If I recall correctly, caffeine works by binding to a sleep chemical recepttor (adenosine I think), not by binding to a stimulating receptor. It works because its an odd shape so that it doesn't carry the signal (sort of like completing a circuit) but it fits in there well enough to block the real stuff out. Since thats the way it works, I'm not sure you could find an similar chemical naturally in the body.
If you want to make something standard, you need a big backer. In this case, paypal got one of the biggest: Ebay. Because of Ebay's endorsement (and unique support for) paypal has blossommed. Now that its the clearly in the lead in the race for success, it should only be a few days before Microsoft buys it out and makes it a part of their passport service.
He may not be a lawyer, but you are clearly not a programmer (NAP). What they did was clearly an implentation of a protocol. The way the everquest client (the "software application" as you said) communicates with the server (what they have made) is the protocol in question.
He was speaking of weather that could be copyrighted/patented (it would probably be a patent since it is a method of doing something, not the complete software package, which would require a copyright).
As far as "Holocaust Everest" goes. You apparently aren't familiar with any other computer game in the history of games. Doom, quake, duke3d, diablo and all sorts of other games have been subject to mods doing all sorts of crazy things. None, to the best of my knowledge, has ever faced legal action unless they specifically tried to charge for their mods or tried to imply that they were a product of the company that made the original game.
From what I understand, George Lucas WILL be using the computer generated R2 for most of the movie. You'll notice this artcile mentions that Kenny would be scheduled for a "few shots". In other words, he is still playing second fiddle to the cgi one.
I agree. Keep in mind that you can use VPN servers as a dial-in server for a modem. I think what comcast is saying here is don't set up a rack of modems and vpn and let people dial in and run your own little ISP over our cable connection.
Now I just want to be able to do this with Tivo. Not because I have a need to, but rather because I will then be able to say "Look at me, I'm setting a program to record from the library!"
Doesn't this qaulify as a DOS attack under the law? They are sending tons of unrequested, unnecessary packets and essentially flooding the network with them. Keep in mind that search results are sent along the chain of servers also, meaning that when they send these search results back (false results) to every single search. You're not just recieving the responses to your searches, but also to other peoples searches that you forward along. This creates TONS of useless traffic that you must forward along and I think can easily be one of the causes of gnuetallas current fragmented state. (More people = more searches = more false responses from sharezilla that you're forced to forward = more wasted bandwidth)
If you think about it, the way information travels across the gnutella network is much the same the way newsgroups posts spread..from server to server to server. With that in mind, it should be simple enough to simply implement a gnutella death penalty wherein everyone simply adds in the ip of the spam producing server into a list bad ips. If enough people do it, any server that gets packets from that ip will drop them. So pong packets won't get through ( and thus the ip won't make it into host catchers) and also their search results won't appear in your results list. I'm sure there are a few bumps in this idea, and it does invovle mass participation as well as a client upgrade, but it does seem to be the way to do it.
Being behind on 6.0 has perhaps made it more difficult to get others to adopt their standards but consider the alternative. I.E. is trying to make up their own standards as they go along and anyone who doesn't conform to their standards won't be viewable by the majority of people out there. In relative terms, it could be a lot worse.
Actually, I suspect its because the rights to NGE arent' available. The Sci-Fi channel already has them and will be showing the eps starting (I'm told) in september.
Cartoon network is a cable channel, they could get away with way more than what they do. With that in mind, I don't think they necessarily want everything editted like nuts, thats just the way it is. If you want less editting on the cartoon, complain to the company doing the dubs, not CN.
When I was using dial-up, I always connected at 44000. I do not know how this speed is derived/calculated, but I could tell you that it translated to about 3.5-4k upstream, and 5-5.5k downstream I got. Now I'm on cable (fast cable too, 100k up/300k down), so I dont' worry about such things anymore.
While using windows, I was, according to DUN, able to connect at 44000 bps, sometimes 48000 bps. This was using netzero no less. I know of some people who have told me they can't get better than 31200, but usually they've traced that back to bad/old phone lines.
The Idea is that divx can get almost any movie under 2 hours on one cd; this is it's main "selling-point". I've seen the matrix in a 600 meg file with near-dvd (just like mp3 is near-cd) quality. Most people rip them to make them fit...so if it comes out to be a bit big..they can just re-encode it a bit smaller.
I agree on the old news part. However, those of us with fast cable connections know better about the second part. I've seen litteraly tons of dixv movies easily available for download on all sorts of irc channels. Not only that, but one can also find episodes of Malcolm in the middle, Farscae, The X-files, and other popular tv shows easily available in divx.
First of all, div-x uses mpeg4 (like microsoft's asf format which is also mpeg4) and mp3 audio to create a solid file format that reaches dvd quality. The rate given of 350 megs an hour is consistent with this sort of dvd quality.
ON a side note, I am bothered by slashdot posting this for a few reasons, 1) I'm almost positive I saw an article about div-x on here a long time ago. 2) If I didn't, then slashdot should be ashamed: even news.com did a big write up on it months ago.
Gold is a common component in computer parts. An old pentium or 486 is probably worth more in gold than what you could sell to for anyone. They are talking about very small amounts of gold from what I could understand anyways.:)
Streambox VCR from www.streambox.com is a viable alternative, but unfurtunately, thanks to a court order from your friends and mine at Real Networks, they have been prohibitted from disrtibuting it during the lawsuit. Real's problem with the program is that not only does it allow for viewing real files, but it also alows for the recording of files that are streamed through it. IF anyone knows of anything like this not under gag order by Real, I'd love to see it.:)
Any answer that they gave would have given us some0 insight into their motives, into what they're really trying to accomplish here.
Sadly, I think most people have come to the realization that Metallica themselves are not trying to accomplish anything. I believe (as many others do also I'm sure) that Metallica is simply being used by the RIAA as their official "MP3-IS-BAD" Puppets. And although I'm not a big Metallica fan, to see a band so blatantly used by the people who claim to be looking out for their interests pains me.
I think its quite obvious the MP3 offers enough benefits to Metallica (music getting heard by more people. . . perhaps in places where the are not yet popular, people able to listen to cd's before deciding to make a purchase, etc.) to at minimum offset any negative effects. The true reason for the jihad upon mp3 by the RIAA is because *they* are afraid it will take them out the loop. They are afraid that they will no longer be the primary means of distribution. It's just sad that they feel they need to manipulate a band whose understanding of the the technology is not quite up to par in order to serve their greedy needs.
The article just made use of DVD's as one example of something covered by the DMCA. Is Artwork a service? I'd realize that no such medium exists now, but they could very well creates some sort of encrypted artwork (paitings) that you could only view on a certain player which had to conform to an absurd set of standards. It wouyld be the same thing.
Just to prove a point, lets role with the whole dvd example. I own several dvd's. I did not accept a license agreement when using any of them for the first time, or opening them. I did not pay for a service, I paid for the right to own a copy of the movie itself. This is how it was presented to me; it wasn't portrayed like some sort of on-disc version of Pay-per-view TV. So now I own all these movies now (or at least own copies of them), Right? Well, apparently I do own them, but only if I use them in the prescribed manner? God forbid I should wish to unencrypt my movie (remember one of aspects of the DMCA is that it makes the actual act of circumventing copyright protection a crime) that I paid for with my money. Why I might wish to do that is my buisness, it should not be of legal concern to anyone. Existing copyright law already exists that would make it crime for me to distribute that copy, but I should have every right to make that copy for my own uses.
And aren't there laws that state that its ok to make such copies for back-ups if they are for your own personal use (you know, in case I scratch up the disk playing frisbee)? It would seem that this would be in direct conflict with the DMCA mandate that circumventing copyright protections, even to make a copy for your own personal back-up use, is a crime.
I disagree, stronlgy. At least to your claims that this would have been contrary to slashdot's spirt of the "little guy" as you phrased it. I believe the purpose of this book is to help use be heard. You do not post something on a public forum so that people won't read it. You put it there with the knowledge that it will be read, and that is the intention with which you put it there.
Regardless of if you like it or not, slashdot makes money from your posts even if they do not publish them in a book format. You will notice banner adds at the top of your page which slashdot is no doubt paid to place there. The only people who see those ads are the people who come to read slashdot. They come to read slashdot because of the news, information and comments put here by other slashdot readers (lets face it, Hemos doesn't do too much posting of comments) Without your commments, there is no site. So it's your stuff that pays the bills. If you don't like it, don't post.
Even if you were forced by order of court to remove the orignal posts, we, as loyal slashdot readers and free speech defenders would no doubt make it our sacred duty to post exact copies of that comment to every available forum at our disposal (Usenet, IRC, New Slashdot articles, any and every place where can post it).
What Microsoft doesn't get, is that this sort of censorship never works. Look what happened with DeCSS. Websites are forced to remove it, and suddenly it starts popping up everywhere. Microsoft can only hurt themselves with their request.
Slashdot Mirror
Good idea.
If I recall correctly, caffeine works by binding to a sleep chemical recepttor (adenosine I think), not by binding to a stimulating receptor. It works because its an odd shape so that it doesn't carry the signal (sort of like completing a circuit) but it fits in there well enough to block the real stuff out. Since thats the way it works, I'm not sure you could find an similar chemical naturally in the body.
If you want to make something standard, you need a big backer. In this case, paypal got one of the biggest: Ebay. Because of Ebay's endorsement (and unique support for) paypal has blossommed. Now that its the clearly in the lead in the race for success, it should only be a few days before Microsoft buys it out and makes it a part of their passport service.
He may not be a lawyer, but you are clearly not a programmer (NAP). What they did was clearly an implentation of a protocol. The way the everquest client (the "software application" as you said) communicates with the server (what they have made) is the protocol in question. He was speaking of weather that could be copyrighted/patented (it would probably be a patent since it is a method of doing something, not the complete software package, which would require a copyright). As far as "Holocaust Everest" goes. You apparently aren't familiar with any other computer game in the history of games. Doom, quake, duke3d, diablo and all sorts of other games have been subject to mods doing all sorts of crazy things. None, to the best of my knowledge, has ever faced legal action unless they specifically tried to charge for their mods or tried to imply that they were a product of the company that made the original game.
From what I understand, George Lucas WILL be using the computer generated R2 for most of the movie. You'll notice this artcile mentions that Kenny would be scheduled for a "few shots". In other words, he is still playing second fiddle to the cgi one.
I agree. Keep in mind that you can use VPN servers as a dial-in server for a modem. I think what comcast is saying here is don't set up a rack of modems and vpn and let people dial in and run your own little ISP over our cable connection.
Now I just want to be able to do this with Tivo. Not because I have a need to, but rather because I will then be able to say "Look at me, I'm setting a program to record from the library!"
Doesn't this qaulify as a DOS attack under the law? They are sending tons of unrequested, unnecessary packets and essentially flooding the network with them. Keep in mind that search results are sent along the chain of servers also, meaning that when they send these search results back (false results) to every single search. You're not just recieving the responses to your searches, but also to other peoples searches that you forward along. This creates TONS of useless traffic that you must forward along and I think can easily be one of the causes of gnuetallas current fragmented state. (More people = more searches = more false responses from sharezilla that you're forced to forward = more wasted bandwidth)
If you think about it, the way information travels across the gnutella network is much the same the way newsgroups posts spread..from server to server to server. With that in mind, it should be simple enough to simply implement a gnutella death penalty wherein everyone simply adds in the ip of the spam producing server into a list bad ips. If enough people do it, any server that gets packets from that ip will drop them. So pong packets won't get through ( and thus the ip won't make it into host catchers) and also their search results won't appear in your results list. I'm sure there are a few bumps in this idea, and it does invovle mass participation as well as a client upgrade, but it does seem to be the way to do it.
The guy at www.newsservers.net maintains a good list and he checks it often to show which servers are still up. This is the best list I've ever found.
Being behind on 6.0 has perhaps made it more difficult to get others to adopt their standards but consider the alternative. I.E. is trying to make up their own standards as they go along and anyone who doesn't conform to their standards won't be viewable by the majority of people out there. In relative terms, it could be a lot worse.
Actually, I suspect its because the rights to NGE arent' available. The Sci-Fi channel already has them and will be showing the eps starting (I'm told) in september.
Cartoon network is a cable channel, they could get away with way more than what they do. With that in mind, I don't think they necessarily want everything editted like nuts, thats just the way it is. If you want less editting on the cartoon, complain to the company doing the dubs, not CN.
When I was using dial-up, I always connected at 44000. I do not know how this speed is derived/calculated, but I could tell you that it translated to about 3.5-4k upstream, and 5-5.5k downstream I got. Now I'm on cable (fast cable too, 100k up/300k down), so I dont' worry about such things anymore.
While using windows, I was, according to DUN, able to connect at 44000 bps, sometimes 48000 bps. This was using netzero no less. I know of some people who have told me they can't get better than 31200, but usually they've traced that back to bad/old phone lines.
The Idea is that divx can get almost any movie under 2 hours on one cd; this is it's main "selling-point". I've seen the matrix in a 600 meg file with near-dvd (just like mp3 is near-cd) quality. Most people rip them to make them fit...so if it comes out to be a bit big..they can just re-encode it a bit smaller.
I agree on the old news part. However, those of us with fast cable connections know better about the second part. I've seen litteraly tons of dixv movies easily available for download on all sorts of irc channels. Not only that, but one can also find episodes of Malcolm in the middle, Farscae, The X-files, and other popular tv shows easily available in divx.
First of all, div-x uses mpeg4 (like microsoft's asf format which is also mpeg4) and mp3 audio to create a solid file format that reaches dvd quality. The rate given of 350 megs an hour is consistent with this sort of dvd quality.
ON a side note, I am bothered by slashdot posting this for a few reasons, 1) I'm almost positive I saw an article about div-x on here a long time ago. 2) If I didn't, then slashdot should be ashamed: even news.com did a big write up on it months ago.
Gold is a common component in computer parts. An old pentium or 486 is probably worth more in gold than what you could sell to for anyone. They are talking about very small amounts of gold from what I could understand anyways. :)
Streambox VCR from www.streambox.com is a viable alternative, but unfurtunately, thanks to a court order from your friends and mine at Real Networks, they have been prohibitted from disrtibuting it during the lawsuit. Real's problem with the program is that not only does it allow for viewing real files, but it also alows for the recording of files that are streamed through it. IF anyone knows of anything like this not under gag order by Real, I'd love to see it. :)
Any answer that they gave would have given us some0 insight into their motives, into what they're really trying to accomplish here.
Sadly, I think most people have come to the realization that Metallica themselves are not trying to accomplish anything. I believe (as many others do also I'm sure) that Metallica is simply being used by the RIAA as their official "MP3-IS-BAD" Puppets. And although I'm not a big Metallica fan, to see a band so blatantly used by the people who claim to be looking out for their interests pains me.
I think its quite obvious the MP3 offers enough benefits to Metallica (music getting heard by more people. . . perhaps in places where the are not yet popular, people able to listen to cd's before deciding to make a purchase, etc.) to at minimum offset any negative effects. The true reason for the jihad upon mp3 by the RIAA is because *they* are afraid it will take them out the loop. They are afraid that they will no longer be the primary means of distribution. It's just sad that they feel they need to manipulate a band whose understanding of the the technology is not quite up to par in order to serve their greedy needs.
The article just made use of DVD's as one example of something covered by the DMCA. Is Artwork a service? I'd realize that no such medium exists now, but they could very well creates some sort of encrypted artwork (paitings) that you could only view on a certain player which had to conform to an absurd set of standards. It wouyld be the same thing.
Just to prove a point, lets role with the whole dvd example. I own several dvd's. I did not accept a license agreement when using any of them for the first time, or opening them. I did not pay for a service, I paid for the right to own a copy of the movie itself. This is how it was presented to me; it wasn't portrayed like some sort of on-disc version of Pay-per-view TV. So now I own all these movies now (or at least own copies of them), Right? Well, apparently I do own them, but only if I use them in the prescribed manner? God forbid I should wish to unencrypt my movie (remember one of aspects of the DMCA is that it makes the actual act of circumventing copyright protection a crime) that I paid for with my money. Why I might wish to do that is my buisness, it should not be of legal concern to anyone. Existing copyright law already exists that would make it crime for me to distribute that copy, but I should have every right to make that copy for my own uses.
And aren't there laws that state that its ok to make such copies for back-ups if they are for your own personal use (you know, in case I scratch up the disk playing frisbee)? It would seem that this would be in direct conflict with the DMCA mandate that circumventing copyright protections, even to make a copy for your own personal back-up use, is a crime.
I disagree, stronlgy. At least to your claims that this would have been contrary to slashdot's spirt of the "little guy" as you phrased it. I believe the purpose of this book is to help use be heard. You do not post something on a public forum so that people won't read it. You put it there with the knowledge that it will be read, and that is the intention with which you put it there.
As for your ownership (i.e. "All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective owners. Comments are owned by the Poster. The Rest © 1997-2000 Andover.Net."), I'd have to say that it refers to your responsibillity to the material that you post. You may still own the quote itself in a more literal sense, but you've clearly given slashdot permission to use it by posting it on their webpage, its like metallica running a napster server loaded with their own mp3s (as if that would happen)...If you get it from the source, you have permission. You wouldn't download that mp3 from metallica and assume that you needed additional permission from them to actually keep it, it would be why they put it there to begin with.
Regardless of if you like it or not, slashdot makes money from your posts even if they do not publish them in a book format. You will notice banner adds at the top of your page which slashdot is no doubt paid to place there. The only people who see those ads are the people who come to read slashdot. They come to read slashdot because of the news, information and comments put here by other slashdot readers (lets face it, Hemos doesn't do too much posting of comments) Without your commments, there is no site. So it's your stuff that pays the bills. If you don't like it, don't post.
The moon gets blown in up Dragon ball too..I guess the japaneese don't like the moon?
Even if you were forced by order of court to remove the orignal posts, we, as loyal slashdot readers and free speech defenders would no doubt make it our sacred duty to post exact copies of that comment to every available forum at our disposal (Usenet, IRC, New Slashdot articles, any and every place where can post it).
What Microsoft doesn't get, is that this sort of censorship never works. Look what happened with DeCSS. Websites are forced to remove it, and suddenly it starts popping up everywhere. Microsoft can only hurt themselves with their request.