My best guess is, that this will trigger contracts that say: "supplier vows to abide by IP laws". The vendor that buys products from the supplier then just claims they didn't know about it (they really don't care). Then they testify (truthfully) that they did their due diligence and acted in good faith.
How do you want to sue someone when they act in good faith and have no knowings of what the supplier on the other half of the word is breaking the contract? Do you want to make supplier audits mandatory? Don't be ridiculous.
And if a law is passed that enables the suing of the companies when someone exposed the supplier, this opens a whole can of post factum liability worms.
The other thing is, that China is only vocal about IP laws, but the industry mostly depends on shallow enforcement. So I really doubt that it will be easy to expose suppliers if it has bad consequences for Chinese companies.
You seem to miss the point. Avoiding run-away inflation is exactly the point of gold backed legal tender. They would have to exchange it for external affairs, but that would be their smallest problem.
The U.S. treasury and central bank would never allow this to happen + it's illegal.
It's funny, most of the stuff you have in your pocket is not that much different. You bring it to a bank and it just becomes a bunch of numbers on your credit account backed by nothing. Banks and the goverment basically play the same game, with the difference that they get away with it.
Well, if I'd plan a revolution, I'd set up a few mobile satellite up-links and an ad-hock WiFi network through the major cities, establishing communication and organization cells with instructions how to operate them (protocol).
But then again, a revolution is mostly a pretty messy, so they were probably preoccupied with other things, like wild rage and stuff.
Oh come on people, please don't label every possible action "theft".
Sony did not steal anything of you, instead they commited "FRAUD". They advertised the costumers features of their product, and removed them afterwards in fairly illegal ways, that's a breach of contract (assuming that most of that small print babling nobody reads is invalid) and as such fraud.
Netflix only servers 300 million users max. (U.S. residents only). The Internet is actually much larger (global), so it would not make that much difference.
Google on the other hand does global business, so they can and probably will make a dent if they want to. And it seems they want.
I don't think Microsoft has to worry all that much about this. The PS3 is interesting because of the Cell broadband engine and as such, has a lot of potential. It's also quite reliable. The XBox 360 has very average hardware with high failure rates, and therefore has little attraction to be opened. The WII was broken long ago, as it only has marginal security measures.
You forget that not everyone is a basement dweller. Split screen and LAN games are/were generally a nice social activity. Get a few friends, a few beers and make a fun evening in one place.
You can't really replicate that with on-line play and team speak.
Granted, those have their place too, and there are also the days you don't really want to have people around. Still, both have their advantages. Seeing that socializing in this form dies out just fastens our zombification as a society.
Not that complaining would help, so I don't. Just making an observation.
Yes, it's controversial and probably a bit off the real numbers, but real numbers are near impossible to get. How do you want to know what people use in their closed projects? Nobody ever publishes that data.
Seems you happened to miss the trend, big data centers are built with cheep commodity hardware, and the workload is distributed by software.
I know Google is doing this, they manufacture a container with hundreds of these. They don't even bother to replace failing parts, only when a specific percentage of nodes goes down, the container is replaced. Basically zero maintenance.
Theoretically it would be possible to kill an entire data center, or a big chunk of it anyway, with the master codes for only a few production batch serial numbers.
I think you are right about that, and the reason is, that the processors have to be very resilient against external influences, like the elevated radiation up at around 1km height (~4k feet).
I know they do special hardened chips for anything that goes to space, as the most important thing up there is reliability. I imagine it's similar for planes, though not that extreme.
Besides the simpler and more robust build for these chips, the probably also draw much less power than a modern workhorse processor, and that's pretty critical when the power goes out and you are flying on a little emergency battery.
There is also the tons of optimized code for these things. Developing airplane control software is not exactly like building a website, and it's expensive as hell (multiple reviews of every line, test cases ad infinitum, etc.). The current software works well on that architecture, so there is no inherent reason to quickly switch (unless the production lines run dry, of course).
Yup. That's what browser language settings are for, which more and more websites start to forget.
If you happen to travel to an Spanish language country now-a-days and visit your using a WiFi on *your* laptop with your browser preferences still on *English*, you are still welcomed with: "Holla! Commo esta?". WTF?
Serious question. Yes, the BitCoins are and will further gain in value, which is normally called deflation.
There are a lot of economists who'd say that's a very bad thing, but those are the same ones who ram wall-street into the ground regularly, so I'd not give them too much credit.
So if you want to know what a BitCoin based economy would look like, here it is:
* Central banks could not print as much (FIAT) money as they'd like (now a days they use the euphemism: quantitative easing). They could not print any. This would mean, that they could not inflate away debt (which is what's actually going on). They'd actually had to do responsible accounting (imagine that). * This would encourage people to actually save and spend what they have, and not buy everything on debt creating massive problems down the road.
This all would make pretty good economic stability and nominal growth (not this exponential lunatic thing we see today, ending in bubbles most of the time).
This is all based on simple logic, and must not be true, but can it get much worse than it's right now? I doubt it.
Please, for the love of the written text: read the damn FAQ http://www.bitcoin.org/faq *before* you engage in a discussion about the topic!
The generation of BitCoins is just part of the bootstrapping process, and it's not economically viable to do that to get wealthy (you'd set up an Amazon cluster to make them, you'd pay more than you'd earn). Generation also slows and will cap out at around 21 million BitCoins.
The primary value of BitCoins is defined by how much people are ready to exchange it for, and what you can buy/sell with it, not unlike real currency.
The primary differences are that there is no central bank that can print more money on a whim, and that the transactions are anonymous (kind of, the numbers are broadcasted, but they are not attached to names, only cryptographic keys anyone can make).
In that sense, it is an interesting and promising thing. Could use some broader adoption though, but that's not an over night thing. The current structures are stable enough to use it for practical things already and maybe we'll see it in broader adoption in the future.
What ever happened with the assertion that the Windows product family got super safe and stable in recent years and the old stigmas aren't true any more? Seriously, I should not have to read these kind of news if that'd be true. What gives?
Not to mention the planned obsolescence that can be enforced with simply turning off the server. You want to replay a game you liked 10 years ago, dream on buddy!
Slashdot Mirror
I live in central Europe and my smart-phone has a pre-paid card with a 1GB data option enabled for 10 EUR (~14 USD) a month.
That's by far enough for e-mail chat and the occasional map. And I can get rid of it anytime I want (just don't have to extend it for the next month).
I'm always fascinated to hear the comparison from the new world.
My best guess is, that this will trigger contracts that say: "supplier vows to abide by IP laws". The vendor that buys products from the supplier then just claims they didn't know about it (they really don't care). Then they testify (truthfully) that they did their due diligence and acted in good faith.
How do you want to sue someone when they act in good faith and have no knowings of what the supplier on the other half of the word is breaking the contract? Do you want to make supplier audits mandatory? Don't be ridiculous.
And if a law is passed that enables the suing of the companies when someone exposed the supplier, this opens a whole can of post factum liability worms.
The other thing is, that China is only vocal about IP laws, but the industry mostly depends on shallow enforcement. So I really doubt that it will be easy to expose suppliers if it has bad consequences for Chinese companies.
You seem to miss the point. Avoiding run-away inflation is exactly the point of gold backed legal tender. They would have to exchange it for external affairs, but that would be their smallest problem.
The U.S. treasury and central bank would never allow this to happen + it's illegal.
Only if you believe in a deterministic universe. Otherwise you get pretty good results with TRNG's and quantum mechanics.
http://www.random.org/randomness/
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quantum_cryptography
Shut up, for crying out loud. You work under the assumption that your system stays uncompromised.
In security you should work under the assumption that your hash files get compromised, konws the hashes, the salt and the algorithm.
That's why stuff like bcrypt was developed. It's addressing this situation by making brute force hash lookups unfeasable.
Please read a crypto 101 book before posting next time, this really hurts to read.
Well, that's only because we collectively managed to very efficiently stick the shit to the catapult and someone turned on the fan this week.
It's funny, most of the stuff you have in your pocket is not that much different. You bring it to a bank and it just becomes a bunch of numbers on your credit account backed by nothing. Banks and the goverment basically play the same game, with the difference that they get away with it.
Well, if I'd plan a revolution, I'd set up a few mobile satellite up-links and an ad-hock WiFi network through the major cities, establishing communication and organization cells with instructions how to operate them (protocol).
But then again, a revolution is mostly a pretty messy, so they were probably preoccupied with other things, like wild rage and stuff.
Oh come on people, please don't label every possible action "theft".
Sony did not steal anything of you, instead they commited "FRAUD". They advertised the costumers features of their product, and removed them afterwards in fairly illegal ways, that's a breach of contract (assuming that most of that small print babling nobody reads is invalid) and as such fraud.
Trucks are big, slow and smelly. The diagrams show that cars follow a lead truck close by. I really doubt this will be a success.
Netflix only servers 300 million users max. (U.S. residents only). The Internet is actually much larger (global), so it would not make that much difference.
Google on the other hand does global business, so they can and probably will make a dent if they want to. And it seems they want.
I don't think Microsoft has to worry all that much about this. The PS3 is interesting because of the Cell broadband engine and as such, has a lot of potential. It's also quite reliable. The XBox 360 has very average hardware with high failure rates, and therefore has little attraction to be opened. The WII was broken long ago, as it only has marginal security measures.
Don't you worry, one of these days, someone will write a full 386 emulator in JavaScript bringing the full Web 2.0 fidelity to your lawn.
And if you have an especially powerful rig, you'll even be able to use the 'turbo' button.
You forget that not everyone is a basement dweller. Split screen and LAN games are/were generally a nice social activity. Get a few friends, a few beers and make a fun evening in one place.
You can't really replicate that with on-line play and team speak.
Granted, those have their place too, and there are also the days you don't really want to have people around. Still, both have their advantages. Seeing that socializing in this form dies out just fastens our zombification as a society.
Not that complaining would help, so I don't. Just making an observation.
The langpop site has quite a good set of charts, including Google Code and Freshmeat: http://langpop.com/
Did not found any up to date stats on sourceforge, the only statistic circling around is very dated (2006): http://wismuth.com/lang/languages.html
ups, yes I did, my mistake, the correct link is: http://www.r-chart.com/2010/08/github-stats-on-programming-languages.html
Seems he was referring to the Tiobe community index at: http://www.tiobe.com/index.php/content/paperinfo/tpci/index.html
Yes, it's controversial and probably a bit off the real numbers, but real numbers are near impossible to get. How do you want to know what people use in their closed projects? Nobody ever publishes that data.
Now if you check out a different chart, the language distribution of Github projects, you'd get a totally different picture: http://www.tiobe.com/index.php/content/paperinfo/tpci/index.html , but it's also not very representative for the entire ecosystem.
Seems you happened to miss the trend, big data centers are built with cheep commodity hardware, and the workload is distributed by software.
I know Google is doing this, they manufacture a container with hundreds of these. They don't even bother to replace failing parts, only when a specific percentage of nodes goes down, the container is replaced. Basically zero maintenance.
Theoretically it would be possible to kill an entire data center, or a big chunk of it anyway, with the master codes for only a few production batch serial numbers.
I think this will really worry some folks.
I think you are right about that, and the reason is, that the processors have to be very resilient against external influences, like the elevated radiation up at around 1km height (~4k feet).
I know they do special hardened chips for anything that goes to space, as the most important thing up there is reliability. I imagine it's similar for planes, though not that extreme.
Besides the simpler and more robust build for these chips, the probably also draw much less power than a modern workhorse processor, and that's pretty critical when the power goes out and you are flying on a little emergency battery.
There is also the tons of optimized code for these things. Developing airplane control software is not exactly like building a website, and it's expensive as hell (multiple reviews of every line, test cases ad infinitum, etc.). The current software works well on that architecture, so there is no inherent reason to quickly switch (unless the production lines run dry, of course).
/. ate the > and < part, and everything that was between. So ps: "visit *favourte_website.com*
Yup. That's what browser language settings are for, which more and more websites start to forget.
If you happen to travel to an Spanish language country now-a-days and visit your using a WiFi on *your* laptop with your browser preferences still on *English*, you are still welcomed with: "Holla! Commo esta?". WTF?
Serious question. Yes, the BitCoins are and will further gain in value, which is normally called deflation.
There are a lot of economists who'd say that's a very bad thing, but those are the same ones who ram wall-street into the ground regularly, so I'd not give them too much credit.
So if you want to know what a BitCoin based economy would look like, here it is:
* Central banks could not print as much (FIAT) money as they'd like (now a days they use the euphemism: quantitative easing). They could not print any. This would mean, that they could not inflate away debt (which is what's actually going on). They'd actually had to do responsible accounting (imagine that).
* This would encourage people to actually save and spend what they have, and not buy everything on debt creating massive problems down the road.
This all would make pretty good economic stability and nominal growth (not this exponential lunatic thing we see today, ending in bubbles most of the time).
This is all based on simple logic, and must not be true, but can it get much worse than it's right now? I doubt it.
Please, for the love of the written text: read the damn FAQ http://www.bitcoin.org/faq *before* you engage in a discussion about the topic!
The generation of BitCoins is just part of the bootstrapping process, and it's not economically viable to do that to get wealthy (you'd set up an Amazon cluster to make them, you'd pay more than you'd earn). Generation also slows and will cap out at around 21 million BitCoins.
The primary value of BitCoins is defined by how much people are ready to exchange it for, and what you can buy/sell with it, not unlike real currency.
The primary differences are that there is no central bank that can print more money on a whim, and that the transactions are anonymous (kind of, the numbers are broadcasted, but they are not attached to names, only cryptographic keys anyone can make).
In that sense, it is an interesting and promising thing. Could use some broader adoption though, but that's not an over night thing. The current structures are stable enough to use it for practical things already and maybe we'll see it in broader adoption in the future.
What ever happened with the assertion that the Windows product family got super safe and stable in recent years and the old stigmas aren't true any more? Seriously, I should not have to read these kind of news if that'd be true. What gives?
Not to mention the planned obsolescence that can be enforced with simply turning off the server. You want to replay a game you liked 10 years ago, dream on buddy!