In Europe I have bought Terratec (German company) sound cards and they are fantastic. They use the same chipsets than M-Audio and the quality of the sound is amazing. They also do very high quality TV cards.
Moreover, they are open source developers friendly. Actually, after I bought the Terratec 7.1 card, I contacted them to get the spec documentation, so that it could be used for ALSA drivers. They very kindly sent me the documentation, without any problem, which I passed to ALSA devs. And since then, we have Terratec drivers for Linux.
Hurr hurr. The Microsoft implementation of Java wasn't buggy: far from it, it was actually superior to the Sun implementation. It was faster and integrated better with Windows.
So what? This is exactly the same with their "Open Specification Promise": if you implement an extended or derived version of their specifications you would be in breach with the agreement. Try to release a "superior" implementation of their specs, just to see what will happen.
Yes, you know, they are afraid that buggy implementations show their format in a bad light. For instance, that would be like writing your own buggy implementation of Java and then to distribute it in order to contaminate the market with a flawed version, just to show it under a bad light. Oh wait...
That's funny. ATi have been told for years to do this, and they were very reluctant about it. And finally, several years after, they finally do this move, hoping the open source movement will help them regain some momentum they have recently lost. So they just stupidly postponed a move they had to do one day or another. And I am afraid now it is a little too late. AMD faces huge problems (slow and buggy chips). AMD and ATi both had their period of fame a couple of years ago, but unfortunately, we are slowly moving toward a monopoly where Intel and nVidia are the sole actors.
Once again: the summary IS correct!!!!!
The technology was invented in the 18th century, prior its introduction in the US in the 1800s, but does not discuss the latter. Is that so difficult to grab?
Where is the obfuscation ? Read again: "The article maps out some of the European networks but provides no details of those built in North America in the early 1800s.":
1) The article maps out some of the European networks (presumably 18th century, as inferred from the title)
2) but provides no details of those built in North America in the early 1800s: ok, such kind of technology appeared later in the US, and the article does not detail any example of them.
Is that so difficult to understand ?
I had once a crush on the fictional character of Nancy Callahan from Sin City. Of course it was played by Jessica Alba, but I really loved Nancy, I swear!
It does strike me as a bit stupid explaining it all - now crims will just use better techniques for blurring themselves out.
I think that most technical people (as found here on Slashdot) will have figured out how they did it. Many posters here gave the solution (as the "twirl" is not a very destructive transformmation). If Police had not explained how they did it (and actually they tried to add up some mystery to their story by the way), most journalists would have commented on the method anyway.
Exactly, contrary to a blur or a crude mosaic, a "twirl" is almost non-destuctive, and therefore it is possible to put the pixels back in place.
Anyway, many people will think it is an amazing achievement and that it is possible like in many movies, to get a very fine, detailed image from an out-of-focus, low-res picture.
To be fair to the man, one has to read the rest of the thread:
Honestly I was just pokin' a bit of fun at you. There was no threat.
Hugh,
You da man. Thanks for taking the time to write all that.
I admit it. The guys on phone support started harassing me over and over about GPL and I got a bit tweaked. My initial reaction was out of line.
Now that I'm laying on the carpet begging not to be kicked again, I can inform you that the following modules' source code will be released.
- madwifi driver
- wpa_supplicant
- busybox
- Z-com driver (for wi-fi card)
Will follow up with the "when" "when" I found out.
Actually - now that you mention it - I would like to see this thing compatible with MythTV too. Let me see if I can sneak it into the plan.
Thank you and have a lovely day.
The problem for them is not the fine, but instead, from now on, the compliance to the ruling, which will lead them to change the content of Windows software, the parts they will be able to install on new computers. That's a lot more important than money.
Don't forget the ruling is 152-page long, and therefore, they will have to digest and comply with all the court orders to avoid paying even more fine. That may be difficult for them in a market that becomes more competitive.
I know also parents that work 10hour/day (and more with sometimes 2 jobs) just to afford the rent, the daycare of their child and basic needs. Not all parents who work a lot just throw away their money.
I have to amend what I just wrote. You are right: the relaxed phase is actually twisted, which allows light to pass though a polarising filter. Therefore, black consumes more power on LCD... Since LCD displays are now a majority, the idea of a black background is simply stupid. Anyway, I think there is still more technological advances to be done at the level of power supplies instead of focusing on the background of the pages.
I don't think so. Dark is when crystals are not aligned (or randomly aligned), which is the powerless state. When a current is applied, crystals are aligned and let most of the light go through. I may be wrong, but this is what I remembered.
No, once a software is released under GPL, it cannot be "delicensed". By using the GPL, the copyright holders grant you a perpetual authorisation to distribute that software version under the terms of the GPL.
Really, you're wrong, and if you are not a noob, you're an ignorant, and this is obvious as you do the common error of comparing rpm and apt. RPM is equivalent to DEB, it has no mechanism of dependency solving whatsoever, and it is the same for DEB. On Debian, APT is responsible for solving dependencies. And RPM based distros have also their APT equivalent: urpmi, yum and some other, which are responsible for solving dependencies.
urpmi has been in Mandrake/Mandriva since late 90s, and has always been able to solve dependencies, download from distant repositories and install packages automatically. It was there long before Ubuntu even existed.
Slashdot Mirror
You mean The Last Man Alive. Last Man on Earth is another excellent sci-fi movie with Vincent Price.
As far as I know US laws do not apply in Germany... Although AFAIK Germany may have also a set of similar liberticide laws.
In Europe I have bought Terratec (German company) sound cards and they are fantastic. They use the same chipsets than M-Audio and the quality of the sound is amazing. They also do very high quality TV cards.
Moreover, they are open source developers friendly. Actually, after I bought the Terratec 7.1 card, I contacted them to get the spec documentation, so that it could be used for ALSA drivers. They very kindly sent me the documentation, without any problem, which I passed to ALSA devs. And since then, we have Terratec drivers for Linux.
What about Google Video? Would that work too?
Yes, you know, they are afraid that buggy implementations show their format in a bad light. For instance, that would be like writing your own buggy implementation of Java and then to distribute it in order to contaminate the market with a flawed version, just to show it under a bad light. Oh wait...
Maybe you heard about the French (and German, Canadian) companies because the US and British companies that were doing exactly the same had been initally removed from the disclosed documents relating such practices:
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2007/10/01/wsaddam101.xml http://www.guardian.co.uk/international/story/0,3604,1485546,00.html
Don't be naive.
Don't want to be bound to the terms of the GPL? Don't use GPL code!
Just another piece of FUD.
That's funny. ATi have been told for years to do this, and they were very reluctant about it. And finally, several years after, they finally do this move, hoping the open source movement will help them regain some momentum they have recently lost. So they just stupidly postponed a move they had to do one day or another. And I am afraid now it is a little too late. AMD faces huge problems (slow and buggy chips). AMD and ATi both had their period of fame a couple of years ago, but unfortunately, we are slowly moving toward a monopoly where Intel and nVidia are the sole actors.
Once again: the summary IS correct!!!!! The technology was invented in the 18th century, prior its introduction in the US in the 1800s, but does not discuss the latter. Is that so difficult to grab?
Read again the summary, it does not say the technology was invented in the US in the 1800s. It is not very complicated.
Where is the obfuscation ? Read again: "The article maps out some of the European networks but provides no details of those built in North America in the early 1800s.": 1) The article maps out some of the European networks (presumably 18th century, as inferred from the title) 2) but provides no details of those built in North America in the early 1800s: ok, such kind of technology appeared later in the US, and the article does not detail any example of them. Is that so difficult to understand ?
And ? Does that make the title of the article wrong ?
If you take the time to read the article, you will see the technology was invented and developed in France in 1791. But I forgot, this is Slashdot.
I agree.
I had once a crush on the fictional character of Nancy Callahan from Sin City. Of course it was played by Jessica Alba, but I really loved Nancy, I swear!
42!
It does strike me as a bit stupid explaining it all - now crims will just use better techniques for blurring themselves out. I think that most technical people (as found here on Slashdot) will have figured out how they did it. Many posters here gave the solution (as the "twirl" is not a very destructive transformmation). If Police had not explained how they did it (and actually they tried to add up some mystery to their story by the way), most journalists would have commented on the method anyway.
Exactly, contrary to a blur or a crude mosaic, a "twirl" is almost non-destuctive, and therefore it is possible to put the pixels back in place.
Anyway, many people will think it is an amazing achievement and that it is possible like in many movies, to get a very fine, detailed image from an out-of-focus, low-res picture.
The problem for them is not the fine, but instead, from now on, the compliance to the ruling, which will lead them to change the content of Windows software, the parts they will be able to install on new computers. That's a lot more important than money.
Don't forget the ruling is 152-page long, and therefore, they will have to digest and comply with all the court orders to avoid paying even more fine. That may be difficult for them in a market that becomes more competitive.
I know also parents that work 10hour/day (and more with sometimes 2 jobs) just to afford the rent, the daycare of their child and basic needs. Not all parents who work a lot just throw away their money.
I have to amend what I just wrote. You are right: the relaxed phase is actually twisted, which allows light to pass though a polarising filter. Therefore, black consumes more power on LCD... Since LCD displays are now a majority, the idea of a black background is simply stupid.
Anyway, I think there is still more technological advances to be done at the level of power supplies instead of focusing on the background of the pages.
I don't think so. Dark is when crystals are not aligned (or randomly aligned), which is the powerless state. When a current is applied, crystals are aligned and let most of the light go through. I may be wrong, but this is what I remembered.
No, once a software is released under GPL, it cannot be "delicensed". By using the GPL, the copyright holders grant you a perpetual authorisation to distribute that software version under the terms of the GPL.
Really, you're wrong, and if you are not a noob, you're an ignorant, and this is obvious as you do the common error of comparing rpm and apt. RPM is equivalent to DEB, it has no mechanism of dependency solving whatsoever, and it is the same for DEB. On Debian, APT is responsible for solving dependencies. And RPM based distros have also their APT equivalent: urpmi, yum and some other, which are responsible for solving dependencies.
urpmi has been in Mandrake/Mandriva since late 90s, and has always been able to solve dependencies, download from distant repositories and install packages automatically. It was there long before Ubuntu even existed.