount of time studying the published IBM source was "contaminated" and couldn't work on the Phoenix BIOS code for risk of legal entanglement later.
The external specification was actually developed in house and a second set of developers implimented the BIOS code according to that spec.
You are correct in saying that the IBM release of the code was a legal factor as I remember at the time that x86 developers who could legally sign that they had never seen the BIOS code were in short supply and in high demand at the time clones took off.
Now according to MoRE, Jon did not crack (as in break) the encryption code, but another member did who was a guy from germany. Jon wrote DECSS and published it via his fathers web site to the 'net.
So now how does this differ, Jon who wrote the code to a spec provided by someone else and the situation facing the Pheonix developers all those years ago.
If he looses then does that not mean that any non IBM BIOS is therefore illegal?
It seems that MPAA and DVD CSS want to set the precidents in court against the individual who does not have the resources to fight back and then this becomes the means to take anyone, corporation or otherwise out later.
It should not be just us users and the OS community backing this but any of the companies that make money by OS.
Think about it RedHat, what happens when anything that is reversed engineered after a person clicked on the agreement might be declared illegal, what happens to your distro when lots of open source software gets banned?
Of course every software player in the IS industry should back this, but then I don't think they get what this means for them yet.
How many lawsuits will fly if this case is lost
on
DeCSS Author Arrested
·
· Score: 1
Ok so what happens if this case is lost, and it is deemed illegal to reverse engineer anything because you must have had to click an agreement saying not to to install the thing right.
Now how software in the recent past have had these licences and how much software have had thier file formats and protocols reverse engineered recently. Now this does not just effect Open Source projects but any company, for example Microsoft vs AOL for the instant message protocol. Now suddenly the only thing they can do is agressively sue and couter sue each other just to survive. You would only be left with a monopoly in the US software industry that cannot be touched as they have application barriers to entry that are backed by the courts no less.
Open source will be ok as the projects can move offshore very easily, but US companies will be hamstrung and unable to compete with Internation software firms as thier laws will prevent them.
It is the same story with the bill being pushed through that says software companies cannot be held liable for thier products. It will create an industry in the US that does not care about quality, hence International and Open Source competition will prevail.
The US software and media industry should be careful what it asks for as it may just get it.
Ok so this guy is being prosecuted in Norway, but this action no doubt was prompted to influence the case(s) in the US.
If it is decided that DECSS is illegal due to being illegally reversed engineered, the reason being the person doing the reverse engineering clicked on a licence agreement, well will it not effect the whole of the shrink wrap software industry.
How does company A get thier software to write the file format of company B. Well by reverse engineering it of course. This is one example, but there must be hundreds of precidents of reverse engineering of software and hardware with the standard shrink wrap licence.
So does this mean for example Microsoft can be sued by the makers of Word Perfect as to use the software they must have clicked on the licence agreement first. Or Microsoft can then sue anyone that tries to write software that can write thier file formats, or interface to thier protocols.
It makes you wonder, doesn't it, replace the words DECSS and the two parties names by any large company and any peice of software and you can see the simularity.
Maybe the software industry will realise this and rally behind us.
Or maybe they would like to see application barriers to entry being backed by the legal system. In the short term this is great for the corporations but in the long term it will hurt them and also the consumer looses out totally.
Slashdot Mirror
This is a real benfit with CD you can only output a triangle wave at 22khz. Contrast this to a good moving coil cartridge which can get a signal out at 35khz. You can't hear it but it means that lower down the spectrum you have better resolution.
A lot of real high end gear does not have a treble and bass control.
In theory you do as your analogue electronics is influenced by the source, in practice I doubt it.
Sorry but I have to disagree, do you get paid for working on your own projects at home? I doubt it highly, so why should the company that employs you get the copyright to anything you do outside of thier employ.
:)
As for your argument about doing private research on company time, I would say that an equal amount of time would go to doing company research on private time, you know when you got that itch.
FYI I will not sign a contract with this clause in.
Don't need to wonder why, have you ever seen comparisons of a voodoo II SLI vs G200, or even used both? The G200 is dog slow compared to a V2 SLI config at the same CPU speed, so this was an illistration of the raw CPU power of the Athlon.
Don't use cheezola motherboards and you will be fine. Celerons at one point were faster than the PII at the same clock, so don't knock em down.
to what you have just posted.
It would make him weep.
BTW What colour was Jesus's skin?
So you are in favour of race-hate campaigns, terrorist propagranda and bigotry in all its forms?
No I think he was in favour of using the material to educate, to install understanding and hence the material loses it's power and is exposed as the garbage that it is.
Remember what being a Chritian was like in the first 200 years, you are merly spouting the same propaganda as the Roman empire at the time.
Rather than censor it, why not expose it as the garbage it is.
Any media on this planet can contain illegal copies of copyrighted material, does that mean all media should be banned.
Don't think so, your argument that nutella (the software) should be banned because it may be abused or contain material that you or people like yourself feel is objectionable really does fall apart.
Remember that at one time Christianity was objectionable material to the authoritories.
And as soon as your kid starts the program up, what's the first thing he sees? A huge list of pornography, bomb-making instruction manuals and virulent anti-Christian diatribes.
Have you used this program, do you know that this is the first thing a person sees? Trust me if a kid wants to find this info out, unless you monitor them 100% they will. I do not know of anyone who as a child did not manage to find information out that thier parents would have gone ballistic over.
Children need to be protected so that they can grow up to be good, decent, Christian people.
Children might need to be educated so that they know why things are morally wrong or not, protecting them from the world only makes them more vulnerable to these ideas that you want to protect them from.
A good decent person does not equal only a Christian person. Now for example how do you know that this technology could not be used to propegate Christian viewpoints in regimes where they are banned or stamped on by the state.
As I understand it the DMCA was to bring it in line with the IP treaties set up by the WTO. Now I noticed on the WTO members lists that there were no consumers groups at all. It would seem that one needs a consumer as well as a producer to trade and so the WTO is in my view unballanced and so you end up with still births like the DMCA.
Looking at slashdot for example I can see a huge number of consumers that are dissatisfied with the way things are turning out. Any suggestions how we get heard on the WTO?
My Athlon 650 in a K7M was driving a higher frame rate with a G200 than my old 333 Celeron in a Bx6-2 and 12Mb Voodoo II SLI's.
Blew me away, and my Rocksim sims were much quicker. Have you actually tried an Athlon?
If you think about it, there is no requirement to enforce that people have to send changes to the maintainer of the project (i.e. You). If you think about it the reason changes propegate back is thus.
A. Coder downloads the source from OS.com
A. Coder gets an itch and codes up a little scratch.
P.H. Boss does not want that code to go back up
Now what happens is this the source gets updated as many eyes are fixing bugs and a new version goes onto OS.com
A. Coder has to download the source again from OS.com as the product is more stable, more features rich
A. Coder has to now reapply the scratch as the this was not in the original codebase, if the codebase has changed sometimes this might take a lot of time to reimpliment.
P.H. Boss see's that he is spending money again on getting that code put in.
The cycle repeats until someone visits the clue tree and sees that the cost of reapplying patches to the code base they have to download is costing more than the value of keeping that code to themselves.
Therefore when you make a change it is in your self interest to make sure that change goes into the base codebase as it benfits you to do this rather than not bothering to get the change back upstream.
Moderators, mod this baby up, this needs to be preserved for all time.
:)
Wet myself, were talking actual droplets of urine here
Unfortunfortunatly the copyright holder needs to sue. Of course you could always hand over the copyright to say the FSF and they can go after the company.
I just want to write some GPL code thats gets copied into the source of some closed source companies and go after them for the damages, that would be nice.
I am not condoning this product in any way, but the company I work for uses Websense to do it's filtering of the company Internet feed. Now they at least let you see what category a site is blocked under and you can tell them they got it wrong and they will review the URL. You can even suggest new sites they don't have yet.
Now I guess they figure (correctly IMHO) that you pay for the service or correlating all these URLS and the actual list should be open and as much controlled by users (suggest updates, suggest corrections) as the company.
Censorship is wrong and not letting customers participate in the list management is even more blatent giving up your rights.
The EFF was set up to fight encroachments into our freedon on the net. This can be one of thier tools that they cn use. This has an advantage in that the EFF is established and trusted and works towards these goals anyway so action can be coordinated.
Quoting David Dittrich from http://staff.washington.e du/dittrich/misc/trinoo.analysis
Trinoo daemons were originally found in binary form on a number of Solaris 2.x systems, which were identified as having been compromised by exploitation of buffer overrun bugs in the RPC services "statd", "cmsd" and "ttdbserverd". These attacks are described in CERT Incident Note 99-04:
http://www.cert.org/incident_notes / IN- 99-04.html
So basically this guy is making it all up as the method he is spouting was not used, it took me ten mins to find this out. Windows is vulnerable to buffer overruns as much as anything else.
IANAL but the guy who wrote this is, and it bascially details the federal law has precidence over state law, hence this law will probably be made null.
Anyway read the following EULA problems, so I guess it goes to court and expires.
So if you swirl the stuff at the speed of C in the substance, it should glow nice and blue due to Cherekenov (spelling probably out) radiation, which happens when you accelerate matter through a medium faster than C in that medium. It just dumps the energy as photons.
C = speed of light.
Ok try the following
Stephen Baxter
David Brin
David Mace (who can name them books)
Iain M Banks (Ok not a tech.)
David Drake
Joe Haldeman
So the old masters go and new ones come along.
So if the MPAA makes it illegal (via winning this battle) to reverse engineer software and protocols, well what is this going to do for the US as far as competetivness?
Non US companies can reverse engineer, US ones can't, hmm guess this will have some implications.
Ok everyone is griping about how this interface is wasting thier CPU usage. Well fire up your monitor and see how much CPU you are actually using.
Now unless you have something in the background that is chewing up your CPU, then I reckon it is hovering near 1 or 2 percent right now.
We interact with our machines in a way that makes them site idle for most of the time, so why not use that idle CPU power to make the GUI nice and sexy.
Now of course you want to be able to turn some fluff off if you want to use those cycles for something else, and you don't want it to chew the application CPU time too much when your app is running especially a game for example.
I think it is a great idea and looks really nice, and having a nice area to work and play in is a good thing.
So you can have solar panals generate the electricity for these reactions. Who cares if you need lots of power, the sun supplies more than enough.
This produces methanol which you can then use to power those methanol, air breathing fuel cells that are in developement.
The fuel cells actually burn cleaner than Internal Compustion Engines so you get less nasties in the emmisions, and of course you take the CO2 and start it all over again.
Of course you can also burn it in Gas turbines, which have a nice clean exhaust as well.
Actually, the source code for the IBM PC BIOS was published openly. The commented Assembly language is included in it's entirety in the Technical Reference Manual, which was available at a reasonable cost from IBM. Publishing this source openly had a 'viral' effect not unlike what happens with GPL code, in that anybody who spent any amount of time studying the published IBM source was "contaminated" and couldn't work on the Phoenix BIOS code for risk of legal entanglement later.
The external specification was actually developed in house and a second set of developers implimented the BIOS code according to that spec.
You are correct in saying that the IBM release of the code was a legal factor as I remember at the time that x86 developers who could legally sign that they had never seen the BIOS code were in short supply and in high demand at the time clones took off.
Now according to MoRE, Jon did not crack (as in break) the encryption code, but another member did who was a guy from germany. Jon wrote DECSS and published it via his fathers web site to the 'net.
So now how does this differ, Jon who wrote the code to a spec provided by someone else and the situation facing the Pheonix developers all those years ago.
If he looses then does that not mean that any non IBM BIOS is therefore illegal?
It seems that MPAA and DVD CSS want to set the precidents in court against the individual who does not have the resources to fight back and then this becomes the means to take anyone, corporation or otherwise out later.
It should not be just us users and the OS community backing this but any of the companies that make money by OS.
Think about it RedHat, what happens when anything that is reversed engineered after a person clicked on the agreement might be declared illegal, what happens to your distro when lots of open source software gets banned?
Of course every software player in the IS industry should back this, but then I don't think they get what this means for them yet.
Ok so what happens if this case is lost, and it is deemed illegal to reverse engineer anything because you must have had to click an agreement saying not to to install the thing right.
Now how software in the recent past have had these licences and how much software have had thier file formats and protocols reverse engineered recently. Now this does not just effect Open Source projects but any company, for example Microsoft vs AOL for the instant message protocol. Now suddenly the only thing they can do is agressively sue and couter sue each other just to survive. You would only be left with a monopoly in the US software industry that cannot be touched as they have application barriers to entry that are backed by the courts no less.
Open source will be ok as the projects can move offshore very easily, but US companies will be hamstrung and unable to compete with Internation software firms as thier laws will prevent them.
It is the same story with the bill being pushed through that says software companies cannot be held liable for thier products. It will create an industry in the US that does not care about quality, hence International and Open Source competition will prevail.
The US software and media industry should be careful what it asks for as it may just get it.
Ice Tiger
Ok so this guy is being prosecuted in Norway, but this action no doubt was prompted to influence the case(s) in the US.
If it is decided that DECSS is illegal due to being illegally reversed engineered, the reason being the person doing the reverse engineering clicked on a licence agreement, well will it not effect the whole of the shrink wrap software industry.
How does company A get thier software to write the file format of company B. Well by reverse engineering it of course. This is one example, but there must be hundreds of precidents of reverse engineering of software and hardware with the standard shrink wrap licence.
So does this mean for example Microsoft can be sued by the makers of Word Perfect as to use the software they must have clicked on the licence agreement first. Or Microsoft can then sue anyone that tries to write software that can write thier file formats, or interface to thier protocols.
It makes you wonder, doesn't it, replace the words DECSS and the two parties names by any large company and any peice of software and you can see the simularity.
Maybe the software industry will realise this and rally behind us.
Or maybe they would like to see application barriers to entry being backed by the legal system. In the short term this is great for the corporations but in the long term it will hurt them and also the consumer looses out totally.
Ice Tiger