The following vehicles are exempt from vehicle emissions tests:
* Diesel-powered vehicles and vehicles that are powered exclusively by electricity;
* Motorcycles, motor-driven cycles and motorized pedal-cycles;
* Antique vehicles, custom vehicles, street rods, and vehicles of model year 1967 or before.
* Vehicles operated exclusively for parade or ceremonial purposes by any veterans, fraternal, or civic organization, organized on a not-for-profit basis; *
* Vehicles of model year 1995 or before that were in compliance with the Illinois Vehicle Emissions Inspection Law on February 1, 2007;
* Farm vehicles and implements of husbandry;
* Vehicles registered in, subject to, and in compliance with the emission inspection requirements of another state;
* Vehicles for which a Junking Certificate has been issued by the Secretary of State pursuant to the Illinois Vehicle Code (625 ILCS 5/3-117);
* Vehicles operated exclusively in organized amateur or professional sporting activities as defined in the Environmental Protection Act (415 ILCS 5/1 et seq.);
Race Car/Show Car affidavits are available at test stations. Please read and complete the affidavit carefully, and enclose all required documentation. The affidavit must be resubmitted every two years to retain the exemption. Any questions can be directed to the Illinois EPA at (217)785-7449.
* Implements of warfare owned by the State or federal government.
It looks like only cars newer than 1996 are required to test. From the FAQ, it states that vehicles newer than 1996 with no OBD are given idle emissions and gas cap tests.
My state switched to biennial emissions checks and they no longer do any actual testing. They just plug into your OBD computer and if status is good you go on your merry way for 2 more years.
the hardware spec is available and an open source driver, maintained by the community, is now available.
Last I checked, the entire hardware spec was not released and the open source driver limps along because of it. Perhaps you are thinking of ATI (AMD), who have opened most of their specs (minus some video acceleration bits that are supposedly required to be kept secret for patent reasons). Please correct me if this has changed.
Rather than bitching and moaning that they didn't release the source code why not thank them for the effort of supporting your chosen operating system...for free.
It didn't sound like bitching and moaning. They wanted open source drivers for practical and/or dogmatic reasons and so they picked the company that provides it. That is more like voting with your wallet.
The name of the project is normally trademarked by someone. While somebody can take the open code and fork it under a different name (IceWeasel, for example), they cannot call the fork by the trademarked name (Firefox, for the previous example). Also, the code is still copyrighted by its owners, BSD or GPL are just licenses for what you are allowed to do with the code. In some cases that I have seen (I believe QT does this), the owner of the trademark will require contributors to assign copyright of their contributions to the trademark holder. That way they can get away with dual licensing without needing to work out the other license with the contributors. I am more familiar with GPL licenses, so some of what I said may apply slightly differently for BSD licensed code like MetaSploit.
It does look similar to eSATA, but is larger, has a slightly different shape, and carries power. Unfortunately, I have had some trouble finding a good picture, mainly because of the content filtering system here. The Datel Xport and something called an XSATA are interfaces that sit between the 360 hard drive and the 360 in order to connect them to your computer to transfer files easily. An image search of one of those should yield you some better angles.
Also, I've seen the connectors that you linked on plenty of servers and RAID enclosures, but I've just always considered them to be 2 separate connectors that are attached to the backplane or put together on a single cable. I'm probably just being pedantic in calling them 2 connectors.
I think you have the DRM backwards. The Kindle (and I imaging the Nook) allows you to read non-DRM content just fine. It is the DRM content that the device will impose restrictions on. There are tons of legal places to get free (either a free license like Creative Commons or public domain works like Project Gutenburg) ebooks for whatever you want to use to read them. Be it a Kindle (or whatever ebook reader), a laptop (or netbook, whatever), or a mobile device. I've seen many people on forums talk about using these devices and never once using DRM content. If you are opposed to DRM (as I am), by doing the same thing you are voting with your wallet against DRM.
Pretty sure "nooky" is not just a Britishism. I've heard and seen the word plenty of times in the US, although normally I've seen it spelled "nookie"(probably because we have to spell everything differently from you folks). In fact, the Limp Bizkit song "Nookie" was pretty popular a few years back.
Sorry, I should have called it a "special SATA data+power" port. After a google search, I found a picture here of the connector on the enclosure for the Xbox 360 drive. It looks more durable than a standard SATA connection so I would say that it is more comparable with eSATA(which does not include power). Also, a standard SATA drive will have both the SATA power and data connectors in the same formation, but they are still technically 2 connectors.
It looks to me like ElectricTurtle is trying to say that there should be no special benefits for those that are married and the government should stay out of it as much as possible.
Sorry, I apparently didn't write the sentence in my head where this should be part of the testing required for a license, not testing for studies.
Besides, the people in those tests you mention must know they are being tested on their driving. Is there any way to do a double-blind test on this? Granted, what I am saying would probably invalidate my earlier point further since thetest subjects would likely allow themselves to become more distracted, but I prefer scientific method over my own opinions anyway. If my earlier point is incorrect then so be it.
Also, many people are mentioning that the studies disagree with my earlier comment, anyone care to link to some? I am genuinely interested.
I agree that the Palm Pre thing was a hack, my point was just trying to clarify the course of events. They should have just gone through the effort of creating a plugin for iTunes and then not have to use an ugly hack like ID-spoofing (even if spoofing the device portion is legitimate in the eyes of the USB group).
As far as the 360 memory units go, the connection is probably reverse-engineered. You can plug pretty much any USB mass storage devices in and play songs and videos from them, but they are added as read-only and only show up for video and music. I believe it will only read FAT32 (and probably other FAT filesystems like exFAT) and HFS+ (for iPod support). Last I checked it won't even read NTFS. The official hard drives and memory units do not connect using USB (hard drive is a special SATA+power port, and the memory units have 2 special ports in the front of the xbox) and use proprietary file system that is given full read, write, and execute access by the 360.
In my opinion, it would be in Microsoft's best interests to allow (but not support) standard storage devices. This way customers will have more storage space and can purchase more digital content. I guess it depends on how much they make marking up a 60 dollar hard drive to 160 dollars versus being able to sell more content to more users.
So if you have a Feisty box now, and you want to upgrade, the update manager will not find the upgrade to Gutsy? I understand that you will have issues when skipping releases, but the update manager is supposed to install the new releases in series to bring you up to speed. Then again, it might be faster to backup your data/configuration changes, then download and do a fresh install of most recent version if you are that many versions behind.
I believe that you are mistaking a petition with a vote. Votes are and should be kept as anonymous as possible while still preventing fraud, signing a petition means you are signing that you personally are in support of the cause. If you could anonymously sign a petition, then what is to stop someone from filling a petition with anonymous #1 through #1,000,000? Votes are handled by voting authorities to try to prevent fraud, petitions can be held by the person or group supporting the cause they are petitioning for.
I'd say there is a pretty good chance that someone will release a backport, but security updates for 9.04 will end in 2010. It might be best to hold off for a month or so to see how others fair with upgrading and then run the upgrade to 9.10. Your settings and everything will be maintained. If you do want to stick with 9.04, then open Synaptic and add the backports repository, update, and then find the package and install it. If you want to do it in a command line, add the backports repository, "apt-get update", "apt-cache search openoffice", find package, and then run "apt-get install [package]".
Are you sure? I updated an LTS (8.04) box to 9.04 (might have been 9.04.1) by just changing an entry in a conf file (following official docs) and then installing and running the upgrade manager. Sure, you will still need run that once for each version (so if 9.10 is the next LTS, you will go from 8.04 to 8.10 to 9.04 to 9.10), but it is still pretty quick and you don't need to worry about digging up old versions on CD.
I made this assumption as well, and was informed otherwise. Near as I can tell, here is how it went down:
-Palm Pre used the device ID for an iPod, but the manufacturer ID was left as Palm. This worked with iTunes and allowed by the USB Working Group. -Apple updated iTunes to check the manufacturer ID, and disallowed sync for the "Palm iPods" that were actually a Palm Pre. -Palm then updated Pre devices to use Apple's manufacturer ID as well, and sync started working again. -Apple updated iTunes again to do further verification and disallowed sync for the "Apple iPods" that were actually a Palm Pre. -Palm cried foul to the USB Working Group. -USB Working Group decided that Palm had violated their agreement by using the manufacturer ID. -I have not followed the story since, please correct and/or update as necessary.
Or you can buy a WD1200BEVT for $55, flash the firmware with one ripped from the official 120 GB drive, and then stick it in an enclosure. While that is more work than the other options, I am sure that most/. readers can handle it. Hell, many would probably find it fun.
Anti-competitive actions are not necessarily illegal. Bullshit, yes. Plus, even if it was illegal, they could claim that the hardware locking is for reasons of DRM and other storage products are violating the DMCA. As far as I can tell from hacks that are out there, there is no actual DRM at the hardware level, but it could be difficult for other manufacturers to claim otherwise.
One big reason that Microsoft should open up storage, is that the file-system and the files themselves are where the DRM happens. By allowing, but not supporting, users to add their own drives, the customers will have more room to buy more content from the movie, music, and game stores. This is a big issue with the new Games On Demand service, because these downloads can be up to the size of a dual-layer DVD. Having to redownload 8 GB of data because they had to delete it to make room for something else is not something people are going to do every time they want to play a game. Sure, customers could take out the drives, install Xplorer360 to access the filesystem and copy the files on their computers, and then find some means to break the DRM on the file, but they could do the same exact thing with the official hardware.
As far as I know from reading about hacks to replace the hard drive, the DRM is on a file system and file level and not in hardware on the drives. You can unlock the file system by removing the drive while the system is browsing the drive. You can then connect the drive to your computer with SATA (the connector on the enclosure is just a funky SATA+power connector from MS, while inside of the enclosure the drive uses standard SATA) and access, move, or copy the files, but they will not work without you having signed into your account on the 360. Sure, there is a special firmware on the drive to tell the system it is an official drive, but from what I have seen, that is all it does. There is a hack to install an off-the-shelf SATA drive by replacing the firmware on the drive. The only excuse I can think that they could use is that they do not want to deal with supporting unofficial hardware or what that hardware could do to the system. This is understandable, to a degree. However, the profit margins they must be making by selling a 120 GB drive for $160, when you can get a similar model drive from Newegg for $65 dollars or less (Actual drive is WD1200BEVS, Newegg has WD1200BEVE for $65 and WD1200BEVT for $55, and I believe one or both of them are compatible with the hack), tell me that they are locking you to their drives for pure greed and nothing else.
That seems to be more of a problem with drivers allowing themselves to be distracted than with the phones themselves. A radio will also keep talking or singing to you no matter the situation. Then again, I can't think of a good way to test for those who can actually not be distracted by a phone, and those who just claim to not be distracted.
Please reread the post you replied to and the post they were replying to. The very first post of this thread was asking how a 20-year old OS could be relevant. Then someone quipped that UNIX is 20 years older. Meaning that UNIX is much older but still relevant, so yes a 20-year old OS can be relevant. You then made your sarcastic rant about how nothing since UNIX could be "revolutionary", which is a far different thing from "relevant" and has nothing to do with what was said. For example, XP is far from revolutionary, but discussions about it are relevant because so many out there still use it on a regular basis.
Your contributions to this discussion have been neither relevant nor revolutionary. Perhaps I am feeding a troll here, but I'll give you the benefit of the doubt.
Slashdot Mirror
Found this on the website:
The following vehicles are exempt from vehicle emissions tests:
* Diesel-powered vehicles and vehicles that are powered exclusively by electricity;
* Motorcycles, motor-driven cycles and motorized pedal-cycles;
* Antique vehicles, custom vehicles, street rods, and vehicles of model year 1967 or before.
* Vehicles operated exclusively for parade or ceremonial purposes by any veterans, fraternal, or civic organization, organized on a not-for-profit basis; *
* Vehicles of model year 1995 or before that were in compliance with the Illinois Vehicle Emissions Inspection Law on February 1, 2007;
* Farm vehicles and implements of husbandry;
* Vehicles registered in, subject to, and in compliance with the emission inspection requirements of another state;
* Vehicles for which a Junking Certificate has been issued by the Secretary of State pursuant to the Illinois Vehicle Code (625 ILCS 5/3-117);
* Vehicles operated exclusively in organized amateur or professional sporting activities as defined in the Environmental Protection Act (415 ILCS 5/1 et seq.);
Race Car/Show Car affidavits are available at test stations. Please read and complete the affidavit carefully, and enclose all required documentation. The affidavit must be resubmitted every two years to retain the exemption. Any questions can be directed to the Illinois EPA at (217)785-7449.
* Implements of warfare owned by the State or federal government.
It looks like only cars newer than 1996 are required to test. From the FAQ, it states that vehicles newer than 1996 with no OBD are given idle emissions and gas cap tests.
My state switched to biennial emissions checks and they no longer do any actual testing. They just plug into your OBD computer and if status is good you go on your merry way for 2 more years.
the hardware spec is available and an open source driver, maintained by the community, is now available.
Last I checked, the entire hardware spec was not released and the open source driver limps along because of it. Perhaps you are thinking of ATI (AMD), who have opened most of their specs (minus some video acceleration bits that are supposedly required to be kept secret for patent reasons). Please correct me if this has changed.
Rather than bitching and moaning that they didn't release the source code why not thank them for the effort of supporting your chosen operating system...for free.
It didn't sound like bitching and moaning. They wanted open source drivers for practical and/or dogmatic reasons and so they picked the company that provides it. That is more like voting with your wallet.
The name of the project is normally trademarked by someone. While somebody can take the open code and fork it under a different name (IceWeasel, for example), they cannot call the fork by the trademarked name (Firefox, for the previous example). Also, the code is still copyrighted by its owners, BSD or GPL are just licenses for what you are allowed to do with the code. In some cases that I have seen (I believe QT does this), the owner of the trademark will require contributors to assign copyright of their contributions to the trademark holder. That way they can get away with dual licensing without needing to work out the other license with the contributors. I am more familiar with GPL licenses, so some of what I said may apply slightly differently for BSD licensed code like MetaSploit.
It does look similar to eSATA, but is larger, has a slightly different shape, and carries power. Unfortunately, I have had some trouble finding a good picture, mainly because of the content filtering system here. The Datel Xport and something called an XSATA are interfaces that sit between the 360 hard drive and the 360 in order to connect them to your computer to transfer files easily. An image search of one of those should yield you some better angles.
Also, I've seen the connectors that you linked on plenty of servers and RAID enclosures, but I've just always considered them to be 2 separate connectors that are attached to the backplane or put together on a single cable. I'm probably just being pedantic in calling them 2 connectors.
I think you have the DRM backwards. The Kindle (and I imaging the Nook) allows you to read non-DRM content just fine. It is the DRM content that the device will impose restrictions on. There are tons of legal places to get free (either a free license like Creative Commons or public domain works like Project Gutenburg) ebooks for whatever you want to use to read them. Be it a Kindle (or whatever ebook reader), a laptop (or netbook, whatever), or a mobile device. I've seen many people on forums talk about using these devices and never once using DRM content. If you are opposed to DRM (as I am), by doing the same thing you are voting with your wallet against DRM.
Pretty sure "nooky" is not just a Britishism. I've heard and seen the word plenty of times in the US, although normally I've seen it spelled "nookie"(probably because we have to spell everything differently from you folks). In fact, the Limp Bizkit song "Nookie" was pretty popular a few years back.
Sorry, I should have called it a "special SATA data+power" port. After a google search, I found a picture here of the connector on the enclosure for the Xbox 360 drive. It looks more durable than a standard SATA connection so I would say that it is more comparable with eSATA(which does not include power). Also, a standard SATA drive will have both the SATA power and data connectors in the same formation, but they are still technically 2 connectors.
It looks to me like ElectricTurtle is trying to say that there should be no special benefits for those that are married and the government should stay out of it as much as possible.
Sorry, I apparently didn't write the sentence in my head where this should be part of the testing required for a license, not testing for studies.
Besides, the people in those tests you mention must know they are being tested on their driving. Is there any way to do a double-blind test on this? Granted, what I am saying would probably invalidate my earlier point further since thetest subjects would likely allow themselves to become more distracted, but I prefer scientific method over my own opinions anyway. If my earlier point is incorrect then so be it.
Also, many people are mentioning that the studies disagree with my earlier comment, anyone care to link to some? I am genuinely interested.
I agree that the Palm Pre thing was a hack, my point was just trying to clarify the course of events. They should have just gone through the effort of creating a plugin for iTunes and then not have to use an ugly hack like ID-spoofing (even if spoofing the device portion is legitimate in the eyes of the USB group).
As far as the 360 memory units go, the connection is probably reverse-engineered. You can plug pretty much any USB mass storage devices in and play songs and videos from them, but they are added as read-only and only show up for video and music. I believe it will only read FAT32 (and probably other FAT filesystems like exFAT) and HFS+ (for iPod support). Last I checked it won't even read NTFS. The official hard drives and memory units do not connect using USB (hard drive is a special SATA+power port, and the memory units have 2 special ports in the front of the xbox) and use proprietary file system that is given full read, write, and execute access by the 360.
In my opinion, it would be in Microsoft's best interests to allow (but not support) standard storage devices. This way customers will have more storage space and can purchase more digital content. I guess it depends on how much they make marking up a 60 dollar hard drive to 160 dollars versus being able to sell more content to more users.
So if you have a Feisty box now, and you want to upgrade, the update manager will not find the upgrade to Gutsy? I understand that you will have issues when skipping releases, but the update manager is supposed to install the new releases in series to bring you up to speed. Then again, it might be faster to backup your data/configuration changes, then download and do a fresh install of most recent version if you are that many versions behind.
I believe that you are mistaking a petition with a vote. Votes are and should be kept as anonymous as possible while still preventing fraud, signing a petition means you are signing that you personally are in support of the cause. If you could anonymously sign a petition, then what is to stop someone from filling a petition with anonymous #1 through #1,000,000? Votes are handled by voting authorities to try to prevent fraud, petitions can be held by the person or group supporting the cause they are petitioning for.
Sorry, 10.04 will be the next LTS, not 9.10.
Sorry, I wasn't sure which ID you were referring to, because the device ID was fine as far as the USB group was concerned. Going further up the tree:
Apple didn't block the Pre from anything. The Pre was using the iPod/iPhone USB identifier. It was the USB Working Group that told them to stop.
I probably should have just replied to this instead of your post.
I'd say there is a pretty good chance that someone will release a backport, but security updates for 9.04 will end in 2010. It might be best to hold off for a month or so to see how others fair with upgrading and then run the upgrade to 9.10. Your settings and everything will be maintained. If you do want to stick with 9.04, then open Synaptic and add the backports repository, update, and then find the package and install it. If you want to do it in a command line, add the backports repository, "apt-get update", "apt-cache search openoffice", find package, and then run "apt-get install [package]".
Are you sure? I updated an LTS (8.04) box to 9.04 (might have been 9.04.1) by just changing an entry in a conf file (following official docs) and then installing and running the upgrade manager. Sure, you will still need run that once for each version (so if 9.10 is the next LTS, you will go from 8.04 to 8.10 to 9.04 to 9.10), but it is still pretty quick and you don't need to worry about digging up old versions on CD.
I made this assumption as well, and was informed otherwise. Near as I can tell, here is how it went down:
-Palm Pre used the device ID for an iPod, but the manufacturer ID was left as Palm. This worked with iTunes and allowed by the USB Working Group.
-Apple updated iTunes to check the manufacturer ID, and disallowed sync for the "Palm iPods" that were actually a Palm Pre.
-Palm then updated Pre devices to use Apple's manufacturer ID as well, and sync started working again.
-Apple updated iTunes again to do further verification and disallowed sync for the "Apple iPods" that were actually a Palm Pre.
-Palm cried foul to the USB Working Group.
-USB Working Group decided that Palm had violated their agreement by using the manufacturer ID.
-I have not followed the story since, please correct and/or update as necessary.
Or you can buy a WD1200BEVT for $55, flash the firmware with one ripped from the official 120 GB drive, and then stick it in an enclosure. While that is more work than the other options, I am sure that most /. readers can handle it. Hell, many would probably find it fun.
Anti-competitive actions are not necessarily illegal. Bullshit, yes. Plus, even if it was illegal, they could claim that the hardware locking is for reasons of DRM and other storage products are violating the DMCA. As far as I can tell from hacks that are out there, there is no actual DRM at the hardware level, but it could be difficult for other manufacturers to claim otherwise.
One big reason that Microsoft should open up storage, is that the file-system and the files themselves are where the DRM happens. By allowing, but not supporting, users to add their own drives, the customers will have more room to buy more content from the movie, music, and game stores. This is a big issue with the new Games On Demand service, because these downloads can be up to the size of a dual-layer DVD. Having to redownload 8 GB of data because they had to delete it to make room for something else is not something people are going to do every time they want to play a game. Sure, customers could take out the drives, install Xplorer360 to access the filesystem and copy the files on their computers, and then find some means to break the DRM on the file, but they could do the same exact thing with the official hardware.
As far as I know from reading about hacks to replace the hard drive, the DRM is on a file system and file level and not in hardware on the drives. You can unlock the file system by removing the drive while the system is browsing the drive. You can then connect the drive to your computer with SATA (the connector on the enclosure is just a funky SATA+power connector from MS, while inside of the enclosure the drive uses standard SATA) and access, move, or copy the files, but they will not work without you having signed into your account on the 360. Sure, there is a special firmware on the drive to tell the system it is an official drive, but from what I have seen, that is all it does. There is a hack to install an off-the-shelf SATA drive by replacing the firmware on the drive. The only excuse I can think that they could use is that they do not want to deal with supporting unofficial hardware or what that hardware could do to the system. This is understandable, to a degree. However, the profit margins they must be making by selling a 120 GB drive for $160, when you can get a similar model drive from Newegg for $65 dollars or less (Actual drive is WD1200BEVS, Newegg has WD1200BEVE for $65 and WD1200BEVT for $55, and I believe one or both of them are compatible with the hack), tell me that they are locking you to their drives for pure greed and nothing else.
That seems to be more of a problem with drivers allowing themselves to be distracted than with the phones themselves. A radio will also keep talking or singing to you no matter the situation. Then again, I can't think of a good way to test for those who can actually not be distracted by a phone, and those who just claim to not be distracted.
Yes, lets justify the added cost for the consumer for the glass coating by telling they can just pay more to add external antennas.
incredibly dangerous to be talking on the phone while you're driving
There are hands-free headsets, and using one is no more of a distraction than talking to someone that is in the car with you.
Please reread the post you replied to and the post they were replying to. The very first post of this thread was asking how a 20-year old OS could be relevant. Then someone quipped that UNIX is 20 years older. Meaning that UNIX is much older but still relevant, so yes a 20-year old OS can be relevant. You then made your sarcastic rant about how nothing since UNIX could be "revolutionary", which is a far different thing from "relevant" and has nothing to do with what was said. For example, XP is far from revolutionary, but discussions about it are relevant because so many out there still use it on a regular basis.
Your contributions to this discussion have been neither relevant nor revolutionary. Perhaps I am feeding a troll here, but I'll give you the benefit of the doubt.