Other than the sheer scale problem, couldn't a company just run the video through an identification program to ID the actors in the video, cross reference it with an imdb type database with both movies/shows and actors video IQ profile? Couple this with video fingerprinting to dispose of copies. Add in a system to freeze the offending video and allow the user who uploaded to be able to contest the infringement?
I'm too lazy to look it up right now, but just as a side note..there may be an "out" with in the ADA already. I happened to do some research into the act a while ago for an essay and I believe it's written that businesses must attempt to comply with the ADA as long as it isn't prohibitively expensive. There were many small businesses that couldn't say, afford to install an elevator to make their business accessible to the handicapped. Although, any redesigns from that point on must take the Americans with Disabilities Act into account.
If fixing an election was the objective, why bother with removing a memory card? Wouldn't it be easier to get a few people together and go to precincts known to vote one way or another and just break the plastic "security" tags? When the count comes up you can raise a fuss about the tags being broken and having the votes discounted.
Not that I disagree with what you said, but I think a point needs to be clarified. Japan and Korea manufacture other parts used in the iPod that really have nothing to do with the issue of sweatshops. An example of this would be Samsung and Toshiba memory on iPod nanos etc. As far as I know, this has nothing to do with the issue of sweatshops and the countries probably shouldn't be listed as pertinent to this topic.
Forget about the Russian Mafia; the more likely scenario would be insurance companies. Primarily health insurance, but this could cover health, life, home owners, and auto insurance.
More and more, health insurance companies want to give out insurance to only low risk candidates so that they can keep collecting their premiums without having to fork over any money. Home owners are being denied policies because of the breed of their dog. Imagine if a health insurance company had access to your DNA profile. "According to your dna profile, you're susceptible to getting cancer. Sorry you are not a viable candidate for health insurance...unless you pay triple the cost. It'd be a shame if something happened to you and you needed health care." Nowadays, the cost of a minor stay in a hospital w/o insurance is enourmous. Hell, to even walk in the door and fill out the hospital form costs hundreds of dollars. For many people, this could basically mean break them economically and ruin their credit in the process. (Credit being hugely important nowadays. Rent? Buy a house? Apply for a job? Many things depends on good credit now.)
Just wondering but, if this were indeed the case and the copyrights were forfeited, how would this affect previous lawsuits filed by the RIAA against alleged copyright offenders? Would this be grandparented in and the previous rulings overturned?
I wonder, does p2p really have anything to do with bandiwdth usage? Let's assume there was no p2p software whatsoever. With the amount of bandwidth that ISP's are making available, and the rise of a more technologically savvy generation, would this prevent people from utilizing as much of the bandwidth as they are now? My thinking is, that right now, p2p is the most convenient for a vast majority of people to get what they want, but I don't believe that a less convenient delivery method would truly deter people from downloading audio, video, whatever files they are looking for. So, I'm not really sure this is a p2p issue whatsoever.
As a side note, I'm not sure that ISP's could successfully implement bandwidth shaping, and/or bandwidth caps. If a single ISP were to open up shop and offer no bandwidth shaping or bandwidth caps, in the area that this isp serviced, I believe that people would vote with their money and choose this ISP over others. The only means to prevent this is to either compete with the ISP (getting rid of bandwidth shaping/tiered pricing/caps or lowering costs) or to use what would be considered illegal business practices by 1) leveraging existing pseudo-monopolies 2) interfering with traffic from competing ISP or 3) massive collusion amongst established ISPs. Unless of course they get the government to give them a reach around.
So to summarize, it's not about p2p, it's about the people, and the success or failure of limiting consumers will be whether or not they'll be competing in a free market or practical monopoly (government sanctioned or otherwise).
Haven't RTFA, firstly, I'd run the documents through a program that searches for certain words or phrases that are absolutely certain. The words and placements could be used as a type of fingerprinting landmark. Then, I'd run the open source contributions through a filter; eliminating the ones that aren't even close to a match. Next, I'd run the remaining contributions through a comparitive analysis program that would group by similarity. Hopefully this would wittle everything down to manageable number and make it feasible time wise for a real translator to scan through the top groupings. Of course, I'm talking out my ass, but it seems logical anyways.
Just a side note really, but the reason antibiotics are mixed in with the grain that cattle are fed isn't really to make them bigger, but to add more fat to the muscle giving it the fat "marble" that people like to see in quality meats. The problem with this is that cattle naturally eat high cellulose, low nutrition grass and not the 90-100% high-grain diets that they are being fed (it's also cheaper to feed them corn and other high-grains than quality hay and letting them graze). This high-grain diet wreaks havoc with their digestive system and can be the cause of various diseases and infections which are prevented with the antibiotics. Whether or not this can somewhere down the line cause antibiotic resistant bacteria, I have no clue.
Technically, the Tyco fiasco was only Kozlowski (former CEO), Swartz (former CFO), and Belnick (former chief legal officer). Essentially, they took out personal, no interest, loans from the company totalling $170m without informing shareholders. This was later written off as benefits which the benefits committee did not approve beforehand. (Although, I have my doubts about the possibility that $170m in personal loans would go unnoticed by other people within the company.)
In my opinion this is a questionable business decision at best. Vonage has all the earmarks of a mid 90's "bubble" company with a shaky at best business plan. Now, they go public on unstable ground and hire a person from Tyco as CEO. While he may not have contributed to the scandal at Tyco, anything associated with Tyco has, deserved or not, a bad reputation associated with it. This wouldn't be my first choice as hire if I was trying to convince potential stockholders to invest.
Would it be too much to ask to make HUDS in games customizeable. Make it scriptable and also include a graphical means to create the HUD setup you like akin to the idea of customizeable home pages where you can add and remove "boxes", drag them around, and even choose what information is shown in each box.
[i]"Why should they be allowed to use my pipes? The Internet can't be free in that sense, because we and the cable companies have made an investment, and for a Google or Yahoo! or Vonage or anybody to expect to use these pipes [for] free is nuts!"[/i]
Two thoughts here.
Why should L3 allow at&t's backbone to route traffic across their pipes or vice versa? Are they idiots or would they seriously rather have no interconnects and have the internet break down to multiple WAN's? Also, correct me if I'm wrong, but doesn't Google or Yahoo! or basically any other web site out there pay for their bandwidth and on top of this, the consumers pay for essentially the same thing on the other end. Basically they're double dipping and still complaining that they aren't making enough.
Like most people, there are issues which I take the conservative viewpoint and others where I take a more liberal view. In full disclosure, I consider myself Democrat only because I tend to lean very slightly more towards their views on certain issues than the Historical Republican Party/Grand Old Party and lean very far away from the views of "neo-conservatives"/"Grand New Party". The historical Republican Party was for individual rights and the corresponding limited government, entrepreneurship, and fiscal conservatism and to a point I would concur with these views. The neo-republican party seems to be a "do as I say not as I do" party that preaches the GOP but seems to act with an agenda of more government, fiscal irresponsibilty and caters to primarily "big business" like Walmart while mom and pop stores are pushed to the side. To get to the point, as a citizen who has a vested interest in individual rights, the individual rights to privacy and against unreasonable searches and seizures is clearly not a "party politics" issue and frankly is an offense to what the original GOP stood for.
I'm currently residing in Massachusetts. The taxes aren't too bad and you can always forgo the big item sales taxes by taking a short trip to New Hampshire (Though you're supposed to file anything bought in New Hampshire and used in MA in your tax forms, no one does). The real killer is the cost of living if you locate to anywhere close to Boston. Rent for a single bedroom apartment is around $1,000 per month, condos no less than 200k and a small hous upwards of 300-500k easily. Also, the prices seem to increase exponentially the closer you get to Boston itself.
Techinically, given the same wafer size, a die shrink means a higher yield per wafer. What this is supposed to result in is lower costs, but this is Intel we're talking about.
I'd say almost everyone is in agreement that the Cell processor is a very powerful design, but I don't believe the PS3 will be the best example of what it can really do.
Sifting through what I've read about the PS3, the Cell processor is bottlenecked by a few things including but not limited to memory bandwidth, and a fairly generic pc graphics solution from nvidia (by generic I mean, one of their standard pc products tweaked slightly for use on the PS3).
The "movie quality" games that I'm assuming the article is referring to are the demos shown at places such as e3, which are nothing more than either pre-rendered movies or carefully programmed, high end pc demos (Epic demo with high end pc and 7800 sli config).
I'm not trying to disparage the ps3, nvidia, or IBM. Frankly, I'm a fan of Nvidia and the Cell processor and I truly believe (drm jokes aside) the ps3 will be a solid console, but I think saying that the PS3 with Cell, "...is going to enable PS3 developers to create movie-quality games with blazing-speed graphics" is misleading, ignorant and sensationlist journalism.
Technically a crime is whenever you break a law. But I have to wonder, at what point does a law become impotent? Take for instance the 18th amendment and the prohibition of alcohol. Something like 36 states ratified it, and yet almost everyone was ignoring it (especially the Kennedy's, which is where they made their fortune, in bootlegging). So the 21st amendment was eventually drafted repealing the 18th. If laws are something akin to a collectively agreed to moral pact that benefits and protects the majority of the citizens, isn't the law moot if the majority of the citizens choose to ignore said law?
It's not quite the law of diminishing returns, but it seems to me that it is kind of like the direction computers are heading in general. As computer technology and overall speed increases, the OS and software seems to become more feature bloated. This in returns reduces the overall responsiveness of the system. The internet seems to be headed in the same direction with increasing content and web applications. Couple this with more users gaining access to the internet and it seems as the speed increases aren't as significant as they would appear. Obviously where this diverges is the fact that there are more users online and the web pages are more intensive, so there is obviously a benefit, but it may not be as obvious to the casual glance.
(Night time, Opening shot of sky above neighborhood) (Pan in window showing various people in front of computers) (Cue music "The Internet is for porn - Avenue q")...
Slashdot Mirror
http://www.fcc.gov/mb/facts/otard.html
Rental property that is part of an "exclusive use area" such as a patio or balcony is covered.
Other than the sheer scale problem, couldn't a company just run the video through an identification program to ID the actors in the video, cross reference it with an imdb type database with both movies/shows and actors video IQ profile? Couple this with video fingerprinting to dispose of copies. Add in a system to freeze the offending video and allow the user who uploaded to be able to contest the infringement?
I'm too lazy to look it up right now, but just as a side note..there may be an "out" with in the ADA already. I happened to do some research into the act a while ago for an essay and I believe it's written that businesses must attempt to comply with the ADA as long as it isn't prohibitively expensive. There were many small businesses that couldn't say, afford to install an elevator to make their business accessible to the handicapped. Although, any redesigns from that point on must take the Americans with Disabilities Act into account.
If fixing an election was the objective, why bother with removing a memory card? Wouldn't it be easier to get a few people together and go to precincts known to vote one way or another and just break the plastic "security" tags? When the count comes up you can raise a fuss about the tags being broken and having the votes discounted.
Not that I disagree with what you said, but I think a point needs to be clarified. Japan and Korea manufacture other parts used in the iPod that really have nothing to do with the issue of sweatshops. An example of this would be Samsung and Toshiba memory on iPod nanos etc. As far as I know, this has nothing to do with the issue of sweatshops and the countries probably shouldn't be listed as pertinent to this topic.
Forget about the Russian Mafia; the more likely scenario would be insurance companies. Primarily health insurance, but this could cover health, life, home owners, and auto insurance.
More and more, health insurance companies want to give out insurance to only low risk candidates so that they can keep collecting their premiums without having to fork over any money. Home owners are being denied policies because of the breed of their dog. Imagine if a health insurance company had access to your DNA profile. "According to your dna profile, you're susceptible to getting cancer. Sorry you are not a viable candidate for health insurance...unless you pay triple the cost. It'd be a shame if something happened to you and you needed health care." Nowadays, the cost of a minor stay in a hospital w/o insurance is enourmous. Hell, to even walk in the door and fill out the hospital form costs hundreds of dollars. For many people, this could basically mean break them economically and ruin their credit in the process. (Credit being hugely important nowadays. Rent? Buy a house? Apply for a job? Many things depends on good credit now.)
Just wondering but, if this were indeed the case and the copyrights were forfeited, how would this affect previous lawsuits filed by the RIAA against alleged copyright offenders? Would this be grandparented in and the previous rulings overturned?
I wonder, does p2p really have anything to do with bandiwdth usage? Let's assume there was no p2p software whatsoever. With the amount of bandwidth that ISP's are making available, and the rise of a more technologically savvy generation, would this prevent people from utilizing as much of the bandwidth as they are now? My thinking is, that right now, p2p is the most convenient for a vast majority of people to get what they want, but I don't believe that a less convenient delivery method would truly deter people from downloading audio, video, whatever files they are looking for. So, I'm not really sure this is a p2p issue whatsoever.
As a side note, I'm not sure that ISP's could successfully implement bandwidth shaping, and/or bandwidth caps. If a single ISP were to open up shop and offer no bandwidth shaping or bandwidth caps, in the area that this isp serviced, I believe that people would vote with their money and choose this ISP over others. The only means to prevent this is to either compete with the ISP (getting rid of bandwidth shaping/tiered pricing/caps or lowering costs) or to use what would be considered illegal business practices by 1) leveraging existing pseudo-monopolies 2) interfering with traffic from competing ISP or 3) massive collusion amongst established ISPs. Unless of course they get the government to give them a reach around.
So to summarize, it's not about p2p, it's about the people, and the success or failure of limiting consumers will be whether or not they'll be competing in a free market or practical monopoly (government sanctioned or otherwise).
Just some thoughts w/o really thinking too hard.
Seg^H^H^H Sun Dream-CAS "It's thinking..for you."
802.11 - IEEE with netgear dlink et al
Pci-e - nvidia and ati
intel x84-64 - AMD
And most importantly, it could be argued that early adopters were the ones who were most responsible, which is a market share Dell is not known for.
Haven't RTFA, firstly, I'd run the documents through a program that searches for certain words or phrases that are absolutely certain. The words and placements could be used as a type of fingerprinting landmark. Then, I'd run the open source contributions through a filter; eliminating the ones that aren't even close to a match. Next, I'd run the remaining contributions through a comparitive analysis program that would group by similarity. Hopefully this would wittle everything down to manageable number and make it feasible time wise for a real translator to scan through the top groupings. Of course, I'm talking out my ass, but it seems logical anyways.
Just a side note really, but the reason antibiotics are mixed in with the grain that cattle are fed isn't really to make them bigger, but to add more fat to the muscle giving it the fat "marble" that people like to see in quality meats. The problem with this is that cattle naturally eat high cellulose, low nutrition grass and not the 90-100% high-grain diets that they are being fed (it's also cheaper to feed them corn and other high-grains than quality hay and letting them graze). This high-grain diet wreaks havoc with their digestive system and can be the cause of various diseases and infections which are prevented with the antibiotics. Whether or not this can somewhere down the line cause antibiotic resistant bacteria, I have no clue.
Fossil fuels, electric, bio-diesel, hydrogen, ethanol...energon?
Technically, the Tyco fiasco was only Kozlowski (former CEO), Swartz (former CFO), and Belnick (former chief legal officer). Essentially, they took out personal, no interest, loans from the company totalling $170m without informing shareholders. This was later written off as benefits which the benefits committee did not approve beforehand. (Although, I have my doubts about the possibility that $170m in personal loans would go unnoticed by other people within the company.)
In my opinion this is a questionable business decision at best. Vonage has all the earmarks of a mid 90's "bubble" company with a shaky at best business plan. Now, they go public on unstable ground and hire a person from Tyco as CEO. While he may not have contributed to the scandal at Tyco, anything associated with Tyco has, deserved or not, a bad reputation associated with it. This wouldn't be my first choice as hire if I was trying to convince potential stockholders to invest.
Wrong, as of 2004, ebay owns 25% of craiglist.
Would it be too much to ask to make HUDS in games customizeable. Make it scriptable and also include a graphical means to create the HUD setup you like akin to the idea of customizeable home pages where you can add and remove "boxes", drag them around, and even choose what information is shown in each box.
[i]"Why should they be allowed to use my pipes? The Internet can't be free in that sense, because we and the cable companies have made an investment, and for a Google or Yahoo! or Vonage or anybody to expect to use these pipes [for] free is nuts!"[/i]
Two thoughts here.
Why should L3 allow at&t's backbone to route traffic across their pipes or vice versa? Are they idiots or would they seriously rather have no interconnects and have the internet break down to multiple WAN's?
Also, correct me if I'm wrong, but doesn't Google or Yahoo! or basically any other web site out there pay for their bandwidth and on top of this, the consumers pay for essentially the same thing on the other end. Basically they're double dipping and still complaining that they aren't making enough.
Like most people, there are issues which I take the conservative viewpoint and others where I take a more liberal view. In full disclosure, I consider myself Democrat only because I tend to lean very slightly more towards their views on certain issues than the Historical Republican Party/Grand Old Party and lean very far away from the views of "neo-conservatives"/"Grand New Party". The historical Republican Party was for individual rights and the corresponding limited government, entrepreneurship, and fiscal conservatism and to a point I would concur with these views. The neo-republican party seems to be a "do as I say not as I do" party that preaches the GOP but seems to act with an agenda of more government, fiscal irresponsibilty and caters to primarily "big business" like Walmart while mom and pop stores are pushed to the side. To get to the point, as a citizen who has a vested interest in individual rights, the individual rights to privacy and against unreasonable searches and seizures is clearly not a "party politics" issue and frankly is an offense to what the original GOP stood for.
I'm currently residing in Massachusetts. The taxes aren't too bad and you can always forgo the big item sales taxes by taking a short trip to New Hampshire (Though you're supposed to file anything bought in New Hampshire and used in MA in your tax forms, no one does). The real killer is the cost of living if you locate to anywhere close to Boston. Rent for a single bedroom apartment is around $1,000 per month, condos no less than 200k and a small hous upwards of 300-500k easily. Also, the prices seem to increase exponentially the closer you get to Boston itself.
Techinically, given the same wafer size, a die shrink means a higher yield per wafer. What this is supposed to result in is lower costs, but this is Intel we're talking about.
I'd say almost everyone is in agreement that the Cell processor is a very powerful design, but I don't believe the PS3 will be the best example of what it can really do.
Sifting through what I've read about the PS3, the Cell processor is bottlenecked by a few things including but not limited to memory bandwidth, and a fairly generic pc graphics solution from nvidia (by generic I mean, one of their standard pc products tweaked slightly for use on the PS3).
The "movie quality" games that I'm assuming the article is referring to are the demos shown at places such as e3, which are nothing more than either pre-rendered movies or carefully programmed, high end pc demos (Epic demo with high end pc and 7800 sli config).
I'm not trying to disparage the ps3, nvidia, or IBM. Frankly, I'm a fan of Nvidia and the Cell processor and I truly believe (drm jokes aside) the ps3 will be a solid console, but I think saying that the PS3 with Cell, "...is going to enable PS3 developers to create movie-quality games with blazing-speed graphics" is misleading, ignorant and sensationlist journalism.
Then they'd have to send in another undergrad to clean up that mess...
Technically a crime is whenever you break a law. But I have to wonder, at what point does a law become impotent? Take for instance the 18th amendment and the prohibition of alcohol. Something like 36 states ratified it, and yet almost everyone was ignoring it (especially the Kennedy's, which is where they made their fortune, in bootlegging). So the 21st amendment was eventually drafted repealing the 18th. If laws are something akin to a collectively agreed to moral pact that benefits and protects the majority of the citizens, isn't the law moot if the majority of the citizens choose to ignore said law?
It's not quite the law of diminishing returns, but it seems to me that it is kind of like the direction computers are heading in general. As computer technology and overall speed increases, the OS and software seems to become more feature bloated. This in returns reduces the overall responsiveness of the system. The internet seems to be headed in the same direction with increasing content and web applications. Couple this with more users gaining access to the internet and it seems as the speed increases aren't as significant as they would appear. Obviously where this diverges is the fact that there are more users online and the web pages are more intensive, so there is obviously a benefit, but it may not be as obvious to the casual glance.
(Night time, Opening shot of sky above neighborhood) ...
(Pan in window showing various people in front of computers)
(Cue music "The Internet is for porn - Avenue q")