The difference between this case and a murder is that while it is almost impossible to prove you didn't kill someone (the body could be anywhere), it is quite easy to prove that there is no child porn on your computer. You just give them the password and let them have at it.
Companies that create chips like this usually have a system in place for running built in test that do test all the registers and functions of the chip.
The methods that they use to do this are actually quite complex involving creating test patterns and seeing if the correct result is generated. This is often on a much smaller scale than "does each core work" and it could test just the ALU (Arithmetic Logic Unit).
The problem with a consumer trying to access this is that the test mode is usually hidden from the user intentionally so they can't break their chip. The way that you get into test mode varies from chip to chip, but can be any thing from a hidden instruction to pulsing the memory CAS and RAS backwards.
I think the argument that many of the people who call it a monopoly are trying to make is this:
If I have a Ford truck, I can put non-ford replacement parts in it if they fit (compile for that architecture).
However the the apple app store would be akin to your truck not starting if you don't have all Ford branded parts in it.
Its not a monopoly in the actual meaning of the word as there is no-one forcing you to buy a Ford, but it comes back to the "I bought a physical thing, I want to do whatever I want with it" argument.
I live in Edmonton, not only would you be able to pull the cold air in from the outside in the winter, you would probably have to heat it too (it got below -40c this year).
The problem is not that there isn't that they need to raise taxes to pay for health care. Its that the US spends too much on its privatized health care.
Look to your neighbors in the great white north, they spend less per capita than the US on health care and I can get medical treatment without paying a dime other than taxes.
The concept that the government is not responsible for healthcare, as so many people are saying here, is so foreign to me that I had to re-read the sentence several times, just to make sure I got it. A government's primary responsibility is to see to the welfare of its citizens and to space exploration farther down the list.
Maybe you should start putting peoples lives above any other priorities.
The US is using various international trade agreements to push its views out in the world around them. So it may not be you personally, but it is the government that you as a country have elected.
The money is spread based on popularity (as far as I know) so you could simply think that all your money goes to the artists that you like, and that the vast majority of people who pirate the top-40 artists are paying into the pool for the top-40 artists.
As it is just one big pool, you aren't necessarily putting money in their pockets.
If you want to support more indie artists then simply buy the music directly from them.
My Motherboard's sound drivers don't install on SP3, they claim that it is not a supported OS. As they will probably never be updated, I am unable to use sound as well as surf the web?
Parts of the uses of this aren't even for ripping movies.
I have had several movies that I have wanted to play on my computer (off of the disc, no ripping) because I have a larger screen that is if higher quality.
However, when I tried to play them I got a message about how I did not pass the copy protection requirements. Slysoft's software was through them in no time at all and allowed me to watch my legally obtained videos on my legal dvd player.
The problem is not that software breaks when put under an unfair load; it is that software is released when it is "good enough" and just patched later.
Would you want to drive over a bridge that was finished when it was "good enough" to handle a couple cars and then they just started strapping steel beams to it to keep it upright?
Well in that case, there are more than one person in on the decision. The problem is not that the library gave up the computers, it is that they did it based on the decision of one person, at the request of the police who didn't even have a warrant.
If the police went through the proper channels and got a warrant and asked for the computers, very few people would have issue with this.
I shouldn't need to be afraid of the police, they are the ones responsible for upholding the law. My job as a citizen is to contribute to society by paying taxes that pay for these officers.
So if I need to know my rights because I have to fear the police taking advantage of me, there is something wrong.
The problem is not the actual computers but the records that are on them, if someone (like a business) owned these computers (like an internet cafe) then they can do as they wish with them, however these computers were used with the understanding that they had some privacy.
In effect the librarian was deciding what to do with the data of all the people who used those computers, not just the computers.
but the advantage of using Windows is that everything works (all of the programs I mean), so "upgrading" to vista where half of everything works is not an advantage
Yes but when you consider that you can't easily buy a computer without Vista on it (I live in Canada, we don't have the Ubuntu dells up here), then the Vista install is a fixed cost, as much as part of the laptop as the keyboard.
The real question is is that why would people pay money to have a "obsolete" OS installed on their computer instead of the newer one, because if they are buying it they are obviously planning on using it.
I don't think you'll be running Photoshop, Matlab, video games, and Maya on a subnotebook.
Subnotbooks are more geared towards the things that Linux does really well and it doesn't do any differently from Windows, like surfing the internet, reading email and word processing.
The way that you can get people to be open to trying Linux on their main computer is showing them that it is not just a command line (every non-tech person I talk to thinks it is) and that it is as capable of being the full-fledged OS that we all know it is.
The interesting part is that there is 25% of the market that IE does not have, and I would put the percentage of the market that knows which browser they are using at less than 25%.
So obviously those who are "in the know", switch away from firefox, and get their relatives/friends to do so as well
But you only ever need to buy one writer, so the cost of the writer is a one time cost.
The only real cost that you have to worry about is the disc so they just need to be priced bellow hard-discs enough for it to be worth it.
Slashdot Mirror
http://xkcd.com/678/
The difference between this case and a murder is that while it is almost impossible to prove you didn't kill someone (the body could be anywhere), it is quite easy to prove that there is no child porn on your computer. You just give them the password and let them have at it.
Obligatory
The methods that they use to do this are actually quite complex involving creating test patterns and seeing if the correct result is generated. This is often on a much smaller scale than "does each core work" and it could test just the ALU (Arithmetic Logic Unit).
The problem with a consumer trying to access this is that the test mode is usually hidden from the user intentionally so they can't break their chip. The way that you get into test mode varies from chip to chip, but can be any thing from a hidden instruction to pulsing the memory CAS and RAS backwards.
These two links go into greater detail.
I think the argument that many of the people who call it a monopoly are trying to make is this:
If I have a Ford truck, I can put non-ford replacement parts in it if they fit (compile for that architecture).
However the the apple app store would be akin to your truck not starting if you don't have all Ford branded parts in it.
Its not a monopoly in the actual meaning of the word as there is no-one forcing you to buy a Ford, but it comes back to the "I bought a physical thing, I want to do whatever I want with it" argument.
I live in Edmonton, not only would you be able to pull the cold air in from the outside in the winter, you would probably have to heat it too (it got below -40c this year).
The problem is not that there isn't that they need to raise taxes to pay for health care. Its that the US spends too much on its privatized health care.
Look to your neighbors in the great white north, they spend less per capita than the US on health care and I can get medical treatment without paying a dime other than taxes.
The concept that the government is not responsible for healthcare, as so many people are saying here, is so foreign to me that I had to re-read the sentence several times, just to make sure I got it. A government's primary responsibility is to see to the welfare of its citizens and to space exploration farther down the list.
Maybe you should start putting peoples lives above any other priorities.
I'm allergic to nuts (the people kind). Can I have a different airplane to fly in?
There is also the part that says you are not allowed to profit from crime.
That would probably be more applicable in this situation as the pirate bay is not technically copying anything.
The US is using various international trade agreements to push its views out in the world around them. So it may not be you personally, but it is the government that you as a country have elected.
The money is spread based on popularity (as far as I know) so you could simply think that all your money goes to the artists that you like, and that the vast majority of people who pirate the top-40 artists are paying into the pool for the top-40 artists.
As it is just one big pool, you aren't necessarily putting money in their pockets.
If you want to support more indie artists then simply buy the music directly from them.
Here in Alberta, Canada we pay 5% tax only
My Motherboard's sound drivers don't install on SP3, they claim that it is not a supported OS. As they will probably never be updated, I am unable to use sound as well as surf the web?
If you can distort it I can un-distort it, so at best a short term solution once again thwarted by the analogue hole.
Parts of the uses of this aren't even for ripping movies.
I have had several movies that I have wanted to play on my computer (off of the disc, no ripping) because I have a larger screen that is if higher quality.
However, when I tried to play them I got a message about how I did not pass the copy protection requirements. Slysoft's software was through them in no time at all and allowed me to watch my legally obtained videos on my legal dvd player.
I agree the idea of suing someone for you breaking your own TV is quite ridiculous.
If I throw a brick through my TV should the brick company be liable?
Soon there will be a ream of lawsuits of people who threw their PS3/Xbox controllers through the screen in frustration at a game.
The problem is not that software breaks when put under an unfair load; it is that software is released when it is "good enough" and just patched later. Would you want to drive over a bridge that was finished when it was "good enough" to handle a couple cars and then they just started strapping steel beams to it to keep it upright?
Well in that case, there are more than one person in on the decision. The problem is not that the library gave up the computers, it is that they did it based on the decision of one person, at the request of the police who didn't even have a warrant. If the police went through the proper channels and got a warrant and asked for the computers, very few people would have issue with this.
I shouldn't need to be afraid of the police, they are the ones responsible for upholding the law. My job as a citizen is to contribute to society by paying taxes that pay for these officers. So if I need to know my rights because I have to fear the police taking advantage of me, there is something wrong.
The problem is not the actual computers but the records that are on them, if someone (like a business) owned these computers (like an internet cafe) then they can do as they wish with them, however these computers were used with the understanding that they had some privacy. In effect the librarian was deciding what to do with the data of all the people who used those computers, not just the computers.
but the advantage of using Windows is that everything works (all of the programs I mean), so "upgrading" to vista where half of everything works is not an advantage
Yes but when you consider that you can't easily buy a computer without Vista on it (I live in Canada, we don't have the Ubuntu dells up here), then the Vista install is a fixed cost, as much as part of the laptop as the keyboard. The real question is is that why would people pay money to have a "obsolete" OS installed on their computer instead of the newer one, because if they are buying it they are obviously planning on using it.
I don't think you'll be running Photoshop, Matlab, video games, and Maya on a subnotebook. Subnotbooks are more geared towards the things that Linux does really well and it doesn't do any differently from Windows, like surfing the internet, reading email and word processing. The way that you can get people to be open to trying Linux on their main computer is showing them that it is not just a command line (every non-tech person I talk to thinks it is) and that it is as capable of being the full-fledged OS that we all know it is.
The interesting part is that there is 25% of the market that IE does not have, and I would put the percentage of the market that knows which browser they are using at less than 25%. So obviously those who are "in the know", switch away from firefox, and get their relatives/friends to do so as well
But you only ever need to buy one writer, so the cost of the writer is a one time cost. The only real cost that you have to worry about is the disc so they just need to be priced bellow hard-discs enough for it to be worth it.