Isn't the point of this kind of research to determine if we need to find a safer alternative (like switching data transfer methods), not whether we should put an end to these kind of devices or not?
The video tag in HTML5 can support any codec at multiple resolutions (iPhone vs a PC) at the same time and use flash as a fallback when a browser doesn't support HTML5. See Video for everybody. The only thing standing in the way is transcoding the videos to multiple encoding and webmasters lack of interest/resources.
What I find most interesting about this case is that the initial sentence is up to 1 year for the unauthorized access itself and 20 years for the "obstruction of justice". I just can't see how that punishment fits the crime.
Yeah Steve's totally right there, Google definitely should have asked Apple for permission before developing the Nexus One or Android... just like Apple asked all the other phone companies for permission when developing the iPhone or the MP3 player manufacturers when developing the iPod..... oh wait... what a dick!
I think you're interpreting the GP statement differently than I do because IIRC it's common for Microsoft to give better deals to those who seek alternatives to MS Office, and in many cases the organizations who say they're going with Open Standards (tm) end up with that sweet MS Office discount in the end. What the GP is pointing out is that he (and I) are hoping the Danish government is really routing for open standards but not using it just for leverage in price negotiations with Microsoft.
I really don't see how indexing is making an unauthorized copy. You cannot view a website without copying it. Am I therefor making unauthorized copy of every page I visit? My computer automatically indexes all the sites I visit, am I breaking the law?
These are rhetorical questions btw... oh and cpt kangarooski:
+----------+ | PLEASE | | DO NOT | | FEED THE | | TROLLS | +----------+ | | | | .\|.||/..
I think he's going for the "two independent inventors" argument. Similar to how Gottfried Wilhelm Leibniz was originally accused of plagiarizing Isaac Newton's unpublished work, but is now regarded as an independent inventor of and contributor to calculus, but with patentable inventions.
Don't be surprised. They're not considering what's good for _people_ they're considering what's good for them. It's bad for big brother if all the internets are encrypted.
This can also be done very quickly by using a ATX power supply tester like this one. It has a LCD screen which shows the voltage for IIRC every connector on your power supply. In use image here: http://www.ocia.net/fullsize.php?filename=32_9.jpg
Actually, their motto is "Don't be evil" it's impossible to "Do no evil" - it's an understandable but inexcusable mistake *grin*. While you've got a point it could also be argued that by not being evil, Google is more likely to make profit for the shareholders (good PR etc), especially in the long term.
We really don't know Google's intentions with this patent until they enforce it. Everything else is speculative at best. I'm not taking sides here, I'm just preaching doubt.
On a side note; Can someone give some insight on that this design is from (at least) 1998. Does that mean that the patent will be valid until 2018 or 2029?
and most derive from the rampant homelessness problems
Someone should start distributing fliers for that Californojnoj's supercool to the homeless. That should take care of it!
But seriously, I don't get what this case is about. Is he considered to be the cyberterrorist version of Dr. Evil? So what he changed all the passwords before he left the sysadmin position, but the new one has access to the equipment and we all know that physical access == not that secure in most cases. So the new admin fixes the things he's supposed to but the old one's made as an example? I really don't get it, what could this guy possibly be a danger to out on the streets besides being legally an asshole?
On a side note, has he told the new admin the passwords yet? I really, really don't get it if he hasn't.
And it seems you don't either. Indeed it's every company's goal to maximize profits but you've failed to consider that personalized/dynamic advertisements may make the company more money in the long run than the 1% in lost sales would.
Slashdot Mirror
Isn't the point of this kind of research to determine if we need to find a safer alternative (like switching data transfer methods), not whether we should put an end to these kind of devices or not?
The video tag in HTML5 can support any codec at multiple resolutions (iPhone vs a PC) at the same time and use flash as a fallback when a browser doesn't support HTML5. See Video for everybody. The only thing standing in the way is transcoding the videos to multiple encoding and webmasters lack of interest/resources.
What I find most interesting about this case is that the initial sentence is up to 1 year for the unauthorized access itself and 20 years for the "obstruction of justice". I just can't see how that punishment fits the crime.
Asus EEE PC 1005HA. It has a 10" screen, good keyboard and and has ~7h battery-life while watching video and 10+ while browsing. Costs $268.00
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Illegal_number
Correct. Under U.S. law, there are certain numbers which are illegal. Similar laws apply in many other jurisdictions.
^^ nice catch!
Yeah Steve's totally right there, Google definitely should have asked Apple for permission before developing the Nexus One or Android... just like Apple asked all the other phone companies for permission when developing the iPhone or the MP3 player manufacturers when developing the iPod..... oh wait... what a dick!
I think you're interpreting the GP statement differently than I do because IIRC it's common for Microsoft to give better deals to those who seek alternatives to MS Office, and in many cases the organizations who say they're going with Open Standards (tm) end up with that sweet MS Office discount in the end. What the GP is pointing out is that he (and I) are hoping the Danish government is really routing for open standards but not using it just for leverage in price negotiations with Microsoft.
How is MapReduce a horrible idea as a large-scale parallel/distributed processing framework?
How about: Holy shit!
Mod parent up!
.\|.||/..
I really don't see how indexing is making an unauthorized copy. You cannot view a website without copying it. Am I therefor making unauthorized copy of every page I visit? My computer automatically indexes all the sites I visit, am I breaking the law?
These are rhetorical questions btw... oh and cpt kangarooski:
+----------+
| PLEASE |
| DO NOT |
| FEED THE |
| TROLLS |
+----------+
| |
| |
How much would a collector pay for a (possibly still working) 45 year old computer used by someone semi-notable?
I think he's going for the "two independent inventors" argument. Similar to how Gottfried Wilhelm Leibniz was originally accused of plagiarizing Isaac Newton's unpublished work, but is now regarded as an independent inventor of and contributor to calculus, but with patentable inventions.
Google did it with good results
I'm sure we've all given Google specific consent through the TOS
I like my elves like I want my whiskey - twelve years old...
wait that came out wrong...
How about extending the sentence? Given his gene pool he's likely to kill again. See, this door opens both ways.
Don't be surprised. They're not considering what's good for _people_ they're considering what's good for them. It's bad for big brother if all the internets are encrypted.
An ad hominem argument has the basic form:
This can also be done very quickly by using a ATX power supply tester like this one. It has a LCD screen which shows the voltage for IIRC every connector on your power supply. In use image here: http://www.ocia.net/fullsize.php?filename=32_9.jpg
Yes, but there is a crack for it on TPB.
Actually, their motto is "Don't be evil" it's impossible to "Do no evil" - it's an understandable but inexcusable mistake *grin*. While you've got a point it could also be argued that by not being evil, Google is more likely to make profit for the shareholders (good PR etc), especially in the long term.
We really don't know Google's intentions with this patent until they enforce it. Everything else is speculative at best. I'm not taking sides here, I'm just preaching doubt.
On a side note; Can someone give some insight on that this design is from (at least) 1998. Does that mean that the patent will be valid until 2018 or 2029?
Try global government.
and most derive from the rampant homelessness problems
Someone should start distributing fliers for that Californojnoj's supercool to the homeless. That should take care of it!
But seriously, I don't get what this case is about. Is he considered to be the cyberterrorist version of Dr. Evil? So what he changed all the passwords before he left the sysadmin position, but the new one has access to the equipment and we all know that physical access == not that secure in most cases. So the new admin fixes the things he's supposed to but the old one's made as an example? I really don't get it, what could this guy possibly be a danger to out on the streets besides being legally an asshole?
On a side note, has he told the new admin the passwords yet? I really, really don't get it if he hasn't.
And it seems you don't either. Indeed it's every company's goal to maximize profits but you've failed to consider that personalized/dynamic advertisements may make the company more money in the long run than the 1% in lost sales would.
Isn't it pretty much useless to run a 64bit browser anyway? I quote the 64-bit support (chromium developer) page
In general, the benefits and costs of a 64-bit build are non-trivial and should be analyzed and measured thoroughly.