So you determine that the entirety of Title 17 is in need of replacement because of one bad judgement?
No, I determine that some minor amendment to Title 17 is in order. For one thing, roll the copyright terms in chapter 3 back a couple decades. For another, create a clear substantial non-infringing use exception to offenses under 1201. Then, "amount and substantiality" in section 107 needs to be clarified, and the scope of what constitutes a "derivative work" (as opposed to an appropriation of an uncopyrightable idea, section 102b) needs to be clearly restricted so that every work isn't counted as a derivative of some existing work.
Note that "giving to your friend" is not even close to a fair use right as implied by this law.
I can see several instances where a mix tape could express "criticism" of the works involved. For instance, following "Puff Daddy feat. Dave Grohl - It's All About the Benjamins (rock remix)" with "Marilyn Manson - I Don't Like the Drugs (but the Drugs Like Me)" shows how Manson's guitar line is substantially similar to Puffy's. Manson's publisher can't sue me because of Manson's own unclean hands, and Puffy's publisher wouldn't want to waste its time with me because it can get more money from Manson's publisher, a commercial entity. Same with "Chiffons - He's So Fine" and "George Harrison - My Sweet Lord", if done non-commercially. It might even be OK to use any song first published between 1923 and (current year minus 75) non-commercially as a "comment" on the Bono Act. With regard to the "amount and substantiality" provision, I typically don't put the whole song in mix discs that I make.
1008 clearly covers the hardware, not the audio thereupon.
Are you sure about this? "No action may be brought under this title alleging infringement of copyright... based on the noncommercial use by a consumer of [a recording] device or medium for making... musical recordings" (17 USC 1008).
Section 106 seems skipped over
The sections I quoted start with "Notwithstanding section 106". Those sections are intended to give legitimate reasons to skip 106.
Are you a troll employed by the RIAA or one of its member labels?
There's no problem borrowing you're friend's CD to listen to it, but making a COPY is a violation of COPYright.
Not always. See my other comment, which gives a line in 17 USC that authorizes personal use copies. Canada has something even more permissive, with a royalty on blank media to back it up.
The moment you say that musical works are somehow worth less than written works or inventions, then you have stripped musicians of their rights.
There's no way to guarantee that the song you just wrote isn't also the song that somebody else just wrote. Such coincidences are exceedingly likely to happen, and defending oneself in court against an allegation of plagiarism is prohibitively expensive for a novice songwriter. Thus, songwriters are already stripped of their rights.
Oh really? Let me pull out the letter of the United States Code:
17 USC 107: The fair use of a copyrighted work, including such use by reproduction in copies or phonorecords... for purposes such as[1]... is not an infringement of copyright. In determining whether the use made of a work in any particular case is a fair use the factors to be considered shall include...
17 USC 1008: No action may be brought under this title alleging infringement of copyright based on the manufacture, importation, or distribution of a... recording device, or a... recording medium, or based on the noncommercial use by a consumer of such a device or medium for making digital musical recordings or analog musical recordings.
[1] 17 USC 101: The terms ''including'' and ''such as'' are illustrative and not limitative.
If you are using a decent language, 100% of the memory is reclaimed after a full garbage collecting cycle. Maybe it will be once every hour, or once every second, but guess what, it is extremely carefully tuned by the garbage collection programmers.
Maybe they should build a new feature into apache-Slashdot Effect Guard.
You could always just mod_throttle all users coming from Referer contains slashdot.org, Referer contains memepool.com, and Referer contains kuro5hin.org.
Will it run the top of the line games at an acceptable level in 2 years?
Top of the line in 3D graphic detail, or top of the line in fun? I choose the latter, which is why I play games on my GBA and my GBA emulator. You don't need 3D accelerated video for that, just a fast (866 MHz PIII) processor and some bandwidth from the processor to the video card (TNT2). Take it up a bit (recent Athlon and GeForce 2) and you can emulate many N64 games.
I STILL have trouble running games like... Soldier of Fortune 2
Soldiers of Fortune runs fine in snes9x, even on my old 333 MHz PII laptop with a 66 MHz bus and no 3D acceleration. Yeah, it's a piece of crap, but it runs.
Yes, I know, Soldier of Fortune != Soldiers of Fortune.
Neither is any other programming language in existence on a real machine. A Turing machine has an infinitely long memory. Real computers are called "linear bounded automata" (LBAs), which means a Turing machine with the modification that the memory is limited to a constant multiple of the size of the input, and trying to go off one end of the memory makes the head hit a brick wall. It's even possible to solve the halting problem on LBAs: just emulate two copies, one at double speed (tortoise/hare setup), and stop when the state and memory of both machines become identical, which means that the faster LBA has looped.
PL/SQL and its free clone PL/pgSQL are imperative languages that are just as LBA-complete as C or Scheme.
but the first version of Lisp (way back in the '60s, I think) was a pure functional language.
LISP was originally meant to be a Fortran replacement. Heck, its original syntax specification (M-expressions) was designed to look like Fortran; the parentheses you see on modern LISP are from the S-expressions that the first interpreter used internally. Are you sure that the first popular LISP interpreter didn't have what would become Scheme's set! instruction?
If your problem does not allow you to use memory opaquely--that is, if you must exercise control over the way code and data is laid out in physical memory--then you should use C. That accounts for 1% of all code written.
That may account for 1% of the code written, but it may count for a vast majority of the cycles run on computers. Most computers are not workstations or servers; they're embedded systems in refrigerators, microwaves, toasters, telephones, and game consoles. For those restricted environments, you really do need a low-level language such as C.
No, their are not Spanish-accented, they are Portuguese-accented
Your "accent" is most closely related to the phonetic structure of your mother tongue. Except for the nasals, is Portuguese phonetics very different from Spanish phonetics?
a slight geographical inconvenience [prohibits the USA from joining the EU]
Even if all EU members must claim territory that geographically belongs to Europe, then why not "admit" the USA to the EU in much the same manner as Russia has been "admitted" to NATO?
If they deinterlace the video it would be 30 frames a second.
You're thinking of 30fps weave de-interlacing (see below). In real video sources other than film, objects actually move slightly from one field to the next. You're thinking of the form of weave de-interlacing that combines field 0 and field 1 and displays it twice. This is where the motion vectors come into play: they can help predict where the object will be between frames.
Bob de-interlacing: draw each field as a separate frame, interpolating the lines that aren't in a given field. Gives shimmering artifacts for relatively still images.
30fps weave de-interlacing: combine each pair of fields into one frame. Really bad double-image artifacts when something is moving.
60fps weave de-interlacing: combine each field with the previous field. Slightly less artifacty than 30fps weave.
Motion vector de-interlacing: use MPEG motion vectors to determine what parts of the image to bob and what parts to weave. Gives the best results but is compute-intensive and requires the MPEG-2 decoder to output motion vectors.
How are bitmaps two dimensional? Is the data in a bitmap an array of some sort?
Yes. Bitmap data is a two-dimensional array of pixel values, which can be scalars (indexed or grayscale modes), vectors (rgb or cmyk modes), or polar vectors (sih mode). It is then serialized to a one-dimensional stream of bytes.
If that's true then is it true for all bitmap formats?
All lossless-recompression bitmap formats represent a two-dimensional array, perhaps with different packing techniques (BMP and PCX use forms of RLE; GIF uses LZW; PNG uses deflation; TIFF can use several formats). JPEG uses a block transformation (2D DCT), quantization (of scalar values), and then RLE + Huffman packing.
Slashdot Mirror
NTSC (digital) is spec'd 720*577 (including vertical blanking) for a full frame (2 fields).
I was under the distinct impression that NTSC and PAL/M were specified as 525 lines per frame, not 577. PAL video is 625 lines. You may be thinking of PAL's visible area.
So you determine that the entirety of Title 17 is in need of replacement because of one bad judgement?
No, I determine that some minor amendment to Title 17 is in order. For one thing, roll the copyright terms in chapter 3 back a couple decades. For another, create a clear substantial non-infringing use exception to offenses under 1201. Then, "amount and substantiality" in section 107 needs to be clarified, and the scope of what constitutes a "derivative work" (as opposed to an appropriation of an uncopyrightable idea, section 102b) needs to be clearly restricted so that every work isn't counted as a derivative of some existing work.
Note that "giving to your friend" is not even close to a fair use right as implied by this law.
I can see several instances where a mix tape could express "criticism" of the works involved. For instance, following "Puff Daddy feat. Dave Grohl - It's All About the Benjamins (rock remix)" with "Marilyn Manson - I Don't Like the Drugs (but the Drugs Like Me)" shows how Manson's guitar line is substantially similar to Puffy's. Manson's publisher can't sue me because of Manson's own unclean hands, and Puffy's publisher wouldn't want to waste its time with me because it can get more money from Manson's publisher, a commercial entity. Same with "Chiffons - He's So Fine" and "George Harrison - My Sweet Lord", if done non-commercially. It might even be OK to use any song first published between 1923 and (current year minus 75) non-commercially as a "comment" on the Bono Act. With regard to the "amount and substantiality" provision, I typically don't put the whole song in mix discs that I make.
1008 clearly covers the hardware, not the audio thereupon.
Are you sure about this? "No action may be brought under this title alleging infringement of copyright ... based on the noncommercial use by a consumer of [a recording] device or medium for making ... musical recordings" (17 USC 1008).
Section 106 seems skipped over
The sections I quoted start with "Notwithstanding section 106". Those sections are intended to give legitimate reasons to skip 106.
Are you a troll employed by the RIAA or one of its member labels?
There's no problem borrowing you're friend's CD to listen to it, but making a COPY is a violation of COPYright.
Not always. See my other comment, which gives a line in 17 USC that authorizes personal use copies. Canada has something even more permissive, with a royalty on blank media to back it up.
Copies for personal use are for use only by you.
Please support this with statutes or case law.
The moment you say that musical works are somehow worth less than written works or inventions, then you have stripped musicians of their rights.
There's no way to guarantee that the song you just wrote isn't also the song that somebody else just wrote. Such coincidences are exceedingly likely to happen, and defending oneself in court against an allegation of plagiarism is prohibitively expensive for a novice songwriter. Thus, songwriters are already stripped of their rights.
Not legal to make mix tapes.
Oh really? Let me pull out the letter of the United States Code:
17 USC 107: The fair use of a copyrighted work, including such use by reproduction in copies or phonorecords ... for purposes such as[1] ... is not an infringement of copyright. In determining whether the use made of a work in any particular case is a fair use the factors to be considered shall include ...
17 USC 1008: No action may be brought under this title alleging infringement of copyright based on the manufacture, importation, or distribution of a ... recording device, or a ... recording medium, or based on the noncommercial use by a consumer of such a device or medium for making digital musical recordings or analog musical recordings.
[1] 17 USC 101: The terms ''including'' and ''such as'' are illustrative and not limitative.
and when was Russia admitted to NATO
Russia was never fully admitted to NATO. That's why I put "admitted" in scare-quotes. I was talking about the NATO-Russia Council.
Is Spanish better than English? Does Japanese trump Swahili?
What about Toki Pona? It's a small spoken language with 120 words that don't inflect. Whether Toki Pona is small in a practical way or small in an impractical way is still up in the air.
If you are using a decent language, 100% of the memory is reclaimed after a full garbage collecting cycle. Maybe it will be once every hour, or once every second, but guess what, it is extremely carefully tuned by the garbage collection programmers.
Would you recommend using a garbage collector in a real-time application such as a video game? I suggested it once on a video game programmers' mailing list, and I was told that anybody who would use one should be shot.
Because that's a TV, dumbass
And what's wrong with playing video games on a standard NTSC television set?
That's the link the actual site gave as a mirror -- go figure :-)
Look before you link. Make sure it's the right story and not goatse.cx. However, in some cases, even that isn't possible.
Maybe they should build a new feature into apache-Slashdot Effect Guard.
You could always just mod_throttle all users coming from Referer contains slashdot.org, Referer contains memepool.com, and Referer contains kuro5hin.org.
Will it run the top of the line games at an acceptable level in 2 years?
Top of the line in 3D graphic detail, or top of the line in fun? I choose the latter, which is why I play games on my GBA and my GBA emulator. You don't need 3D accelerated video for that, just a fast (866 MHz PIII) processor and some bandwidth from the processor to the video card (TNT2). Take it up a bit (recent Athlon and GeForce 2) and you can emulate many N64 games.
1024x768 seems to be the general consensus for the minimum any game should run at. 800x600 is just noticeably worse on a 19" monitor.
Then why do people like to play games in 640x480 interlaced on the 36-inch display down in the lobby?
I STILL have trouble running games like ... Soldier of Fortune 2
Soldiers of Fortune runs fine in snes9x, even on my old 333 MHz PII laptop with a 66 MHz bus and no 3D acceleration. Yeah, it's a piece of crap, but it runs.
Yes, I know, Soldier of Fortune != Soldiers of Fortune.
SQL is not a turing-complete language
Neither is any other programming language in existence on a real machine. A Turing machine has an infinitely long memory. Real computers are called "linear bounded automata" (LBAs), which means a Turing machine with the modification that the memory is limited to a constant multiple of the size of the input, and trying to go off one end of the memory makes the head hit a brick wall. It's even possible to solve the halting problem on LBAs: just emulate two copies, one at double speed (tortoise/hare setup), and stop when the state and memory of both machines become identical, which means that the faster LBA has looped.
PL/SQL and its free clone PL/pgSQL are imperative languages that are just as LBA-complete as C or Scheme.
but the first version of Lisp (way back in the '60s, I think) was a pure functional language.
LISP was originally meant to be a Fortran replacement. Heck, its original syntax specification (M-expressions) was designed to look like Fortran; the parentheses you see on modern LISP are from the S-expressions that the first interpreter used internally. Are you sure that the first popular LISP interpreter didn't have what would become Scheme's set! instruction?
If your problem does not allow you to use memory opaquely--that is, if you must exercise control over the way code and data is laid out in physical memory--then you should use C. That accounts for 1% of all code written.
That may account for 1% of the code written, but it may count for a vast majority of the cycles run on computers. Most computers are not workstations or servers; they're embedded systems in refrigerators, microwaves, toasters, telephones, and game consoles. For those restricted environments, you really do need a low-level language such as C.
but I do tend to agree that the best way to program in Brainfuck is to write a Something -> Brainfuck converter.
Right. That's why we have compilers. Brainfuck is assembly language for Turing machines, with CBF being the bytecode.
You have to be careful, though, or Dennis Hopper and his Smokers will start raiding.
In that case, just send Bob Hoskins and John Leguizamo after them. Or send in Diddy Kong; he's dealt with pirates before.
No, their are not Spanish-accented, they are Portuguese-accented
Your "accent" is most closely related to the phonetic structure of your mother tongue. Except for the nasals, is Portuguese phonetics very different from Spanish phonetics?
I believe that a vessel in internation waters is subject to the laws of its flag country -- the country in which the vessel is registered.
Then register pirate ships in Freedonia, whose flag (called "Jolly Roger") is a white skull and crossbones on a black field.
a slight geographical inconvenience [prohibits the USA from joining the EU]
Even if all EU members must claim territory that geographically belongs to Europe, then why not "admit" the USA to the EU in much the same manner as Russia has been "admitted" to NATO?
If they deinterlace the video it would be 30 frames a second.
You're thinking of 30fps weave de-interlacing (see below). In real video sources other than film, objects actually move slightly from one field to the next. You're thinking of the form of weave de-interlacing that combines field 0 and field 1 and displays it twice. This is where the motion vectors come into play: they can help predict where the object will be between frames.
Bob de-interlacing: draw each field as a separate frame, interpolating the lines that aren't in a given field. Gives shimmering artifacts for relatively still images.
30fps weave de-interlacing: combine each pair of fields into one frame. Really bad double-image artifacts when something is moving.
60fps weave de-interlacing: combine each field with the previous field. Slightly less artifacty than 30fps weave.
Motion vector de-interlacing: use MPEG motion vectors to determine what parts of the image to bob and what parts to weave. Gives the best results but is compute-intensive and requires the MPEG-2 decoder to output motion vectors.
How are bitmaps two dimensional? Is the data in a bitmap an array of some sort?
Yes. Bitmap data is a two-dimensional array of pixel values, which can be scalars (indexed or grayscale modes), vectors (rgb or cmyk modes), or polar vectors (sih mode). It is then serialized to a one-dimensional stream of bytes.
If that's true then is it true for all bitmap formats?
All lossless-recompression bitmap formats represent a two-dimensional array, perhaps with different packing techniques (BMP and PCX use forms of RLE; GIF uses LZW; PNG uses deflation; TIFF can use several formats). JPEG uses a block transformation (2D DCT), quantization (of scalar values), and then RLE + Huffman packing.