It occurs to me that while they are retransmitting these television shows, I don't believe that communicating IP to specific users who have registered based on zip code is legally considered broadcasting. Broadcasting is, by definition, for public or general use. It's to bad this all turned into a war of money, I'd love to see this one battled out in court..
So who broke the law? iCrave, for not providing adaquete protection, or the US based users who provided fraudulent data to iCrave regarding their area code?
After thinking about this a bit over the last few days, it occurs to me that an American company has no right to go after a non American company who's buisness is conducted in another county.
For some reason the US and US companies seem to believe that the US runs the internet, and this is quite simply not the case.
How is this situation handled in the realm of broadcasting, or telephony? If I setup a TV station in Montreal, which broadcasts into the US something that is legal in Canada, but not in the US, where was a crime commited?
Does Canadian law state that such rebroadcasts must enforce geagraphic locationing of end consumers? I doubt it. Was this company targetting, aka, selling directly to, US citizens? I doubt it.
Geographic based laws are as outdated as laws governing where one can ride their horse and buggy. It's simular to a law that mandates one must provide feed for their given modes of transportation being applied to a truck.
The primary advantage of what they are looking to do is that nearly all of the limitations in most situations in the PC world in *DOING* all of this is the bandwidth from the different processors and coprocessors. Creating a custom local bus to blast data between processors at, lets say 500 Meg p/Sec would allow this type of performance, where the current PC is limited to 4x AGP at like what, 2 Meg/Sec?
A 600 Mhz machine with a dedicated BUS for pure graphics could accomplish all of your requirments..
Remember those Netwinders, with those cool little ARM processors. Why not make a deal with CorelHardware/AOL/Corel instead? Am I just uninformed? Do these things even exist anymore?
The netwinder division was sold to rebel.com. Corel no longer has anything to do with them, and well, they just cost to damned much for what they are..
What is Inprise? What's the merger mentioned?
Inprise = Borland. Corel is finalizing a merger between the two companies..
This is a very hardware based solution, and hence, requires a very specific distro for it. This isn't for running Wordperfect and Quake III. This is high availability. Granted, if they stuck with a given distro's standards, that be nice, but this is a VERY specific solution..
I have to think about your drivers licence point, but phone access is mute. It is *indeed* anonymous. As long as I have an entity that can *pay* for my service, that is all that is required. A bank account. Go ahead and make up a company name, and get a phone line for it. You can, easily.. All they want is someone that's going to pay for it. Sure, they can track down the number, but the number is just that, a number.
It would be easy as heck. Just as I can override the MAC addess my computer currently has embedded inside of the MAC card itself, I could just as easily override a hardcoded IP.
It would also take a good deal of doing to simply *GET* the IP hardcoded into a hardware solution. Modems don't have MAC addresses you see..;-P
While you did address the points of the original article, I still feel the need to say the code is most *certainly* far from being optimized for performance..
I attribute it to software engineering and software engineering being two different art forms entirely. The former being a more 'hypothetical' art form, becouse it's simply the directing of flows of information, and is much more of an 'art form'.
Hardware Engineering, on the other hand, is much more in the physical. It is made into something you can feel and see.
Cars shouldn't be free. But the idea of an internal combustion engine, connected to a device with 4 wheels, should be free.
You break the problem up, and solve parts of it. *Then* figure out the parts that inter-relate.
In the case of the above, you also need to take into consideration that you could simply have the math equations needed sent to the cluster, with one primary machine just putting it all together. Example:
10 to the 10th can be thrown accross 5 machines, calculating 10 to the second. This a very simplistic example, and in real life, wouldn;t work quite right, but in the case of very math intensive applications, some of the equations *can* scale to that extent. It is also able to be processed in parallel, simply becouse you can be working on several equations at the same time.
Now, I'm CERTAINLY no expert on the subject, but I must beg to differ. Weather simulation *CAN* be broken out to run on a distributed machine, which is proven by the fact that several government entities have awarded contracts to build them to just such machines!
I also believe that perhaps you are unfamiliar with a good cubic beowulf setup. Typically, each machine would have 4 Gigbits of bandwidth to transfer data, i.e., 4 Gigbit ethernet cards, no more then 2 hops from any given machine. Using this method, transfering the datasets is fairly trivial. Granted, *THIS METHOD DOESN'T SCALE AS WELL* if you use the same programming techniques as those one would use on a supercomputer scale. However, this can be overcome if you take this into consideration, aka, clusters of 9 cluster machines. Each machine would really only be talking to one of 9 machines, with the cluster controller talking with the other controllers. It's just a different way of looking at the problem.
If you take a look at the hype on www.beowulf.org shutdown, and Important Beowulf notice stories. Now, I know there was great debate over what *really* happened, but one of the possibilities that was a concern was exactly what you are asking about..
Unfortionatly, no. Any derivatives published or incorperated are, under law, pretty much the property of the original author, unless he specifically signs those rights away, which the *GPL DOES NOT DO*. It'd be an interesting fight to see, but one would argue that, as long as the kernel is considered derivative works of Linus's work, he can still use it any way he so chooses.
Now modules are a different story..
Again, I don't think that there is a bats chance in hell that this would ever happen. I was simply addressing the 'technically' aspect..;-P
Technically, I believe yes, this *could* happen.. BUT..
The original would still be under licence of the GPL, and hence, IBM paid billions for something that *anyone* can download and redistribute.
Also, there is an issue of modules. Modules in the kernel aren't really derivitive works, as the kernel actually loads them, and hence, their GPL would infect the new closed kernel. Unless, of course, they where LGPL. So they would have to rewrite a clean room implentation of all of the drivers, etc..
Re:Boy you people like living dangerously
on
A New DeCSS
·
· Score: 2
Using the phrase DeCSS is *hardely* against the law, and anyone attempting to sue an individual for using such a term would quickly find themselves countersued.
Peacefull resistence is not against the law. Neather is using the phrase, DeCSS. It simply means that they won't be able to do a simple net search for the phrase DeCSS, and get a list of sites..
There is no danger. As a matter of fact, I'd love to see one case where someone here was sued. Sure, slashdot was brought to court, but they are 'the big boys'. If they went after 10,000 little guys, once again, class action lawsuit against them..
I thought the same thing, untill I started using debians package manager. I still use RedHat on most of my machines, simply becouse debian can tend to stay in development forever, but once they come out with potato, I'm there..
It's the difference between a 10 speed and a Harley. Particularly the conflict managment, aka, you install package A. When you select it, it detects problems with package A, B, and C, which would also need to be upgraded due to conflicts, and gives you the ability to update them as well. And the package manager also handles updates as well, that puts RedHat's up2date and gnorpm using web search to shame..
I'm not trying to pitch it, but the package that Debian uses does nearly all of this already. This is the selling point that starting to sell me from RedHat to debian, particularly the package conflict managment. It'll tell me what this will break, how, and offer ways to fix it.
It also has command line and GUI modes, using packages such as dselect, etc.. I admin I haven't tried the X interfaces quite yet, but I'd imagine they are extremely simular to the command line ones..
A) Holds the source packages. B) Perl is mostely platform independent.
This is really no more then we currently have in most standard *nix install packages, aka,./configure, make, make install. But instead it's perl Makefile.PL, make, make install.
I think you have missed the point. A gun has a primary purpose, to maim or kill. A hammer.... The intent of the tool is shown through its design.
And this tool was to throw lots of data at a machine. Just as there are devices that are build to ram cars are 60 MPH into a solid wall. This does *NOT* mean that they intend for it to be used with real people instead of test dummies in the drivers seat..
I suppose this means I also *CHOOSE* not to drive a Porshe. Sure, I could buy one, but I don't find them economical. The same applies to a Win32 environment IMHO. It's a resource hog, it costs money, and while you get the Microsoft flash, I'm not sure I'd drive it every day..
Slashdot Mirror
In the case of a more remote country IP wise, this could work. Unfortionatly, in the case of Canada, routes go in and out all over the place..
It occurs to me that while they are retransmitting these television shows, I don't believe that communicating IP to specific users who have registered based on zip code is legally considered broadcasting. Broadcasting is, by definition, for public or general use. It's to bad this all turned into a war of money, I'd love to see this one battled out in court..
So who broke the law? iCrave, for not providing adaquete protection, or the US based users who provided fraudulent data to iCrave regarding their area code?
After thinking about this a bit over the last few days, it occurs to me that an American company has no right to go after a non American company who's buisness is conducted in another county.
For some reason the US and US companies seem to believe that the US runs the internet, and this is quite simply not the case.
How is this situation handled in the realm of broadcasting, or telephony? If I setup a TV station in Montreal, which broadcasts into the US something that is legal in Canada, but not in the US, where was a crime commited?
Does Canadian law state that such rebroadcasts must enforce geagraphic locationing of end consumers? I doubt it. Was this company targetting, aka, selling directly to, US citizens? I doubt it.
Geographic based laws are as outdated as laws governing where one can ride their horse and buggy. It's simular to a law that mandates one must provide feed for their given modes of transportation being applied to a truck.
Instead of using a HD, why not just have the 16 Meg Flash boot and mount root over NFS?
Boy, was I way off. I knew 4x brought it to 1.something, and big mouth me went ahead and blew it by a power of 1024.. ;-P
On a side note, this is a *great* post, and should be moderated up.
But think of what was out nearly 2 years ago now.. I could build the same machine now for that price using technologies from 2 years ago..
Hrm, perhaps that's worded wrong. Basically, that looks impressive now, but will it in 2 years?
The primary advantage of what they are looking to do is that nearly all of the limitations in most situations in the PC world in *DOING* all of this is the bandwidth from the different processors and coprocessors. Creating a custom local bus to blast data between processors at, lets say 500 Meg p/Sec would allow this type of performance, where the current PC is limited to 4x AGP at like what, 2 Meg/Sec?
A 600 Mhz machine with a dedicated BUS for pure graphics could accomplish all of your requirments..
Remember those Netwinders, with those cool little ARM processors. Why not make a deal with CorelHardware/AOL/Corel instead? Am I just uninformed? Do these things even exist anymore?
The netwinder division was sold to rebel.com. Corel no longer has anything to do with them, and well, they just cost to damned much for what they are..
What is Inprise? What's the merger mentioned?
Inprise = Borland. Corel is finalizing a merger between the two companies..
Ordinarily, I'd agree, *BUT..
This is a very hardware based solution, and hence, requires a very specific distro for it. This isn't for running Wordperfect and Quake III. This is high availability. Granted, if they stuck with a given distro's standards, that be nice, but this is a VERY specific solution..
I have to think about your drivers licence point, but phone access is mute. It is *indeed* anonymous. As long as I have an entity that can *pay* for my service, that is all that is required. A bank account. Go ahead and make up a company name, and get a phone line for it. You can, easily.. All they want is someone that's going to pay for it. Sure, they can track down the number, but the number is just that, a number.
It would be easy as heck. Just as I can override the MAC addess my computer currently has embedded inside of the MAC card itself, I could just as easily override a hardcoded IP.
;-P
It would also take a good deal of doing to simply *GET* the IP hardcoded into a hardware solution. Modems don't have MAC addresses you see..
While you did address the points of the original article, I still feel the need to say the code is most *certainly* far from being optimized for performance..
I attribute it to software engineering and software engineering being two different art forms entirely. The former being a more 'hypothetical' art form, becouse it's simply the directing of flows of information, and is much more of an 'art form'.
Hardware Engineering, on the other hand, is much more in the physical. It is made into something you can feel and see.
Cars shouldn't be free. But the idea of an internal combustion engine, connected to a device with 4 wheels, should be free.
You break the problem up, and solve parts of it. *Then* figure out the parts that inter-relate.
In the case of the above, you also need to take into consideration that you could simply have the math equations needed sent to the cluster, with one primary machine just putting it all together. Example:
10 to the 10th can be thrown accross 5 machines, calculating 10 to the second. This a very simplistic example, and in real life, wouldn;t work quite right, but in the case of very math intensive applications, some of the equations *can* scale to that extent. It is also able to be processed in parallel, simply becouse you can be working on several equations at the same time.
Now, I'm CERTAINLY no expert on the subject, but I must beg to differ. Weather simulation *CAN* be broken out to run on a distributed machine, which is proven by the fact that several government entities have awarded contracts to build them to just such machines!
I also believe that perhaps you are unfamiliar with a good cubic beowulf setup. Typically, each machine would have 4 Gigbits of bandwidth to transfer data, i.e., 4 Gigbit ethernet cards, no more then 2 hops from any given machine. Using this method, transfering the datasets is fairly trivial. Granted, *THIS METHOD DOESN'T SCALE AS WELL* if you use the same programming techniques as those one would use on a supercomputer scale. However, this can be overcome if you take this into consideration, aka, clusters of 9 cluster machines. Each machine would really only be talking to one of 9 machines, with the cluster controller talking with the other controllers. It's just a different way of looking at the problem.
If you take a look at the hype on www.beowulf.org shutdown, and Important Beowulf notice stories. Now, I know there was great debate over what *really* happened, but one of the possibilities that was a concern was exactly what you are asking about..
Unfortionatly, no. Any derivatives published or incorperated are, under law, pretty much the property of the original author, unless he specifically signs those rights away, which the *GPL DOES NOT DO*. It'd be an interesting fight to see, but one would argue that, as long as the kernel is considered derivative works of Linus's work, he can still use it any way he so chooses.
;-P
Now modules are a different story..
Again, I don't think that there is a bats chance in hell that this would ever happen. I was simply addressing the 'technically' aspect..
Technically, I believe yes, this *could* happen.. BUT..
The original would still be under licence of the GPL, and hence, IBM paid billions for something that *anyone* can download and redistribute.
Also, there is an issue of modules. Modules in the kernel aren't really derivitive works, as the kernel actually loads them, and hence, their GPL would infect the new closed kernel. Unless, of course, they where LGPL. So they would have to rewrite a clean room implentation of all of the drivers, etc..
Using the phrase DeCSS is *hardely* against the law, and anyone attempting to sue an individual for using such a term would quickly find themselves countersued.
Peacefull resistence is not against the law. Neather is using the phrase, DeCSS. It simply means that they won't be able to do a simple net search for the phrase DeCSS, and get a list of sites..
There is no danger. As a matter of fact, I'd love to see one case where someone here was sued. Sure, slashdot was brought to court, but they are 'the big boys'. If they went after 10,000 little guys, once again, class action lawsuit against them..
I thought the same thing, untill I started using debians package manager. I still use RedHat on most of my machines, simply becouse debian can tend to stay in development forever, but once they come out with potato, I'm there..
It's the difference between a 10 speed and a Harley. Particularly the conflict managment, aka, you install package A. When you select it, it detects problems with package A, B, and C, which would also need to be upgraded due to conflicts, and gives you the ability to update them as well. And the package manager also handles updates as well, that puts RedHat's up2date and gnorpm using web search to shame..
I'm not trying to pitch it, but the package that Debian uses does nearly all of this already. This is the selling point that starting to sell me from RedHat to debian, particularly the package conflict managment. It'll tell me what this will break, how, and offer ways to fix it.
It also has command line and GUI modes, using packages such as dselect, etc.. I admin I haven't tried the X interfaces quite yet, but I'd imagine they are extremely simular to the command line ones..
It works well simply becouse CPAN:
./configure, make, make install. But instead it's perl Makefile.PL, make, make install.
A) Holds the source packages.
B) Perl is mostely platform independent.
This is really no more then we currently have in most standard *nix install packages, aka,
I think you have missed the point. A gun has a primary purpose, to maim or kill. A hammer.... The intent of the tool is shown through its design.
And this tool was to throw lots of data at a machine. Just as there are devices that are build to ram cars are 60 MPH into a solid wall. This does *NOT* mean that they intend for it to be used with real people instead of test dummies in the drivers seat..
I suppose this means I also *CHOOSE* not to drive a Porshe. Sure, I could buy one, but I don't find them economical. The same applies to a Win32 environment IMHO. It's a resource hog, it costs money, and while you get the Microsoft flash, I'm not sure I'd drive it every day..