Re:But how will authorities regulate illegal conte
on
Wireless Freenets
·
· Score: 1
You can in fact change the mac address of most newer cards, although it's probably not a good idea since mac addresses are registered with IEEE. I believe it can be done with ifconfig on most 3com cards. I'll have to find the links....
As had been mentioned by the previous response, the netscape navigator plugin works fine, and, although I could be wrong, I think they have ported the shockwave player over [finally].
That's not a fair comparison, since you are not actually physically steeling anything. Furthermore, most people wouldn't buy the games anyhow, so it costs them NOTHING. So, let's do the math.
1. A game costs $0 to download
2. $0 is markup
3. $0 is spent manufacturing, shipping, and marketing
4. That's $0 the company loses from someone who downloads a game illegally who wouldn't buy it had they not downloaded it.
Pirating does not prevent people from buying games, therefor costs the company nothing.
First of all, OLGA still seems to be working fine. Second of all, as others have pointed out, there are mirrors. And lastly, I think it has become a great shame that so many guitar players rely so heavily on tablature. Maybe if it ever does get closed, it will give people an incentive to start learning more songs by ear! After all, music is all about the ear, and not how to look at numbers on a screen. What's even worse, it's a VERY simplified notation, without timing. I imagine that the large number of people who have know idea how rhythm works is due partially to this.
Hmmm... Let's see if I can make this a little more clear.
"There are millions of 68K-based Macs. More to the point, at the time they dumped the 68K instruction set, 100% of existing Macs were based on the 68K line of chips." And how many x86 PC's are there?
"First of all, dumping the x86 instruction set from new chips will not 'drop [software] support' from the existing PCs." But will new programs run on the old systems? Will old programs run on new systems? Will there be linux software for it, such as a compiler, or a kernel? That's what I meant in 'support', or rather software support.
"This would be a bold move, and has yet to be attempted, in spite of the 'heavy competition in the PC world.'" The idea is that there are so many PC systems that they will not just change to this new architecture because of existing applications that run with these systems. The 'competition' would just take over the market. Look at intel. The reason that they were so successful in the beginning is because they were associated with compatibility. The reason that PC's (as in x86 architectures) were successful is because they were more open and led to more competition. Hmmm.... Maybe this so called 'competition' does play as an incentive not to drop 'support' for the existing technologies(the x86 architecture), as in not making chips that 'support' the old instruction set. There would be no software to run on it.
"What is the paradox here? Perhaps 'heavy competition' does not automatically equal 'elegant new technology.' Or, perhaps there is not as much 'heavy competition' as PC-owners would like to imagine." How many companies make G4 processors? How many companies make mother boards for these? There only appears to be one company. Naturally there must be competition if there's only one company...
"few people give Apple credit for heavily competing with ALL the PC companies, all the time, all by themselves." The only reason they are competing is because they have pretty computers. I really don't see how they got as far as they have, as they sell over-priced, under-powered machines. How much is the high end G4? How much are Dell's even higher end workstations? There doesn't appear to be much innovation, or any competition to reason any innovation, there...
"Which brings us to Linux. Divorced from Microsoft and Intel, what are now ironically called PCs may finally see all kinds of funky new hardware and software technology. Now that IBM is selling PowerPC motherboards, we may soon see G4 and K7 boxes side by side in the computer store--both running Linux. Now that's innovation and freedom of choice! " That would definitely be cool!
The only reason apple was able to do it is because they didn't have very many macs in use and their systems are so proprietery that whatever they say goes. On the other hand, there is heavy competition in the PC world and there are too many PC's that exist to just suddenly drop support for them. Chances are that any company(AMD, Intel) that just dropped the x86 instruction set would lose a lot of business and nobody would support it. They will always have to maintain compatibility with previous generations and just add new instructions to make it more powerful. I think that it would be great to have a new RISC based chip for the PC (it really wouldn't be a PC then), but it just isn't practical.
Maybe the reason that he can't sell it to anyone is because he doesn't have the technology behind it. Yeah, anyone can say that it is a good idea, but without being able to do it, it is worthless. It's just a concept, not an invention. It's like saying, "Yeah, I have this cool invention that does such and such, but with our current technology, we can't do it, nor do I even know how"
Slashdot Mirror
You can in fact change the mac address of most newer cards, although it's probably not a good idea since mac addresses are registered with IEEE. I believe it can be done with ifconfig on most 3com cards. I'll have to find the links....
excuse me, I don't know how that space got in there.
Here's the link
I found this with a quick search of google. http://free.freespeech.org/kaosroolz/jynx%27s_jurn al_v2.84/Flame%20Thrower.txt
As had been mentioned by the previous response, the netscape navigator plugin works fine, and, although I could be wrong, I think they have ported the shockwave player over [finally].
It's analogous to OLE in windows for gnome, but I'm afraid that's all I know.
That's not a fair comparison, since you are not actually physically steeling anything. Furthermore, most people wouldn't buy the games anyhow, so it costs them NOTHING. So, let's do the math.
1. A game costs $0 to download
2. $0 is markup
3. $0 is spent manufacturing, shipping, and marketing
4. That's $0 the company loses from someone who downloads a game illegally who wouldn't buy it had they not downloaded it.
Pirating does not prevent people from buying games, therefor costs the company nothing.
First of all, OLGA still seems to be working fine. Second of all, as others have pointed out, there are mirrors. And lastly, I think it has become a great shame that so many guitar players rely so heavily on tablature. Maybe if it ever does get closed, it will give people an incentive to start learning more songs by ear! After all, music is all about the ear, and not how to look at numbers on a screen. What's even worse, it's a VERY simplified notation, without timing. I imagine that the large number of people who have know idea how rhythm works is due partially to this.
Hmmm... Let's see if I can make this a little more clear.
"There are millions of 68K-based Macs. More to the point, at the time they dumped the 68K instruction set, 100% of existing Macs were based on the 68K line of chips."
And how many x86 PC's are there?
"First of all, dumping the x86 instruction set from new chips will not 'drop [software] support' from the existing PCs."
But will new programs run on the old systems? Will old programs run on new systems? Will there be linux software for it, such as a compiler, or a kernel? That's what I meant in 'support', or rather software support.
"This would be a bold move, and has yet to be attempted, in spite of the 'heavy competition in the PC world.'"
The idea is that there are so many PC systems that they will not just change to this new architecture because of existing applications that run with these systems. The 'competition' would just take over the market. Look at intel. The reason that they were so successful in the beginning is because they were associated with compatibility. The reason that PC's (as in x86 architectures) were successful is because they were more open and led to more competition. Hmmm.... Maybe this so called 'competition' does play as an incentive not to drop 'support' for the existing technologies(the x86 architecture), as in not making chips that 'support' the old instruction set. There would be no software to run on it.
"What is the paradox here? Perhaps 'heavy competition' does not automatically equal 'elegant new technology.' Or, perhaps there is not as much 'heavy competition' as PC-owners would like to imagine." How many companies make G4 processors? How many companies make mother boards for these? There only appears to be one company. Naturally there must be competition if there's only one company...
"few people give Apple credit for heavily competing with ALL the PC companies, all the time, all by themselves."
The only reason they are competing is because they have pretty computers. I really don't see how they got as far as they have, as they sell over-priced, under-powered machines. How much is the high end G4? How much are Dell's even higher end workstations? There doesn't appear to be much innovation, or any competition to reason any innovation, there...
"Which brings us to Linux. Divorced from Microsoft and Intel, what are now ironically called PCs may finally see all kinds of funky new hardware and software technology. Now that IBM is selling PowerPC motherboards, we may soon see G4 and K7 boxes side by side in the computer store--both running Linux. Now that's innovation and freedom of choice! "
That would definitely be cool!
The only reason apple was able to do it is because they didn't have very many macs in use and their systems are so proprietery that whatever they say goes. On the other hand, there is heavy competition in the PC world and there are too many PC's that exist to just suddenly drop support for them. Chances are that any company(AMD, Intel) that just dropped the x86 instruction set would lose a lot of business and nobody would support it. They will always have to maintain compatibility with previous generations and just add new instructions to make it more powerful. I think that it would be great to have a new RISC based chip for the PC (it really wouldn't be a PC then), but it just isn't practical.
Maybe the reason that he can't sell it to anyone is because he doesn't have the technology behind it. Yeah, anyone can say that it is a good idea, but without being able to do it, it is worthless. It's just a concept, not an invention. It's like saying, "Yeah, I have this cool invention that does such and such, but with our current technology, we can't do it, nor do I even know how"