Where is metamoderation when we need it. The parent is right. Flash video filled a useful role, and still does, though hopefully it will go away, and flash games really need to be replaced by SVG rather than (X)HTML 5 for the most part, (although I have seen simple games with HTML 3 or 4, we want people to do things the right way), most flash UIs are annoying and could be done with HTML 4 and CSS. They're still better than full-page JPEGs with image-map hyperlinks, but only just.
Mozilla already have a gstreamer implementation for Windows and OS X, for Songbird, but they don't want to use it for Firefox because it isn't efficient enough, because you are adding another layer of indirection. It might be worth including as a stopgap, though.
You're thinking of ISO, not IETF. Whilst MS were part of the push to allow patents in IETF standards without a royalty-free licence, they have been a lot less harmful there than in other bodies, perhaps because of the requirement for running code, and since they can ignore the IETF entirely when they want to much more easily than they can other bodies.
I, for one, really do want this. When these things are finally road-legal to drive themselves, the problem of getting home after a night out without paying an arm and a leg for a taxi is solved.
It isn't my code. When I visited it, it correctly showed that I hadn't visited any of those IP addresses. The other page correctly identified which sites I had visited, even after clearing my history and after re-visiting them.
If starving/dehydrating would be better (in your opinion) than lingering on, then you could refuse to allow any further care, so they have to disconnect you. You might even be able to request higher does of painkillers, depending on the situation.
That list is the sites being tested, if it can detect any of them in your history, it shows red text in a box next to that item. The exploit can only check a specific list of items. The problem is a UI/implementation one, not a problem with the concept.
From the comments in the book where this is first done, ISTM that no-one had thought of doing that before. Presumably if the crusade hadn't swept across the galaxy, the anti-nuke treaty amongst the nobility would have been updated to include lasgun bombs.
And all the nobles had nuclear weapons, they just didn't use them because of an agreement that if anyone used them first (or possibly only used them on another's world, I forget), all the other nobles would be required to attack the one responsible.
The difference is that it is not the number of infringements that matter, but how much of the original work is infringed. If I were to upload 1/10 of the file 10 times, that does the same damage as me uploading the whole file once.
Furthermore, they would need to prove actual damages including the actual number of copies (no statutory damages for non-commercial infringement), prove who actually infringed (the account holder isn't responsible), and pay legal fees if they lost. Given this decision states that each file sharer typically uploads one copy for each file downloaded, the damages would be at most twice the royalty fee per file, which would be far less than actually buying the tracks legally.
They know it won't work, that's why they haven't done it since the current laws came into force.
That's right. a brief summary of the story is here.
Yes, he is still blocking R18 games, and still making dumb comments about Gamers4Croydon. He is also unpopular for some purely local issues as well, but he is almost certain to be re-elected, even if Labor lose, because he had a >30% margin in the two-party preferred vote last election, and his seat isn't really affected by any of the issues other people hate him for.
OTOH, I expect he Premier has enough sense not to let him enforce the law.
That makes sense, and supposedly Frank Herbert said that anything not contradicted by his books in the Dune Encyclopaedia could be assumed correct. I had assumed that the taboo against IVF was some sort of stunt by the Tilexau, to protect their bushiness (and to stop anyone guessing the secret of the Axolotl tanks), but that is a more elegant explanation and doesn't rely on the "extra" books.
I read the first of the Kevin J Anderson prequels and it explains that the AI was written by a group of humans who used it to overthrow a previous galactic empire by exploiting critical computer systems across the empire. THe AI is supposed to be aggressive and seek to conquer everything it can, but has protections for the programmers. However, they put their brains into computerised life-support systems, and one of them screws up his security and they get pwnt too.
IIRC humans were only tortured by one robot which had a corrupted version of the main AI.
I didn't think the plot was too bad (although it didn't really have anything going for it), my main reason for disliking it was just that it had that characteristic Andrews style, which I don't really enjoy. I agree that the extra books never happened though.
They'd be better off going to parties and getting drunk and building social skills in the process than reading a tenth book on quantum physics, which is what they'd rather do. Although I have no idea how to nudge them toward that while keeping the standard advice for normal kids, for whom it's correct.
Maybe with a food analogy. If you eat too little, you get sick; if you eat too much you get fat and sick, both are bad so you have to have a balance. I would probably choose to compare partying to overeating, but it would work either way.
This is the intended purpose of Dirac. Unfortunately I don't think the Schrödinger implementation is fast enough for anything above 720p yet, but it is getting better, and IIRC that the BBC want to make it their primary codec for both internal use and iPlayer, which would drive fairly widespread adoption, given how many companies use iPlayer.
Schrödinger already supports ffmpeg and gstreamer, and is included with VLC. There is a directshow filter for it as well.
No, that's people using protocols that can interpret a particular HTTP post as a valid message, and then treating it correctly. It is a rather neat abuse of the two standards, but it was bloody annoying since the attack (or freenode admins fighting it) caused continual netsplits for hours.
Firefox implemented the HTTP standard correctly, and Freenode's ircd handled IRC correctly, the problem was that the protocol's designers did not anticipate that this would happen, or expected that ops would set +nj n their channels.
It is not subject to any patents, because even if he had patented it in the US, the patent would have expired. The algorithm's description is copyrighted, of course, but that doesn't stop anyone implementing it (although it would be interesting to try to argue that an implementation of a published algorithm is a derivative work, I doubt that has any legal validity).
IANAL, but isn't there some principle that you are only liable if, had you not done what you did, the plaintiff would not have suffered that harm, and that you are only liable for that fraction of the harm that would not have happened had you not acted as you did? If that is the case, a illegal file sharer would not necessarily be liable for all the copies uploaded because most of the recipients would have still downloaded the file from the other peers.
Also, has anyone checked whether in Bit Torrent cases, they count any chunk uploaded as a whole song?
In Australia, there are no statutory damages at all for non-commercial infringement, stricter rules about actually suing the right person, and a loser-pays system, and not one person has been sued by the recording industry in the last 15 years for file sharing. Since damages are limited to actual damages, you are actually better off to pirate, get sued (in the small claims court), and pay up than you are buying the files legitimately (assuming you download enough to cover the lawyers fees). Despite this, in the three nearest significant shopping centres to me, there is at least two record shops, and several of the smaller ones have one, not counting target etc. who all sell music and DVDs. From this, I assume the industry is still profitable.
I think the objection isn't about grammar, it is that the phrase is usually redundant (since I, for one, lack a time machine to go backwards or sideways), and we already know the GGP is talking about the future.
Slashdot Mirror
Imagine the CmdrTaco's reaction on his wedding night when he figured this out.
Common Lisp is definitely both functional and object orientated.
Where is metamoderation when we need it. The parent is right.
Flash video filled a useful role, and still does, though hopefully it will go away, and flash games really need to be replaced by SVG rather than (X)HTML 5 for the most part, (although I have seen simple games with HTML 3 or 4, we want people to do things the right way), most flash UIs are annoying and could be done with HTML 4 and CSS. They're still better than full-page JPEGs with image-map hyperlinks, but only just.
Mozilla already have a gstreamer implementation for Windows and OS X, for Songbird, but they don't want to use it for Firefox because it isn't efficient enough, because you are adding another layer of indirection. It might be worth including as a stopgap, though.
You're thinking of ISO, not IETF. Whilst MS were part of the push to allow patents in IETF standards without a royalty-free licence, they have been a lot less harmful there than in other bodies, perhaps because of the requirement for running code, and since they can ignore the IETF entirely when they want to much more easily than they can other bodies.
Just so you know.
Also, this is not the time to buy shares in the mass storage manufacturers, and you shouldn't check which influential DC people own shares in them.
I, for one, really do want this. When these things are finally road-legal to drive themselves, the problem of getting home after a night out without paying an arm and a leg for a taxi is solved.
It isn't my code.
When I visited it, it correctly showed that I hadn't visited any of those IP addresses. The other page correctly identified which sites I had visited, even after clearing my history and after re-visiting them.
It's not Wensleydale, but it tastes OK.
Honestly, people's knowledge of astronomy is appalling :)
If starving/dehydrating would be better (in your opinion) than lingering on, then you could refuse to allow any further care, so they have to disconnect you. You might even be able to request higher does of painkillers, depending on the situation.
That list is the sites being tested, if it can detect any of them in your history, it shows red text in a box next to that item. The exploit can only check a specific list of items. The problem is a UI/implementation one, not a problem with the concept.
From the comments in the book where this is first done, ISTM that no-one had thought of doing that before. Presumably if the crusade hadn't swept across the galaxy, the anti-nuke treaty amongst the nobility would have been updated to include lasgun bombs.
And all the nobles had nuclear weapons, they just didn't use them because of an agreement that if anyone used them first (or possibly only used them on another's world, I forget), all the other nobles would be required to attack the one responsible.
The difference is that it is not the number of infringements that matter, but how much of the original work is infringed. If I were to upload 1/10 of the file 10 times, that does the same damage as me uploading the whole file once.
Furthermore, they would need to prove actual damages including the actual number of copies (no statutory damages for non-commercial infringement), prove who actually infringed (the account holder isn't responsible), and pay legal fees if they lost. Given this decision states that each file sharer typically uploads one copy for each file downloaded, the damages would be at most twice the royalty fee per file, which would be far less than actually buying the tracks legally.
They know it won't work, that's why they haven't done it since the current laws came into force.
That's right. a brief summary of the story is here.
Yes, he is still blocking R18 games, and still making dumb comments about Gamers4Croydon. He is also unpopular for some purely local issues as well, but he is almost certain to be re-elected, even if Labor lose, because he had a >30% margin in the two-party preferred vote last election, and his seat isn't really affected by any of the issues other people hate him for.
OTOH, I expect he Premier has enough sense not to let him enforce the law.
That makes sense, and supposedly Frank Herbert said that anything not contradicted by his books in the Dune Encyclopaedia could be assumed correct. I had assumed that the taboo against IVF was some sort of stunt by the Tilexau, to protect their bushiness (and to stop anyone guessing the secret of the Axolotl tanks), but that is a more elegant explanation and doesn't rely on the "extra" books.
I read the first of the Kevin J Anderson prequels and it explains that the AI was written by a group of humans who used it to overthrow a previous galactic empire by exploiting critical computer systems across the empire. THe AI is supposed to be aggressive and seek to conquer everything it can, but has protections for the programmers. However, they put their brains into computerised life-support systems, and one of them screws up his security and they get pwnt too.
IIRC humans were only tortured by one robot which had a corrupted version of the main AI.
I didn't think the plot was too bad (although it didn't really have anything going for it), my main reason for disliking it was just that it had that characteristic Andrews style, which I don't really enjoy. I agree that the extra books never happened though.
They'd be better off going to parties and getting drunk and building social skills in the process than reading a tenth book on quantum physics, which is what they'd rather do. Although I have no idea how to nudge them toward that while keeping the standard advice for normal kids, for whom it's correct.
Maybe with a food analogy. If you eat too little, you get sick; if you eat too much you get fat and sick, both are bad so you have to have a balance. I would probably choose to compare partying to overeating, but it would work either way.
This is the intended purpose of Dirac. Unfortunately I don't think the Schrödinger implementation is fast enough for anything above 720p yet, but it is getting better, and IIRC that the BBC want to make it their primary codec for both internal use and iPlayer, which would drive fairly widespread adoption, given how many companies use iPlayer.
Schrödinger already supports ffmpeg and gstreamer, and is included with VLC. There is a directshow filter for it as well.
This is /., he probably doesn't have any of them unless his mum is German, or her basement counts as a home.
No, that's people using protocols that can interpret a particular HTTP post as a valid message, and then treating it correctly. It is a rather neat abuse of the two standards, but it was bloody annoying since the attack (or freenode admins fighting it) caused continual netsplits for hours.
Firefox implemented the HTTP standard correctly, and Freenode's ircd handled IRC correctly, the problem was that the protocol's designers did not anticipate that this would happen, or expected that ops would set +nj n their channels.
It is not subject to any patents, because even if he had patented it in the US, the patent would have expired.
The algorithm's description is copyrighted, of course, but that doesn't stop anyone implementing it (although it would be interesting to try to argue that an implementation of a published algorithm is a derivative work, I doubt that has any legal validity).
IANAL, but isn't there some principle that you are only liable if, had you not done what you did, the plaintiff would not have suffered that harm, and that you are only liable for that fraction of the harm that would not have happened had you not acted as you did? If that is the case, a illegal file sharer would not necessarily be liable for all the copies uploaded because most of the recipients would have still downloaded the file from the other peers.
Also, has anyone checked whether in Bit Torrent cases, they count any chunk uploaded as a whole song?
In Australia, there are no statutory damages at all for non-commercial infringement, stricter rules about actually suing the right person, and a loser-pays system, and not one person has been sued by the recording industry in the last 15 years for file sharing. Since damages are limited to actual damages, you are actually better off to pirate, get sued (in the small claims court), and pay up than you are buying the files legitimately (assuming you download enough to cover the lawyers fees). Despite this, in the three nearest significant shopping centres to me, there is at least two record shops, and several of the smaller ones have one, not counting target etc. who all sell music and DVDs. From this, I assume the industry is still profitable.
I think the objection isn't about grammar, it is that the phrase is usually redundant (since I, for one, lack a time machine to go backwards or sideways), and we already know the GGP is talking about the future.